Is it time for Ponting to step down as captain?

Roar Pro

By Sarah, 13 Nov 2009 The Crowd is a Roar Pro

Tagged:: Australian Cricket, Cricket, Michael Clarke, Ricky Ponting, The Ashes

Related coverage

Ricky Ponting. AAP Image

Any self-respecting Australian cricket fan will understand that the pain of losing yet another Ashes series doesn’t just go away over night. In fact, it’s the type of pain that likes to linger around for a while.

Even when you’re not thinking about it, you still feel that numb, dulling ache.

Ok, so I might be a little bit melodramatic, but after crucial tactical blunders in the 2008 tour of India and now the 2009 Ashes series in England (I won’t even mention 2005), Ricky Ponting’s reign at the top has now come into serious question.

And rightly so.

Somebody has to start asking the tough question: is it time for Ricky Ponting to step down as captain of Australia?

Now before you start shooting at me for a charge of treason against my fellow countrymen, I should clarify that I’m not just framing Ponting as the scapegoat in the loss of the Ashes.

I understand completely that cricket is after all, a team sport, but what I do have to emphasize is that in cricket, the captain’s role and responsibilities are perhaps more important and more influential than in any other sport.

During a match, the captain is the leader, the role model, the man who has to put the teams strategic planning of the opposition into effect.

He decides who will bowl, when they will bowl, and where the fielders will stand. He decides the batting order, decides whether his team will bat or bowl first based on pitch conditions and offers his players tactical advice.

A cricket captain must have excellent insight, good judgment, and a sharpness that allows him to read the game and be one step ahead of the opposition.

There is no doubting Ricky Ponting’s abilities as a cricketer.

In fact, he is Australia’s leading test run scorer of all time with a mammoth 11,345 runs, boasting an excellent average of 55.88, not to mention being third only behind Tendulkar and Lara in the leading run scorers of all time.

However, great players don’t necessarily make great captains.

Cricket is a game of statistics, and, on the surface Ricky Ponting’s record and stats as captain of Australia are actually quite impressive. He has captained Australia to thirty-nine test victories with eleven losses, and his record in the shorter form of the game is even better winning 140 games out of 192 as captain.

So you might be asking what my point in all of this is if the statistics are in favor of our current captain. Well, statistics sometimes hide the full story and don’t always paint an accurate picture.

Ponting had no easy boots to fill, following in the steps of Steve Waugh, who led Australia in remarkable era in Australian cricket. Steve Waugh holds the highest success rate of any Australian captain, with a 71.92% winning rate.

Now Steve Waugh had perhaps the greatest players we will ever see in our life time at his disposal in Glen McGrath, Shane Warne, Adam Gilchrist, as well as Justin Langer and Matthew Hayden.

However, Steve Waugh was a cricketing mastermind: dynamic and always willing to take a calculated risk. He was able to use each and every player to their full advantage and thus transformed his team into a formidable and unstoppable force.

He transformed the five day game with his attacking style of play and his depth and ability to read a cricket match, to react in the appropriate way when game conditions changed and to use the players he had to deliver the best results possible was the reason why Steve Waugh made a great captain.

Ricky Ponting at the beginning of his captaincy had the comfort of these experienced players from Waugh’s era but after most had retired by 2007 holes in Ponting’s captaincy began to appear. In the last five test series Australia has managed to win just two.

In addition to that, Australia’s position on the ICC world rankings has slipped from first to fourth since Ponting has taken over from Waugh.

It would be too harsh to claim that Ponting’s poor decision making was at first camouflaged by McGrath and Warne, whose expertise, experience and uncanny ability to bowl out the opposition was generally enough for Australia to win.

And taking into consideration the massive reshuffling of the side that saw young and largely inexperienced players thrust into the side, it’s not a simple equation that calls for the axing of the skipper. Rather Ponting has made on several occasions a series of bad decisions at very crucial moments which leads me to question his ability as the decision-maker especially when under pressure.

For example in the 2005 Ashes series in England he chose to bat first on a pitch he believed to contain a bit of life in it. England posted a mammoth total and Australia wasn’t able to come back from it.

On the Fourth Test of Australia’s tour of India for the 08/09 Border-Gavaskar Trophy Ponting made the decision to play part-time bowlers to compensate for his slow over rate.

As a result, Australia was not able to bowl out India, losing the game and consequently the series.

Similarly in the tour of England for the Ashes 09 series, in the fifth and deciding test at Lords, known for being a spin-friendly wicket, Ponting in close consultation with selectors opted to play a fourth seamer in Stuart Clarke, rather than specialist spinner Nathan Hauritz.

Again Australia could not bowl England out, losing the game and the series.

There are other factors that contributed to these losses, but in a game where momentum and strategy is everything, Ponting’s lack of vision in the game has cost Australia on three occasions.

Some players are born natural leaders, some are not.

As I have made clear, Ponting is one of the best players Australia will ever see, and certainly possibly the best batter since Bradman.

Perhaps it’s time Ricky concentrated on his batting and Australia injects new life into the captaincy with current vice-captain Michael Clarke, who clearly has demonstrated he has the thinking brain needed to be captain of Australia.

It may seem harsh, but someone has to ask the tough questions if Australia is to get back to the top of world cricket.

Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.

The Crowd Says (14) | Page 1 of Comments

Freud of Football said | November 13th 2009 @ 6:48am | Report comment

“He decides who will bowl, when they will bowl, and where the fielders will stand. He decides the batting order, decides whether his team will bat or bowl first based on pitch conditions and offers his players tactical advice.” – Sarah, that statement is over-simplified, particularly in Ponting’s case.

I agree that Ponting isn’t a great captain however as stupid as it sounds, taking over the test team with all-time greats at the height of their powers must have been extremely difficult. He didn’t get to come in and put his stamp on things, rather he had to just let Warne and McGrath do what they wanted and Hayden and Langer backed him up with the bat, he might have been captaining the ODI side but he didn’t have to really, the players were good enough to not require his leadership and you can bet someone like Warne would have known his own bowling and field requirements 100X better than Ponting.

“Ponting in close consultation with selectors opted to play a fourth seamer in Stuart Clarke, rather than specialist spinner Nathan Hauritz.” – No, this one is down to the selectors. Hilditch, Cox, Boon and Hughes – there is enough experience between them and in their capacity as selectors they should have known that a spinner should have been played.

Then again, a balanced side has 5 batsmen, an all-rounder, a keeper, a spinner and 3 quicks. Australia’s selection panel is curiosly imbalanced with 3 former batsmen and a quickie, not to mention 2 taswegians, a vic and a croweater – how NSW doesn’t get a look in is simply astonishing.

I think it was Vinay (sorry if I’m wrong) who made this point before – if you remove Ponting from the captaincy then he won’t play for Aus anymore. I think that is probably right and as such, we sort of have to grin and bear it as right now, Australia would fall apart without him.

We saw both extremes of Ponting’s captaincy in the last series, he appeared to get better as the matches went and the results reflected this, his attacking move of utilising the BaPP during overs 34-38 in Australia’s 350 total was really the highlight for me, that was some smart thinking and I’m glad he’s not too stubborn (something I would accuse Steve Waugh of) to not try and correct his ways and improve.

Reply
Brett McKay said | November 13th 2009 @ 7:28am | Report comment

Sarah, you put forward some interesting points, but in my mind unless there is a undoubtedly more qualified alternative captain, then Ponting keeps the job. Had you have asked the question of who should take over, you’d quite likely get a lot of variation in the responses. And that to me is doubt. For what it’s worth I think Ponting has become a better captain over the years. Not as innovative, or as quick on the feet as say, Simon Katich, but he’s significantly better than when he inherited the reins..

Just to finish, I had to comment on this:

“It would be too harsh to claim that Ponting’s poor decision making was at first camouflaged by McGrath and Warne, whose expertise, experience and uncanny ability to bowl out the opposition was generally enough for Australia to win.”

This to me is like delivering a tirade of abuse to someone, and then ending it with ‘no offence’, as if that makes everything previously said null and void. You’re right, it would be way too harsh to say that, but you’ve said it anyway…

Reply
Ben said | November 13th 2009 @ 7:48am | Report comment

Oh give it a rest already. I understand that Australia is truly a proud sporting nation, but Ricky Ponting has to have been made the biggest scapegoat in Australian sporting history. Sure he has made one or two poor decisions, but point to a captain who hasn’t. The 2005 Ashes series loss was by far not the fault of the captain, rather the rubbish form of most of the squad (minus one SK Warne, of course). The 2009 loss involved a monumuntal mental freeze in the final test after Australia had all the momentum. Yes, they should have won the first test, but anybody should have been able to get Monty Panesar out!
The problem with all you armchair critics is that you’re trying to re-live the glory days of yesteryear by comparing Ponting to the previous captains of Waugh, Taylor, Border et al. If any of you knew anything about Ricky Ponting, espeically his upbringing in a very difficult Launceston suburb, you would understand that Ponting is not some wet-blanket Sydney school-boy. Just get over the fact that he is a different person and that his captaincy style is different – not worse – just different. He is the best person for the job and he should remain there. His record – even in trying periods – attests to his leadership abilities.

Reply
Freud of Football said | November 13th 2009 @ 7:57am | Report comment

“in a very difficult Launceston suburb” – very funny Ben.

Reply
will said | November 13th 2009 @ 8:21am | Report comment

Also, the comment about Steve Waugh being a tactical mastermind is just wrong.

I remember how he used to go when either Warne or McGrath were missing from the team.

I remember India racking up 700 at the SCG in 2003/04 without McGrath or Warne, and I remember Australia losing to England in 2002/03 at the SCG when Warne was injured as was McGrath.

It seems very odd to me how you can claim Waugh was a ‘tactical mastermind’ when he had a bowling lineup including Lee, Warne, McGrath and Gillepsie yet you claim this same bowling linup, or primarily Warne and McGrath, covered up Pontings so called shortcomings as captain.

The available evidence is that on the rare occasions Waugh did not have the services of McGrath and / or Warne then we struggled. As I mentioned above.

Now McGrath and Warne are gone for good, retired from the game, so it makes sense that we are going to struggle.

People have to get rid of the notion that a captain can perform miracles, cricket is very much a game of luck, changing captains is not going to do much becaues we are still left with a bowling lineup that is inexperienced.

Reply
vinay verma said | November 13th 2009 @ 8:41am | Report comment

Sarah,It should come as no surprise to you that I am an unapologetic Ponting admirer. My reasons are well documented in the Roar. I am also understanding why thinking commentators like Brett and Freud have a difference of opinion with me. But I would suggest it is easy to criticise someone like Ponting. A few points to remember..he has never shirked his responsibilty. He leads from the front and his batting has flourished since he assumed the Captaincy. He was made Captain because he was the best man for the job. Yes,Shane Warne,would also have made a good Captain but he was coming to the end of his career and had let the team down on the eve of the 2003 World Cup. That Ponting led Australia to a victory in 2003 was all the more laudable.
I for one do not blame the two Ashes losses on Ponting alone. The loss in India,especially Nagpur,is harder to explain. However,for good or bad,he will remain Captain till he decides enough is enough.

Freud,talking of power plays,dont give up on your piece a few days ago. Revisit it because it is worthy of further debate.

Reply
- Brett McKay said | November 13th 2009 @ 9:45am | Report comment
  
  Vinay, Ricky Ponting is one topic in which we’re in strong agreement
  
  Reply
Ian Whitchurch said | November 13th 2009 @ 9:30am | Report comment

There are two theories of captaincy in cricket.

The first one is the English way – you pick your captain, and then select ten players to support him. Case in point, Mike Brearly

The second one is the Australian way – you pick the best XI, and then make the best batsman captain. Case in point, Ricky Ponting.

Therefore, unless you want to change the way Australian captains are selected, or drop the best batsman in the side, you accept Ponting isnt a great captain and move on.

Look, the Australian side used to have three of the best players that ever were – Warne, McGrath and Gilchrist.

Now, they dont.

It has a very fine batsman, some bits and pieces supporting batsmen and a load of crap as far as bowling goes (no, really. Name me a weaker Australian bowling attack, ever). Honestly, they’ve come back to the pack, and I’m impressed by the fact they haven’t completely folded like a cheap suit, the way the West Indies did when they lost their great players.

Reply
- Freud of Football said | November 13th 2009 @ 4:16pm | Report comment
  
  A weaker bowling attack? Honestly, that can’t be too difficult, how’s this for size:
  
  1984, 3rd test between Aus and Windies, Australian’s who bowled in the first innings:
  
  1) G Lawson – 46 Tests, Bowling Average 30.56
  2) R Hogg – 38 Tests, Bowling Average 28.47
  3) T Alderman – 41 Tests, Bowling Average 27.15
  4) B Holland – 11 Tests, Bowling Average 39.76
  5) K Wessels – 40 Tests, Never took a wicket
  
  Name just about any team from the 80′s and the Australian bowling was crap, Lillee was the only one we had back then and he wasn’t at his peak.
  
  Or were Whitney and the like all better than Australia’s current options?
  
  I would strongly disagree.
  
  Reply
davido said | November 13th 2009 @ 10:57am | Report comment

Not again. This is getting boring.

Just FYI Sarah, you rarely if never hear this sort of criticism outside of Australia.

Reply
FIsher Price said | November 13th 2009 @ 1:34pm | Report comment

That time has passed in my opinion. His recent Test record is not up to scratch.

Reply
Fisher Price said | November 13th 2009 @ 4:23pm | Report comment

You’re all educated cricket followers but I find it hard to see how you can justify Ponting’s tactical failings during the series losses away in India and England (twice) and at home to South Africa.

Reply