Vaughan reborn

Events in Kandy and Colombo over the past fortnight have given us Limeys even more reason to believe in the possibility of the improbable. Not only is Michael Vaughan showing signs of re-scaling the heights of 2002 [which is not, admittedly, all that unlike suggesting Michelangelo had another Sistine Chapel in him]; he is also beginning to come to terms with what so many assume to be the toughest job in sport: captaining a cricket team while fully justifying selection as a player.

On the face of it, Vaughan’s Test career endorses that hardy slice of cricketing philosophy: while responsibility may maketh the man, it usually plays merry hell with the batsman. England’s reigning overlord, after all, is averaging more than 20% less with the stripes than he did in the ranks.

On the other hand, as his form thus far in Sri Lanka has reinforced, he does appear to be getting the hang of all that juggling. As I write, up to the end of the second Test in Colombo, he is averaging 39.18 as captain; only once, after scoring a century in each innings against West Indies in 2004, has he averaged more in that capacity – and that was 39.35. Indeed, in his last 14 innings, against West Indies, India and Sri Lanka, he has made 736 runs at nearly 53 – i.e. more than his mean as non-captain. That he is opening again, courtesy of Andrew Strauss’s unexpected decline, seems anything but coincidental: in that position he averages 49.08, elsewhere almost 10 runs fewer.

So, is that old saw, about returns diminishing as duties increase, really borne out by the evidence? Take a look at the following list of current or recent batsmen-captains:

Ponting 65.83 (up from 55.97 not as captain) Jayawardene 60.41 (47.80) Lara 57.83 (50.12) Inzamam 52.10 (48.73) Dravid 44.51 (59.30) Fleming 40.59 (36.77) Vaughan 39.18 (50.98) Smith 45.25 (55.09)

Smith is an awkward case – all but eight of his 66 Tests have been as captain, in which capacity he was averaging 72 after his first seven matches, thanks primarily to those successive double-tons against England in 2003. The decline, though, has been steady, long and virtually uninterrupted. As for Vaughan, he became captain amid the glow of one of the purplest patches the modern game has witnessed, so again, the only way was down. (Indeed, he was averaging more, 50.98, than at any time in his career when he assumed the reins against South Africa at Lord’s in 2003.) Given that helming India is probably the most demanding job in sport, and that he, too, was surfing the crest of a wave when he inherited it, Dravid’s waning is even more forgivable. The surprise, to many, will be that as many as five of the eight players above became more productive with responsibility, Jayawardene, Ponting and Lara appreciably so.

Now let’s toss in, at something akin to random, 12 notables of distant and recent yesteryear who doubled as skippers:

Bradman 101.51 (98.69) Hammond 55.23 (59.48) Sobers 58.80 (57.01) Gavaskar 50.72 (51.33) Javed Miandad 50.08 (53.53) Hutton 52.14 (58.47) Lloyd 51.30 (38.67) Richards 45.11 (53.64) Ian Chappell 50.00 (37.26) Steve Waugh 52.30 (50.44) Hussain 36.04 (38.10) M Taylor 39.63 (46.97)

Almost 60% of the above (seven out of 12) endured a decline in productivity as leaders, yes, but of rather more significance is the fact that more than 40% (five) improved, Chappell and Lloyd especially.

Merging these two lists, moreover, demonstrates the relatively insignificant negative impact captaincy can have:

Chappell + 12.74 Lloyd + 12.63 Jayawardene + 12.61 Ponting + 9.86 Lara + 7.71 Fleming + 3.82 Inzamam + 3.37 Bradman + 2.82 Waugh + 1.86 Sobers + 1.79

Dravid – 14.79 Vaughan – 11.80 Smith – 9.84 Richards – 8.53 Taylor -7.34 Hutton – 6.33 Hammond – 4.25 Miandad – 3.45 Hussain – 2.06 Gavaskar – 0.61

Those least touched by the cares of leadership have been Gavaskar (0.61 difference), Sobers (1.79), Waugh (1.86), Hussain (2.06) and Bradman (2.82). Of the 20 batsmen under examination, furthermore, only six can be said to have suffered in any substantive way (average reduced by more than 5%) from carrying the extra burden – Dravid, Vaughan, Smith, Richards, Hutton and Taylor. Since they all averaged 39-plus, moreover, none can be said to have been conspicuously unworthy batting selections in the way that, say, Mike Brearley (22.48) or even Jeremy Coney (30.19) were. So much, then, for received wisdom.

Vaughan, though, has something else to commend him. Lara’s retirement from the five-day arena may have left a vast void on the aesthetic front, but the Sheriff of Sheffield’s post-knee-op rebirth has plugged a few gaps. VVS Laxman aside, does any contemporary player penetrate the off side quite so effortlessly, quite so regally? Not to these eyes. Throw in a follow-through that might have inspired Rembrandt and the artistic impression is nigh-on Gowerian. Or, come to that, Azharuddin. Six-point-zeroes all round.

Which prompted another mischievous thought. How about picking a current XI to satisfy the senses, and one on whom, despite their collective eyesoreness and/or greyness, you might wager your last penny not to lose? All right, all right, since you insist…

Sensual XI: Michael Vaughan (capt), Chris Gayle, Ricky Ponting, Mohammad Yousuf, VVS Laxman, Prasanna Jayawardene (wk), Stuart MacGill, Shoaib Akhtar, Brett Lee, Shane Bond, Danish Kaneria.

Undemonstrative XI: Kumar Sangakkara (capt & wk), Michael Hussey, Rahul Dravid, Jacques Kallis, Shivnarine Chanderpaul, Paul Collingwood, Anil Kumble, Shaun Pollock, Matthew Hoggard, Stuart Clark, Paul Harris.