| 
Posts and words
Loading ...
captaincy
Strauss deserves a break
By Rich Abbott 2 months ago, 2 Comments »
Not just from the cricket, but also from those criticising the move to rest him for the upcoming Bangladesh tour.
This time last year, England were in some disarray. Having waded through the debris of the Pietersen-Moores debacle, confirmation of their struggles was about to manifest itself in the form of a Test series defeat in the West Indies. The one plus of this trying period was the form of Andrew Strauss, which improved with his newly-acquired captaincy.
With the hundreds flowing – including three consecutive tons in the West Indies – he proved a strong and popular leader. His influence on the Ashes last summer was as great as Flintoff’s in 2005, and achieved without anywhere near the same level of help from his teammates. As England’s only reliable batsman at this time, he returned to the ODI set-up, in a move that will see him lead England at the next World Cup. In South Africa, England lost only two matches under his charge, but at last signs of weariness began to show – mainly in his batting.
He’s had a hell of a year, and but for him, England may have had the year from hell. With no commitments until the start of the county season, his batteries will be suitably recharged for another packed summer, not to mention the next Ashes, only ten months away.
The life of any England captain is finite. Strauss’s is likely to end through tear-stained eyes at some press conference in the future, and England need to prolong that date for as long as possible. Cook will have a chance to lead the side against Bangladesh, which makes sense, because as Atherton himself hints, it would be nice to have an indication that England have a replacement ready for when Strauss finally does call it a day.
2 Comments »Strauss not right for Twenty20
By Mark Tilley last year, mid-March, 6 Comments »
Just a thought on England’s miserable Twenty20 performance tonight. As admirable and as brilliantly as Andrew Strauss has played and captained the side since his elevation to skipper, how can the powers that be possibly have included him in the team for this format of the game?
Yes, he’s the captain and in an ideal world, the captain should play across all formats of the game. But, this isn’t an ideal world English cricket finds itself in. Strauss, a masssively talented batsman, is blatantly not a Twenty20 player. He may have a fine collection of shots in his locker and he may even have a good future in the 50 over version of international cricket. But he doesn’t really fit in with this format of the game.
His innings today wasn’t necessarily terrible. After all, in a lame England batting performance, Strauss notched up the second highest score. But his 22 came off 25 balls and featured just two boundaries. Twenty20 cricket is demanding and a strike-rate of under 100 is unforgivable in the majority situations. There comes a certain point where unless your partner down the other end is belting the ball to all parts, you are just wasting balls.
Surely, Paul Collingwood or someone else could have been asked to captain the side for just today’s game? Strauss will lead the team in the conventional one day series and rightly so but for this condensed version of cricket, why couldn’t someone else have done it? Was it really worth including Strauss in the side just because he is captain? Australia regularly choose Twenty20 games as an opportunity to rest Ricky Ponting and give Michael Clarke an opportunity to take charge. It baffles me as to why England have not done something similar here.
Strauss’ inclusion was not the sole reason for England’s defeat (you’d need about three blogs to cover their various Twenty20 inadequacies) but they aren’t doing themselves any favours at all with poor selection choices such as this one. People lambasted the England selectors for including Alastair Cook in the Stanford Series squad and by the same token Strauss should have been left out here. A great player, no doubt, but not the most innovative and Twenty20 is clearly not his forte. England, please take heed in the future.
6 Comments »Strauss the captain
By Mark Tilley last year, at the end of February, 2 Comments »
‘I am the master of my destiny; I am the captain of my soul.’
I wonder if, by any chance, Andrew Strauss is a fan of William Ernest Henley? His above quote is entirely appropriate for the England captain. His sublime, bold innings of 142 on the first day of the Fourth Test wasn’t merely a sole brilliant innings, drifting alone in a sea of low scores. It was his second big hundred of the series following on from that majestic 169 in Antigua. Both innings have come just after his captaincy of the side has been announced – a coincidence? Not on your life.
Strauss’ world class form is fundamentally linked to him being appointed captain. When in charge of the team, he is as confident as the gargantuan slog sweep for six that brought up his hundred in Barbados. The Jamaica debacle aside, Strauss has been quite brilliant with the bat this series and it follows his twin centuries in Chennai earlier this winter, made in much trickier conditions. Yes, the pitches so far this series may be as flat and as batsman friendly as your local village green but take nothing away from Strauss. His batting is ridiculously formidable at the moment and will hopefully tide over into that small matter of the Ashes later this summer.
It is not the first time Strauss’ batting and his captaincy have had a concurrent relationship. Way back in the heady days of 2006, when Monty Panesar was still a hugely promising young bowler, running rings round the Pakistani batsmen, Strauss was made captain in Andrew Flintoff’s enforced absence. He duly cracked two counter attacking second innings hundreds in the series and helped himself to as much acclaim from as many quarters as possible. He even wedged himself into contention to captain that winter’s Ashes series down under; he lost out to Andrew Flintoff and we all know what happened there.
Strauss’ form dipped dramatically from that moment on, likely as a result of his casting aside from the England selectors. He had a poor Ashes series, registering only one score of over fifty in the drubbing at Melbourne and proceeded to be equally as profligate in the home series with the West Indies and India. Without a Test hundred since that Pakistan series, he was dropped for the series in Sri Lanka, where England took something of a pasting, and managed to scrap his way back onto the tour of New Zealand. He hit a staggeringly huge hundred, although he was hardly at his convincing best and then reinforced his position with some sporadically good performances over that following summer. All of which has led to the Strauss that we now find ourselves with.
Strauss isn’t the only man to see his batting flourish in the role of captain. Many lament Flintoff’s captaincy and his form during the brief and painful time he was in charge but perhaps those critics forget his first few Tests in charge. Four consecutive fifties in four innings in India helped England to a famous draw, immediately after he was tossed into the breach as captain. It is noteworthy that his bowling also earned him a whole dictionaries worth of superlatives.
And who can forget Kevin Pietersen’s hundred at the Oval last summer in his first game as captain? There were concerns that the leadership of the side would hinder his explosive style of batting but Pietersen combined attacking flamboyance with restrained defence to score a wonderful century (before getting out next ball). He also weighed in with a supreme 144 in India this winter, even finding the time to unveil his unique switch hitting abilities.
Captaincy of a side can drive a man to great things. One needs only observe Ricky Ponting’s single minded determination to win back the Ashes in 2006. Ponting, found liable by many an Australian media outlet for the defeat in the 2005 Ashes, embodied a man possessed as he scored a massive volume of runs, crushing English spirit and hopes and showing his own side the way forward. His 196 in Brisbane was a master class of batting and a pure example of a captain showing his team what is possible. And don’t forget Graeme Smith’s courageous, match-winning 154 not out at Edgbaston against England last summer. Here was a man and a captain so determined to win a game and a series for his nation that he closed his mind to the possibility of getting out or anything else and just batted and batted and batted.
Strauss’ performances so far as captain have only served to reinforce the theory that his batting form is inextricably linked with the captaincy. Maybe it is just an ego thing, a man desperate for his name to be up in lights. Or maybe it’s just a man charged with representing and leading his country by example. Maybe it’s the responsibility that sits so well with Strauss – the need to back up his position with good scores and the desire to not have his authority or his place undermined. Either way, it’s extremely refreshing to see Strauss in such good form and providing there are no more dramas regarding English captaincy between now and July, then he could be in the best possible position to perform his own version of Ponting’s 2006 heroics and seriously murder some inexperienced Australian bowling. Here’s hoping the rest of the team can follow the example.
2 Comments »Warne tips Key for England captain
By Mark Tilley last year, mid-January, 6 Comments »
Shane Warne – never short of an opinion or two, especially regarding English cricket. In the wake of the depressing England captain saga, Warne has suggested that official replacement Andrew Strauss would be better suited to the vice-captaincy position and that he would have chosen Kent captain Rob Key as skipper for all three formats of the game.
Key, who hasn’t played a Test for England since 2005, has impressed in recent years through his one-day captaincy and was an outside contender for the England position before Kevin Pietersen was appointed.
Warne said, “He has flair and imagination, a good temperament and is well liked within the game. Ideally, you should look to appoint one captain for all forms and I don’t think that Strauss deserves a place in the one-day side on merit.”
He has a point. Strauss last played a one day game for England back at the 2007 World Cup (in the West Indies, ironically) and hardly deserves a guaranteed place in the limited overs side. He lacks the firepower neccessary for an opener in one day cricket and to have him coming in down the order may get in the way of the established players like Andrew Flintoff and Owais Shah.
However, the support for Key may be misguided. He is a fine player, yes, and definately has the potential to play for England again but captaincy seems a tad premature for Key. His success with Kent was mainly in the Twenty20 format of the game however, as impressive as that was, his side’s performances in the four day game left much to be desired. It would say a huge deal for the state of the game if England were to pick a captain on the strength of his Twenty20 skills.
Where does Strauss fit in to the one day squad then? Thoughts and comments, please.
6 Comments »
Vaughan’s first piece as Telegraph columnist
By Will 2 years ago, at the start of October, No Comments; be the first!
Well, here’s his first piece as a Daily Telegraph columnist. He’s “mad” for getting back into the England team, and has outlined his path to hopefully returning for the Ashes.
There are some obvious lines about tiredness, the Pattinson selection and so on, but overall it’s a worthy read. In particular, on Pietersen’s first tour as England captain:
No Comments »It will be the same in India. The first tour is the hard part for an England captain. You don’t get home conditions, and you have 15 players to manage and get ready to play. I couldn’t have asked for more help as captain – the ECB were good at taking the pressure off, but pressure is part of the job. The England captains who will last are the ones with steely determination to prove people wrong.
A gutting decision. But the right one
By Jonathan Liew 2 years ago, at the start of August, 11 Comments »
Following England’s worst run of form for many years, this was no more and no less than was required. With Vaughan gone, and Collingwood following him, the times really do appear to be a-changin’.
I suspect that could be it for Vaughan as an England player, unless he’s back by the start of next summer. As Mark Ramprakash has shown, an aging batsman needs more than runs to force his way into the England team. The pressure to recall him for the Ashes series will be immense, but ultimately will depend on many factors: injuries, selectorial whimsy, his own form, the form of whoever replaces him in the batting line-up, and the form of the new England team. For the first time in many years, Vaughan is no longer the master of his own destiny.
KP is the only viable candidate to take over. The job has probably come a couple of years too early for Ian Bell, and a couple of years too late for Andrew Strauss. There’s the Freddie factor, of course – expect some barmy tabloid columnist to push his case. Pietersen as captain could go either way. His success will depend whether it is ultimately he who stamps his mark upon the captaincy, or the captaincy that stamps its mark upon him. A good first step would be to move up to number three, thus relieving a new recruit of that weighty burden.
And what of that new recruit? After the Pattinson debacle, the selectors are unlikely to look beyond the main contenders of Shah, Bopara and Key. Key is the best replacement for Vaughan’s experience; Shah the closest fit to Vaughan’s strokeplay; Bopara a suitable substitute for Vaughan’s temperament. Whoever they do pick, one thing will be certain: when England arrive at The Oval on Thursday, there will be a conspicuous Virgil-shaped hole in that dressing room. Thanks for everything, Michael – things won’t be the same without you.
11 Comments »Pietersen as a Test captain, anyone?
By Jonathan Liew 2 years ago, at the start of July, 9 Comments »
There’s always a tendency to make your best player captain, but of late it’s one England have found it quite easy to resist. Captains need guile, nous, subtlety and tact. Mike Brearley had those things. Conversely, I reckon there’s about a 10% chance Kevin Pietersen hasn’t even heard of Mike Brearley.
For the moment, though, KP appears to the man in possession, which allows a tantalising glimpse into an imagined, post-Vaughan future. The present skipper clearly wants to make it as far as the next Ashes series, although so did Graham Thorpe, you might remember. In fact, any one of a number of circumstances could derail Vaughan before next summer – poor form with the bat, a thumping at the hands of South Africa, a disastrous winter tour, that blasted knee, an invitation to take part in Strictly Come Dancing – you know, anything.
And so, a number of names would be in the frame. Collingwood, if he’s still in the team; Cook, probably; Flintoff as a romantic outside bet; Strauss, heaven forbid. Pietersen, though, will definitely be a front-runner. If his stint as one-day captain goes well or he has a sensational run of form, his hand will be strengthened still further.
What would Pietersen be like as a captain? More importantly, perhaps, what would Pietersen the captain be like as a batsman? This is how the captaincy has affected the batting averages of some modern-day captains:
Ricky Ponting: 62.00 as captain; 55.97 not as captain
Brian Lara: 57.83 as captain; 50.12 not as captain
Rahul Dravid: 44.51 as captain; 57.66 not as captain
Michael Vaughan: 37.71 as captain; 50.98 not as captain
Interesting, isn’t it? The best two captains – Dravid and Vaughan – are the two whose form actually dips when given the top job.
When you consider the circumstances, it begins to make a little sense. Imagine that Vaughan or Dravid comes out to bat at 10 for 1 in reply to a score of about about 500. Neither man is exactly going to come out with all guns blazing. As captain, that would be irresponsible. Vaughan and Dravid feel a great and justifiable sense of responsibility towards their team which sometimes inhibits them from playing their natural game.
If Ponting or Lara came in in the same situation (Lara’s retired, I know) they would feel less constrained by the match situation. The reason? Ponting knows that if he’s out cheaply, chances are one of the batsman coming after him will save the day. Lara knows, or knew, that even if he scored 150, the West Indies would still very possibly lose. Neither Ponting nor Lara are as central to their team’s batting line-up as Vaughan or Dravid are, and they can thus play with a far greater degree of freedom.
That’s not to say that players whose figures improve when they become captain are simply selfish and single-minded; merely that the more freedom you have to play your natural game, the less it matters whether you’re a good captain or not. Ponting could be a terrible captain and Australia would still win most of the time. Lara could be a brilliant one and the West Indies would still lose. It’s the likes of Vaughan and Dravid, in the middle ground, who have to rein themselves in for the good of the team.
The qualities that make players good captains, then, actually render them less effective as a batsman. If KP ever becomes England captain, it looks like someone else is going to have to get the runs.
9 Comments »Who should be England’s new one-day captain?
By Will 3 years ago, mid-June, 10 Comments »
I think we all saw this coming, and it’s a timely decision for England’s one-day team.
“Since our disappointing performances in the World Cup, I have been giving careful consideration as to what is the best way forward for the England one-day team and my own role within the side,” said Vaughan in an ECB statement. “I reached this decision some time ago, but I did not want to announce it until after the end of this Test series to avoid it becoming a distraction to the team.
“However, due to intense speculation in the media about my future, I feel it is important to make my intentions clear now. Our priority is to build a one-day squad able to compete strongly at the next World Cup, and I firmly believe that the interests of the team will be best served if I step down and allow another player to gain additional experience of captaincy in the one-day international arena.
But who should replace him? Paul Collingwood is favourite. Who is your choice?
10 Comments »Honestly, Michael
By Ian 3 years ago, at the start of June, 13 Comments »
Just read the piece on Cricinfo about Michael Vaughan implying that the Fredalo incident ruined England’s chances at the World Cup and it got me thinking. There has been plenty written in the last few months that Vaughan should not be skipper; his ego hurts the team; he’s not worth his place etc etc. While his classy hundred against the Windies at Headingley may have bought a little respite from the nay-sayers, it wouldn’t take much for them to get tetchy again.
What this article tells me is that he is still the right man for the job. Vaughan is basically saying that Fred was a bloody idiot and messed it up for everyone by attracting every tabloid paper to the hotel lobby. Fair enough, he did. He also went on to criticise himself and admit that his ODI record sucks. It does. But given how guarded interviews tend to be nowadays until the sportsman has retired, this was pretty candid. A new skipper might not have been so forthright, but Vaughan is about the only one who can say boo to a goose like Freddy or his buddy Harmy for that matter. And we need those two loons back to full throttle if we’re going to threaten the Aussies next time round. Which, if I’m really really honest with myself, is all that matters in the longterm. Vaughan, 32, is still the man to do that.
As for ODIs, I would let him continue as skipper. I’ll admit I am a big fan of his (the Michael Vaughan extra cover drive marks the start of my summer), so this is subjective as ever, but given nobody else is nailing down a place in the top three, what harm is he doing….?
13 Comments »It’s tough at the top (or maybe just too damn frustrating)
By Emma 3 years ago, at the end of April, 14 Comments »
It’s not been a good year for captaincy. England was a case in point last autumn, with the job apparently hinged on how much of a tantrum the ‘lead’ bowler would throw if his mate wasn’t given it. In November, Chris Adams decided to take on more responsibility at Yorkshire, and seemed to get cold feet as soon as he’d given the press conference. Heath Streak, with the season but one Championship game old, has decided today that maybe he really isn’t up to the job. It’s okay Heath, I suppose it wasn’t really long enough to make a decision, those six odd months since September.
The World Cup has seen others give up too, most notably Inzamam and Lara following poor team performances. Vaughan may yet be headed the same way, albeit involuntarily, when the shorter format comes around again.
Enter Stephen Fleming, deserved semi-finalist, who has decided to let the one-day role go. Now I’ve not studied the New Zealand captaincy, but my knowledge of English cricket suggests that this is a step onto a slippery slope. Is Fleming feeling the bite of full cricket years after captaining Notts. for two English summers? Unlikely. Judging from his remarks about injecting enthusiasm, it may just be that four World Cups with three semi-final exits are enough to drive anyone away from one-day cricket.
14 Comments »Nicholas goes into bat for Strauss
By Scott 3 years ago, mid-April, 4 Comments »
Mark Nicholas has come out in favour of giving the English captaincy to Andrew Strauss. Before the Ashes series, and how long ago did that seem, there was a clear choice to make for the English selectors- Strauss or Flintoff. They chose the latter and everything went downhill for England from there. This didn’t entirely surprise me- my spies in England had already told me that Flintoff was no great shakes as a leader. But for Strauss, leading this newly minnowed side is going to be a different proposition then the England of late 2006.
If there is to be a change of captain, Strauss does seem the logical candidate. But without a change of coach, it is a job half done.
4 Comments »Wanted: County Captain
By Emma 4 years ago, mid-November, 1 Comment »
Rumours of Chris Adams’ move have been greatly exaggerated. At the beginning of the month, the man who captained Sussex to victory in both the Championship and the C&G Trophy this season was ‘unveiled’ at Headingley, both as Captain and and Director of Pro-Cricket. Whilst this was mildly surprising, it wasn’t earth-movingly so. Test ground clubs, after all, have that bit of extra cash to squander.
Not long ago, it was Younis Khan who faced public embarrassment when he claimed he was to take the role after quitting (somewhat temporarily) the same position for Pakistan. This time, it is Yorkshire who have made the mistake by parading a man who hadn’t yet signed on the dotted line. Considering how closed-lipped counties normally remain over their offers and potential signings, Adams can only have pulled out at an advanced stage of negotiation.
Whilst Sussex are over the moon by all reports, potentially less chuffed might be Murray Goodwin. The Zimbabwean was reported by local paper The Argus to have been interested in the position.
1 Comment »Ponting and Buchanan under fire from Ritchie
By Will 4 years ago, at the start of October, 9 Comments »
God it’s been a tough weekend. Walking on the beach; sitting in the pub, sitting in another pub overlooking another beach; walking on the cliffs overlooking a beach; eating fresh fish in our local pub with a beer and walking the three minutes to our house; walking round Salcombe and eating far too many pasties. I’m exhausted with my gluttonous relaxation. So it’s with tired eyes I read of Greg Ritchie’s bashing of John Buchanan and Ricky Ponting.
If Australia’s coach and captain remain in power, Ritchie thinks England will win the Ashes.
“Australia would win the Ashes if Shane Warne was captain,” Ritchie was quoted in The Sydney Morning Herald. “On the field, he [Ponting] doesn’t know what’s going on. England’s bowlers have our measure.”
Read the full story at Cricinfo then come back here and leave comments.
9 Comments »Who should be in England’s Ashes squad?
By Will 4 years ago, mid-September, 22 Comments »
It’s very simple: who should be in England’s squad to tour Australia in November? It’s the most important squad announcement since, well, whatever. It’s huge. You get it, we all get it.
Should Jon Lewis get a chance? Has Stuart Broad shown enough? And who will you have as captain; Strauss or Flintoff?
All that kind of thing. I’m not around much today so leave your opinions and let’s work out the squad.
22 Comments »A Question
By Scott 4 years ago, mid-August, 15 Comments »
If England’s cricket is going so well, why is there so much media debate about who should be in the team?
Why, no one can even work out who is going to be the captain in Australia. And let’s not even mention the one-day lineup…
Just asking!
15 Comments » « Previous Entries