CricInfo Home
News Home

NEWS FOCUS
Rsa in Pak
NZ in India
Zim in Aus

Domestic
Other Series

What kind of man should be the captain of England? In an ideal world, which English cricket is not, he ought to be worth his place in the team, enjoy the respect of the players and lead by example, which may be described as speaking well through the media to the world beyond and giving a good account of the game, as its most obvious figurehead. Being lucky wouldn't hurt.

Who was the last man to exhibit all those qualities? Only a churl would deny that Alec Stewart is a good player, Michael Atherton was very good, and Graham Gooch touched greatness. In their different ways they all led by example; with the bat, that is. As for some of the other qualities, it is better to draw a veil of silence.

It is a long time since an England captain gave a public performance half as accomplished as Mark Taylor, to use the most obvious example. Even when he said nothing, he always said it with conviction. He really did bat for Australia. Stewart's sense of public relations not to be confused with 'image' - is poor, and Atherton's was non-existent.

This is a crucial week in Stewart's life, and he may not survive it. When he meets the selectors he must convince them that he wants to carry on, and even if he does it is by no means certain that they will ask him to. The mood is for change, starting at the top, so he is not bargaining from a position of strength.

The selectors have some hard thinking to do, and it is a shame there is no strong external candidate to challenge the in-house pair of Nasser Hussain and Mark Ramprakash. There is a lot to commend David Byas, the Yorkshire captain, but he falls at the first fence, an ability to hold a place on merit. He would certainly knock a few heads together.

If Hussain is to inherit the job (as Gooch would like) simply because he is the senior pro, that is not good enough. The captaincy of England is not a gold watch in the gift of the works foreman. Similarly, if Ramprakash is promoted (in accordance with Mike Gatting's wishes) just because he is the most plausible 'stop Nasser' candidate, that is no more acceptable.

David Graveney, the chairman of the panel, may feel like wearing a hard hat because there is no common ground here. The most signal service he can offer the game is to ram home a clear message: whoever does the job must start to break down the damaging insularity of an England team resembling one of those wacky self-sufficient communities more commonly found in the backwoods of America.

Until the players learn to look out, beyond the ring of tents they have erected, this team will never grow up. Hussain's appointment may not help much in that regard. Too often he comes across as being at odds with the world, though the word is that he has mended his ways in the past two years as deputy to Atherton and Stewart.

Hussain is not without virtue. He is worth his place in the side, for a start, and, insiders say, has a keen tactical sense, even if his employers at Essex were slow to latch on to it. They know him best and yet when they initially had to choose between him and Paul Prichard, they went for 'Prich'.

He is an independent man, too independent, according to his critics, some of them team-mates, who consider him self-obsessed to a degree unhealthy in a team sport.

The question cannot be avoided: if Hussain really is the best man to lead England, then why wasn't he appointed last year ahead of Stewart? Everything we know now was known then. Nothing was hidden. Nothing has subsequently been disclosed. But that is English cricket all over, a game disfigured by such short-sightedness that Buggins will always get his turn.

Anybody observing these players in a disinterested way would say what they need most is pride, rigour - and dignity. The collective impression they convey is of a sullen, parochial crew, and it must be doubtful that anybody within the current set-up can change that. What is needed is a fresh pair of eyes, a completely different way of looking at the game. These are tired players, who give the impression that playing for their country can only be measured in terms of money and flattery.

It is a matter of public record that Graveney thought the World Cup shambles was due, in part, to the unseemly dispute over money - to be paid up front, incidentally - before the tournament began. The players made themselves look cheap, and their subsequent performances did little to advance their cause.

Some of them will not play for England again. The Test series against New Zealand will give the selectors a chance to bring younger men into the team, and it will be the captain's responsibility to help them bed down in a dressing room that has not been notably welcoming. It is to Hussain's advantage in this respect that he had problems as a young cricketer and should therefore be willing to cock a friendly ear to others.

Over the next two years there is a wonderful opportunity to reshape this team, and it must be taken. This is a good time to be young, to be a Tudor or a Read. The Stewart-Atherton era is over. They served England well as batsmen, but one has gone and the other is going. This is no time for false sentiment. Cricket doesn't suddenly stop. The world goes on.

It is a fair bet that Hussain's number will come up this week. He can go to work right away by ending the shirking, the grumbling, the trembling of faint hearts, the fly-by-nightery, the sinecures, and, above all, the weltschmerz of Club England. Wish him well, but don't hold your breath.