Strauss a better captain than Vaughan?

[sami ullah khan]

Vaughan for mine. He defeated a top Aussie side in 2005 and gave English the belief that Australia could be beaten.

 

[StinkyBoHoon]

Strauss has definitely benefitted from a better backroom approach. His appointment to the captaincy was the final part of a watershed moment in the ECB where they stopped messing about with selections and started trusting the individuals.

Flowers being made coach for example, just prior to that they didn't shut up about wanting a big name like mikey arthur, but they saw sense and gave the job to him as the players liked and trusted him, they haven't panicked in the face of mini-disasters like the loss in the windies.

So I'd say vaughan, but it's a different skill needed to man a ship with a hole in the rudder and one with everything in tip top condition.

that said, not sure I totally agree that the talent is that much different. Broad is a poor bowler, anderson is good only when the conditions are ideal and centuries seem very hard to come by in the england team. out of the top nations (india, SL, Aus and SA) all those side have a couple of 50+ averaging batsmen and a few more 45+ ones. England makes do with only two that average over 45.

 

[sifter132]

And because I've got some time to kill before dinner...here's the raw stats from Vaughan's captaincy - none of these stats include Bangladesh or Zimbabwe:
Batsmen: Batsmen under Vaughan
Thorpe and KP are the only ones who average over 42 and Vaughan's average himself is pretty poor averaging 33. And Thorpe and KP really only count as 1 player because KP replaced Thorpe.
Bowlers:Bowlers under Vaughan
Flintoff barely cracks the 30 barrier along with Simon Jones and Sidebottom but those 2 didn't really play many matches, while the regular attack of Giles, Anderson, Hoggard and Harmison couldn't beat an average of 30. Harmison would have when he was hot, but when he was not it was pretty ugly.

For Strauss:
Batting: http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine...rby=runs;team=1;template=results;type=batting
Strauss, Cook, Collingwood, Bell and Prior all beat 45 under Strauss. The worst regular batsman under Strauss has been KP averaging 41.
Bowling: Bowlers under Strauss
Anderson, Swann and Broad have averages under 30 (Broad only just), but it's been a bit of a struggle for a 4th and 5th bowler. Finn might fill that void.

So Strauss has definitely enjoyed better performances from his players so maybe he has had more talent to work with, but maybe he had weaker opposition, or maybe he's just more inspiring to his troops, or maybe Flower's giving them better gameplans. Who knows??

 

[StinkyBoHoon]

good stats sifter, might I provide a wee tweek though?

batting stats since strauss became captain proper, not just doing it temporarily when vaughan was out.

england batting from 2009 with strauss*

batting is evened out a bit more now. strauss has had to lead from the front batting wise, no one else makes it over 45. vaughan was getting far better out of KP. Colly's improved under strauss and Cook is about the same.

bowlers have definitely done better though.

 

[Fatal Shot]

Well to be fair, KP has batted like ████. That's not Strauss's fault.

 

[War]

Both are rather poor captains IMO. Vaughan obviously will go down as a legendary captain because of 05, we will just have to live with it. I actually thought Alec Stewart was the best Eng captain ive seen.

Would say Strauss was average. Vaughan was defiantely a good tactician, the Ashes 05 success doesn't overshadow that. Vaughan between SA 03-SA 04 was very impressive as skipper.

Would probably rate Hussain as the best ENG captain i've seen in my lifetime of watching cricket however.

Being a great captain doesn't mean much statistically.

Indeed. Note how Stephen Fleming was lauded constantly for his captaincy - yet he didn't win very often even in ODIs where NZ had a much better looking side. Ricky Ponting is the opposite - has won everything bar the Ashes in England and he gets constantly slammed

100% on pint here.

 

[Owzat]

Referring to 2005 Ashes alone against 2009, Vaughan did face Warne (40 wkts) and McGrath whereas Strauss didn't. But I disagree that Strauss has 'better weapons', the bowling attack of Harmison, Flintoff, Hoggard, Jones and fair enough, Ashley Giles was far from poor. And the top order batting was pretty good. You can't underestimate the importance of Jones and Flintoff as their figures in my original post show quite clearly - you'd settle for a batsman scoring 402 runs, or a bowler taking 24 wickets, but to have BOTH from one player in one series is priceless. Add to that Jones' 18 wickets in just 3.5 Tests which effectively won us the two Tests out of the first four that won us the Ashes. Thereafter Jones was gone and so was Vaughan's magic wand...................................... Perhaps some of the stattos could post the pre and post Jones captaincy record for Vaughan against the better nations. Flintoff was nearing the end of his magic spell, thereafter he was more or less a spent force - again, stats to prove/disprove the point would be good

 

[angryangy]

I think the attacks are about the same. You can discuss things like Simon Jones, but across some five years of captaincy, his career isn't a prevailing influence. Similarly for Harmison and Flintoff, though they played a lot more and had some great periods of success, they had enough bad or average games to balance it out.

Of course, if Vaughan enhanced one and Strauss is sabotaging the other or vice versa, then it's rather immeasurable exactly how good the players in either period were.

 

[SciD]

what is both these guys record away from home in sub continent, Australia and RSA? I think Strauss is yet to captain in all these regions and Vaughan did not had glorious record in these places combined.

 

[AngryPixel]

Captain or no captain... When Vaughn was in form, he was a treat to watch... IMO most stylish english batsman ever. His cover drives were gorgeous... He had some kinda laxman like style in him

 

[aditya123]

Is Strauss a better captain than Vaughan, or will he be?

Strauss has yet to captain against Sri Lanka or India so maybe when he does it will be clearer.

Was`nt Strauss captain when England last toured India in 2008 and lost that epic test at Chennai? Or was it KP who was captain then?

I`d rate Vaughan higher than Strauss. Firstly, the 2005 Ashes win was strategically superior to the 2009 win. Australia, in 2005 were a far better side than 2009. Also, I`m a big fan of Vaughan, the batsman and hence a bit biased .

Vaughan`s England beat SA in SA, pummeled the WI in the Caribbean and also beat SA at home other than the 2005 Ashes. However, during that phase, he had Harmisson, Hoggard, Flintoff and Jones all firing for England. Strauss has had a better spinner in Swann in his team but the pace attack is`nt what Vaughan had at his disposal. I`d still rate Vaughan slightly higher because he has got self belief into the English side.

Where Strauss has definitely been better than Vaughan is his approach towards ODI cricket. Under him, England have markedly improved as an ODI side.

 

[ZoraxDoom]

Captain or no captain... When Vaughn was in form, he was a treat to watch... IMO most stylish english batsman ever. His cover drives were gorgeous... He had some kinda laxman like style in him

What a stupid post given the thread. Seriously, can't you read the title?


Strauss isn't a brilliant captain. He's not bad, he does a decent job, has shown he can lead from the front, and with Flower is getting the team to gel well.

I think what people like about Vaughan was that he got the best out of some enigmatic players like Flintoff and Harmison and that he wasn't the run of the mill boring captain but kept doing things on the field. Changing field placements and bowlers and stuff. He's also credited for things like winning the 2005 Ashes or tactics such as Giles' negative line to Sachin which got him stumped.

I personally thought Vaughan was a decent skipper, but faded away towards the end when he wasn't scoring runs to support his spot in the side and the team around him was fading and crumbling.

 

[Cricketman]

Since when was captaincy quantitative. Vaughn was a natural, everyone in the team looked up to him even though he wasn't the best player. Kind of like Ganguly.

Australia in 05 were simply the best. They were at their peak, had strength and dominance oozing out of every single pore. England weren't as good on paper, still forming their side and had a lot of newcomers. Vaughn's captaincy played a huge role in inspiring the team, making the right moves on field and off - especially with some of those selections.

Strauss, on the other hand, had a much stronger England team to work with. The Australians were much weaker too.

Ashes performances hold 80-90% of weight for England and Australian captains imo. Therefore, Vaughn is clearly better than Strauss.

 

[pcfan123]

Unless Strauss wins down under in that case ^

 

[Cricketman]

Right. But even then, he didn't have McGrath, Warne, Gillespie, Lee, etc to handle all at their peak. Plus Hayden, Langer, Gilchrist...holy guacamole.