Captaincy, a tricky and challenging task

CAPTAINCY IS about a man's leadership qualities and character. It is about a man's calibre to get the best out of his men by setting an example. A captain is the key figure in the rise and fall of any team. A great captain can inspire an average team to play beyond its potential. An average captain can reduce a formidable team to a mediocre combination.

So, the captaincy matter can be quite tricky and challenging. It has been proved through deeds on the field that one false move by the captain may look trivial initially before becoming a monstrous mistake. It may not be fair to blame the captain alone for a team's failure but he alone often gets the brickbats while the bouquets have to be shared.

Reams have been written about the successful captains and those who found the job thorny and did not last long in the seat. The definition of a successful captain in contemporary cricket is related to the number of matches his team would have won under his tenure. It does not necessarily evaluate the captain's contribution by way of getting the best out of the team.

It is said that a captain is as good or bad as the team. True. But a team's attitude, aggressive or defensive, stems from the manner in which the captain looks at things. One remembers an Indian captain giving an off-spinner a tough stare when the bowler attempted to flight the ball to lure the batsman into making a mistake. The bowler was sternly told to adopt a flat line, essentially meaning a defensive attitude.

In Indian cricket, the issue of captaincy has always been a vexed one. It is strange that the Board, in all these years, has failed to realise the need to look at this subject in a professional manner.

India has had 25 Test captains until the beginning of this season with Mohammed Azharuddin termed the ``most successful'' and Mansur Ali Khan Pataudi the ``most brilliant'. Who was the best?

From various accounts available, Lala Amarnath was said to be quite an adventurous captain. One who had various innovations to fox the opposition with something unusual. He believed in leading by example even though he was a controversial figure. He was one of the few individuals in Indian cricket history, apart from Sunil Gavaskar and Bishan Singh Bedi, who did not hesitate to take on the establishment. Considered a near- perfect reader of the pitch, he was regarded a brilliant student of the game. Old timers rate him the best of India's captain in terms of planning and execution.

Bedi, like Amarnath, was a player's captain. He was said to be tactically advanced and one who believed in attacking. He, again like Amarnath, had his share of conflicts with the Board and stood out from the rest for his guts to fight the system. For a bowler-captain, Bedi handled the situation well, striking a good balance and rarely letting any individual feel left out of the scheme of things. He was also a good communicator, like Pataudi.

Vijay Hazare, Nari Contractor and Dilip Vengsarkar were among the steady captains. They had their moments of glory but did not quite make as big an impact as expected even though Contractor's run was unfortunately cut short by a head injury in the West Indies, leading to the appointment of Pataudi as India's youngest captain ever.

Pataudi had the charisma. The strong point of his role was the respect he commanded from the players. He could quickly establish rapport and inspire the players to rise above their potential. Pataudi also set examples with his dazzling fielding and positive batsmanship. He made no extra efforts to learn the nuances of captaincy but gradually transformed himself into a brilliant leader. One must remember that Pataudi led the team in an era when international cricket had no weak teams and he did not quite have the desired balance in attack. The dependance on the spinners was too much and it was quite an effort to keep the team focussed after a string of defeats on pitches abroad. But Pataudi never allowed the team to develop any complex and was hailed as a ``brilliant'' captain by critics all over.

Ajit Wadekar may not have been India's best captain but he was shrewd and knew how best to capitalise on the opportunities. He won just four Test matches as captain but they all brought the team series wins-two abroad and one at home. It was the success in West Indies and England in 1971 that propelled Wadekar's career even as it was ended by a disastrous tour of England in 1974.

Sunil Gavaskar was often unfairly described as a defensive captain. He was second to none in matters of tactics but was handicapped because of the lack of thrust in bowling and depth in batting. The pressure of holding the innings firm with his batting meant that he had to restrain himself on many occasions and some of his best moves did not yield results because the bowling had little bite. True, he had the services of a young Kapil Dev but one bowler could not have been expected to transform the fortunes of the team. One would like to remember Gavaskar as a captain who read the situation well and played within limitations to keep the team together. He was also a leader who fought for the rights of his colleagues and ended up making enemies in the Board.

Kapil Dev was a player who performed by instinct and he happened to be a captain who made moves by instinct. He expected his mates to respond to his demands which was not always possible because none of them possessed the talent he had. The predicament of Sachin Tendulkar was similar. Tendulkar too expected a lot from his bowlers who understood what he demanded but failed to deliver in the absence of the required talent.

Tendulkar and Kapil did not look comfortable in their stints as captains because of the fact that they were essentially performers. Captaincy put shackles on their natural flair and most critics believed that they were both better off without the pressures of captaincy. Both had a few achievements under their belt as captain with Kapil's triumph in the 1983 World Cup standing out as a memorable example of inspiring leadership.

Azharuddin emerges the most successful captain. With 14 wins, he is far ahead of the rest, the next best being Gavaskar and Pataudi with nine victories each. Not the best tactician, Azharuddin lasted the longest in the seat and produced a few important victories with adequate support from his mates, and of course the Board. He was often found to be disinterested in his job but then he never was a demonstrative captain.

Among others who led India, the most acceptable to all was K. Srikkanth. He was liked by all the members of the team and had done a good job by drawing the four-Test series in Pakistan. But the Board showed poor sense in sacking him, holding him responsible for a revolt for enhanced payment by the players. The architects of that revolt got away even as Srikkanth was made an unfortunate victim of the Board's politics.

The responsibility now lies with Sourav Ganguly, who has a cool head over successful shoulders. He can craft a long career at the helm, going by his forte to interact with the team members and accept their viewpoint. He loves the job and the pressures that come with it. Much depends on the support he gets from some quarters of the team, something which did not come Tendulkar's way in his two stints as captain.

Those who captained India were Hemu Adhikari (1), Pankaj Roy (1), Ravi Shastri (1), Chandu Borde (1), G. R. Visvanath (2), Ghulam Ahmed (3), Maharaj of Vizianagram (3), Nawab of Pataudi (Sr) (3), K. Srikkanth (4), C. K. Nayudu (4), D. K. Gaekwad (4), S. Venkatraghavan (5), Vinoo Mankad (6), Polly Umrigar (8), Dilip Vengsarkar (10), Nari Contractor (12), Vijay Hazare (14), Lala Amarnath (15), Ajit Wadekar (16), Bishan Singh Bedi (22), Sachin Tendulkar (26), Kapil Dev (34), Nawab of Pataudi (Jr) (40), Sunil Gavaskar (47), Mohammed Azharuddin (47).

VIJAY LOKAPALLY

New Delhi

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Sport
Previous : Rain dampens English spirits
Next     : Stacy and Keller, FIH Players of the Year '99