|Photos||Video & Audio||Blogs||Statistics||Archive||Shop||Mobile|
'Ashley Giles not my man for England'
Geoff Boycott on the type of coach England need, and why confidence is essential in T20s (20:18)
Interviewer: Raunak Kapoor
April 10, 2014
Bowl at Boycs
'Ashley Giles not my man for England'April 10, 2014
Excerpts from the show
Raunak Kapoor: Hello and welcome to another show of Bowl at Boycs here on ESPNcricinfo. The World T20 has been concluded and Geoffrey Boycott joins me from South Africa. Let's take the first question. It comes from Jamie and Alex from the UK. They say:
It has been an awful six months for English cricket with the Ashes whitewash, Kevin Pietersen's sacking, and now the embarrassment of losing to Netherlands in the T20 World Cup.
Do you believe that Ashley Giles is really the right man to take England forward? Also, many experts believe Stuart Broad doesn't have what it takes to be captain of England. What are your thoughts on him as a Test or ODI captain for the future?
Geoff Boycott: Well, first of all, I'm amazed that you say an "awful" six months. It's worse than that. Now, Ashley Giles, no, I'm not a supporter of him.
For some time, I've watched the way he's gone about handling the ODI game. He's been in charge for a while now and I've never really understood or enjoyed or appreciated some of his team selections. I'm not against him just because they lost to Netherlands in the World T20, which was pretty poor, it's an overall view. He also makes the usual platitude of taking positives out of defeats or poor performances. Like losing to Netherlands, how the hell do you take positives out of that? For god's sake, I want him to get cross, be upset, feel the pain and hurt as he should.
I feel he's too similar to Alastair Cook, the Test captain. Alastair's a nice guy, lovely lad, and I think Ashely Giles is as well. It's not a personal thing, but you're asking me who should run the national team and I come back to this example. Australia had Michael Clarke, and before he had Mitchell Johnson bowling people out with fast balls, he was such a nice lad, and he had Mickey Arthur as well, another nice lad.
As a twosome, Michael Clarke and Mickey Arthur just didn't work, they were too nice, there was nothing special. Australia brought in Darren Lehmann, totally opposite to Michael Clarke, a different sort of individual, a different dimension. He was upfront, open, passionate, lifted the players, forthright, aggressive, bold even. No excuses, telling players what to do, and when they lost he wasn't impressed. And I think that's it, you need two opposites.
I think English cricket needs somebody who is opposite from Alastair Cook. People at the top have decided we don't seem to have anybody else apart from Cook, which is why he's got it, so he's got to improve a lot because he's not that good, he really isn't. He's a beautiful boy. If you had him as a son or a son-in-law you'd be proud, but that's not the same as leading a cricket team, or leading people in war or leading people in anything.
You've got to be a leader. And Alastair's always going to be nice so you're going to need someone else. I don't think Giles is my man, but I don't pick the head coach of England. The papers seem to suggest he's got the job. A lot will be down to Paul Downton, the new MD of English cricket, and I hope Paul doesn't give it to him.
Now, Stuart Broad, well, I don't agree with the comment that "many experts believe he won't make a good captain". I actually believe he's a very strong character, highly competitive, very talented, and he showed all that in the recent Ashes series when we were murdered by Australia.
Many of the Australian media were disgraceful to him. There was incitement to get on his back, especially in Brisbane, because of that nick at Trent Bridge when he didn't walk. But he was the only, and I mean only, experienced player in the England team, out of eight top players we had, who performed well. Now, if he's going to make a captain, all that will stand him in good stead.
He's talented, he's good, he's a strong character, he's competitive. But he will have to control himself more. He's always questioning umpiring decisions. Not nastily, and I used the word "questioning", he doesn't do any more than that. But he needs to control the way he reacts to the review system.
The other thing is this. It is always very very difficult, and I can't stress how difficult, for a fast bowler to captain an international cricket team, particularly in Test matches.
Why? Because the workload is so heavy. You get stressed and tired, and after a hard over of six balls, you've then got to think about the other bowler, field placings, tactics etc. You'd rather be at fine leg just wandering about for a while after a hard over instead of thinking about the next ball, and you can't do that as captain.
You have to be up for every single ball, thinking two steps ahead of the game. And the other thing he can't do if he's going to survive, and maybe be a captain, is he cannot go and play in all three forms of international cricket.
RK: So would you like to see him as captain of the Test team some day, Geoffrey?
|"There's so much fear if you're not at the top of your game in T20s. And I'd only pick players who are confident, positive, feeling good. And it's not just Yuvraj - don't just blame him for the final, maybe blame the selectors who picked him"|
GB: Well, I'm not saying I'd like to see him, but I wouldn't write him off.
RK: All right, let's take the second question, from Aditya in Australia. He says: Geoffrey, most people in the world consider AB de Villiers as the world's best batsman and Virat Kohli behind him. Correct me if I'm wrong but I think you do too. But if you look at chases, Kohli has a far superior record and even in big games he has performed a lot better than AB. Who in your opinion is the best batsman in the world right now across all formats?
GB: Well, you're dead right, I will correct you, I don't know that I've ever said AB de Villiers is the best player in the world. Maybe you got somebody who you think you've heard with my accent, like David Lloyd, but I haven't.
I like AB de Villiers, I love his batting. Who can't? Wonderful player. No. 1 in the world? Who's the best? Difficult. Where the hell do you decide which one?
There's not a lot to choose between them. It's personal preference. AB de Villiers has been around doing it a lot longer than Kohli. And he's probably in recent times, just recently, had performances of a higher standard.
Now Kohli is much newer to Test cricket but he's doing fabulously. He looks like he's going to be a real superstar. And again, he's got passion and aggression and emotion in him and you can tell. Yes, on occasion it can boil over, we're all guilty of that when we're young, we make mistakes.
But I like the passion and emotion in him. He got a hundred against South Africa in Johannesburg against a wonderful bowling attack. Shortly, he's coming to England when India tour and he's got to do it there, in English conditions, where the ball moves around a bit more.
Then he's got to do it against Mitchell Johnson and Co in Australia later in the year. So the only way you can stamp your name on world cricket as a batsman is to do it in all countries, not just at home. You've got to do it all over the world to show people you've got the skill, the temperament, the character to play on all types of pitches and surfaces and against all types of bowling.
I think Kohli can do that, but it's difficult to say who is the best. AB probably has a bit more experience, but I'm not sure that matters a lot. That Kohli looks pretty good to me!
RK: All right, let's take the Boycs question of the week now and it comes from David in India.
David says: Hello Geoffrey, we saw what happened in the World T20 final where, in the eyes of many, Yuvraj Singh lost the game singlehandedly for India with his 21-ball 11. I read later on ESPNcricinfo in Sid Monga's article that "T20 as a format is cruel as it doesn't offer a player a shot at redemption, and it is easy to identify villains in this format and bury them."
Do you agree that the format is indeed that cruel, or is it just a case of a cricketer out of form? What is to blame more when a player like Yuvraj fails the way he did in the final against Sri Lanka - the format or the cricketer?
GB: Both. It is a difficult format. For me Yuvraj is a cricketer out of form, and he's not been the same batsman since his illness.
It shouldn't surprise people that he's not the same sort of player, but it does, because many people expected Yuvraj to come back and be the same explosive batsman who won three Man-of-the-Match performances in the World Cup.
Cancer is tough to get over. When a sportsman, whatever his sport, has a serious illness or a serious operation, it can take a long, long time to find that elusive thing you had before your layoff.
You can get 80% back of what you were fairly comfortably, with quite a bit of work physically in the gym and practice in the nets and a bit of cricket, but it's the other 20% which is so hard to get back.
I'll give you an example. Take Tiger Woods, a knee operation, a layoff, and what happens, he's not the same, invincible golfer. He's struggling this year. Nobody's frightened of his golf anymore. That aura has gone. He's very very good, but not great, invincible or special.
Now, when you come back after an illness in cricket, like Yuvraj has in the shorter form, the T20, the harder it is to find your form. Because any loss of confidence, you have less time to play when you get to the middle.
So it can be cruel. It exposes you, because if you've got any lack of confidence or form or conviction or positivity, you have no time to play yourself in. Every ball counts - 120 balls and you're expected to get more than a run a ball.
Personally, if he wasn't going to be required as a left-arm spinner - which I've seen him bowl very well and cause problems, but he wasn't used very much in the World T20 - and if that was the case then I would have left him out.
And not just the final, even the games before. Because I've always believed that T20 is a game where batsmen and bowlers need to be confident. There is no room for negativity because every player is under such enormous pressure.
T20 exposes any fears and frailties in your mind. And if you're unassertive, you're gone, and that's what happened to Yuvraj. A lack of confidence, lack of form, no timing, not sure if he should play this shot or that shot, and before you know it has happened, you've received a number of balls and you're poking around in the middle like a headless chicken.
And it gets worse in T20s. There's so much fear if you're not at the top of your game. I'd only pick players who are confident, positive, feeling good. And it's not just Yuvraj - don't just blame him for the final, maybe blame the selectors who picked him.
RK: All right, thanks very much, Geoffrey, that's a wrap on this edition of Bowl at Boycs. Two months of IPL cricket coming up now so do send in your questions via our feedback form and Geoff Boycott will be back in two weeks' time to answer them. Thank you very much, goodbye.
|Comments have now been closed for this article
Sep 10, 2014 Geoffrey Boycott assesses the English summer, Saeed Ajmal's ban, England's World Cup chances, and more (28:59)
Aug 27, 2014 Geoffrey Boycott explains how Indian batsmen are hurting because of excessive limited-overs matches, and more (13:50)
Highlights: Plays of the day from the Champions League match between Kings XI Punjab and Barbados Tridents in Mohali (01:13) | Sep 20, 2014
Highlights: Plays of the day from the Champions League T20 match between Dolphins and Perth Scorchers in Mohali (01:31) | Sep 20, 2014
Press Conference: Durham captain Mark Stoneman said he was nervous when his team lost their seventh wicket but that it felt like fate that Gareth Breese was the man to strike the winning runs to guide the county to Royal London Cup success (01:09) | Sep 20, 2014