A Tale of Three Captains

The decision of England’s selectors to split the captaincy three ways has met with mixed responses. To some it is a bizarre dilution of responsibility, while to others it is a pragmatic solution to the current circumstances.

In a perfect world, one suspects, any international side would look to have one captain for all forms of the game, although Andrew Strauss has spoken recently of the strain of captaining England in both tests and ODIs. England, however, are not in that perfect world at the moment and, given the position that we are in the international cycle, now seems the perfect opportunity to experiment.

England’s test side are currently in good shape, moving up the rankings and fresh from a hammering of Australia. Andrew Strauss’ leadership and his relationship with Andy Flower are central to that success and he can reasonably be expected to carry on until the 2013 Ashes before handing over the resins. However, he doesn’t want to play ODIs anymore and has never featured in England’s Twenty20 plans, so clearly if he is to remain as test captain then the captaincy would have to be split since it would be daft to change the test captain simply in order to provide consistency with the ODI and Twenty20 sides.

It would seem that Geoff Miller et al are keen to use the ODI side as a proving ground to look at promising young players and to provide valuable international experience. Such a side requires an experienced international cricketer to lead it and Alastair Cook, long identified as Strauss’ successor at the helm of the test side, seems a reasonable choice. There has been plenty of comment surrounding Cook’s suitability as an ODI player, but his limited overs form in county cricket has been good over the last couple of years and we should also bear in mind that opener was one of the positions that England most struggled with at the World Cup. He provides a natural replacement for Strauss at the top of the order, albeit probably more at home in English conditions than those that might be found in the sub-continent.

Cook, however, doesn’t play any part in England’s Twenty20 plans and so a third captain is required. For all of Paul Collingwood’s rather surprising protestations, the time is right to look forward and, again, Stuart Broad seems a reasonably logical choice. He is guaranteed his place in the side and has an opportunity to grow into the role as England look to develop a new generation of international cricketers. It will be interesting to see how he fares, but he is respected by his team mates and seems to have plenty of innovative ideas. It may also serve to make him grow up a bit, although that remains to be seen.

The decision, therefore, is not a bizarre one by any means, rather it is a sensible solution to the current international environment, while also including an element of succession planning. Rather than carping we should be wishing Alastair Cook and Stuart Broad well.