In the 126 years since the first known declaration in cricket (Nottinghamshire declared at 5-157 against Kent in 1890), there have been many such brave decisions, and some have paid off handsomely.
Some, not so much.
April 12th 1976. Port of Spain.
India meet the West Indies in the third Test at Trinidad, one down in the series.
West Indies win the toss and elect to bat, but are soon reeling at 52 for 3 against the brilliantly unpredictable Chandrasekhar and his fast leg spinners. But Vivian Richards is in majestic form and on the back of his 177 runs, West Indies end Day 1 at 320 for 5, Chandra taking all five wickets.
The next morning, however, the wily Bishen Bedi wraps up the West Indian innings in quick time for 359.
On a turning Port of Spain pitch, Llyod believes that his three spinners will do more damage to the Indians than they inflicted on his batsmen. However it’s the sole effort of Michael Holding that breaks the back of the Indian batting.
Bowling with great pace and aggression, Holding gets Gavaskar cheaply and then runs through the Indian attack over the next day or so, taking six wickets as Chandra did in the previous innings, and India is all out for 228, a deficit of 131 runs.
Between Chandra and Venkat, the third member of India’s spinning trio in that Test, the Indians make rapid inroads into the West Indies batting dismissing Richards and Clive Lloyd relatively cheaply.
Despite a tentative century from Kallicharan, the West Indies only get to 271 for the loss of six wickets one hour after lunch on the fourth day and with a lead of 402 runs, Lloyd decides he has enough runs to dismiss the Indians cheaply with three spinners at his disposal on a broken track.
Two brothers-in-law batting for the Indian team, however, have other ideas. Gavaskar and Vishwanath, two of the smallest batsmen in Test cricket, score gritty magnificent centuries on a difficult pitch.
Mohinder Amarnath bats for 400 minutes to score 85, and a bearded Brijesh Patel comes in with the mandatory overs half done, and smashes the West Indian spinners all over the park to take India to a famous and unscripted victory.
It’s the first time since 1948/49 when Bradman’s Australia achieved the feat, that a team has scored more than 400 to win in the fourth innings after a declaration by the opposition.
This loss however has a much bigger impact on the future of world cricket than people could imagine.
Lloyd is incensed at the impotence of his spinners on a turning track, and brings in a four-pacer attack for the final Test of the series to pound the Indians into submission.
It’s the start of the West Indies pace quartet domination that is to rule cricket fields from Port of Spain to Eden Gardens for more than a decade.
January 18th 2000. Centurion.
This is a match that has gone down in history as the best example of something that appears to be too good to be true, and sure enough, it is.
South Africa comes into the fifth Test at Centurion having won the series 2-0 and with little to prove against the hapless English team.
South Africa struggle to 155 for 6 on a rain-curtailed first day. Then incessant rain means the next three days are washed out. So the obvious conclusion on Day 5 is that the Test will end in a tame draw.
Before play resumes however, South African captain Hansie Cronje bumps into Alec Stewart on the stairs and asks if Nassir Hussain would consider an offer to chase 270 in 73 overs to give England a chance to fight for a victory.
With South Africa up 2-0, it would not impact the result of the series, and the paying public would get something for their money. Hussain and Coach Fletcher decide to see how the first session goes before responding.
When South Africa restart play, the pitch plays true and Klusener and Pollock bat well, and Darren Gough doesn’t bowl well.
40 minutes into the day’s play, Hussain decides to test Cronje by sending him a message asking whether South Africa would be willing to let England try and chase 250 instead.
Much to his surprise, Cronje agrees, and in fact tells Hussain he can score 245 from 76 overs instead, an even better offer.
What happens next is pure Hollywood.
South Africa declares at 248 for 8. England then declares without playing a ball – the first time a team has ever declared at 0 for 0. South Africa then forfeits its innings, leaving England to score 249 runs to win the match.
England duly scores 251 for 8 to win the match. Michael Atherton describes the victory as “the cheapest win of my Test career”.
There is a lot of talk around the match, and while most of the media praises the arrangement, Derek Pringle, writing in The Independent, questions Cronje’s motives, calling it an action out of character.
On April 12th the same year, the fixing scandal breaks out, and three days later comes confirmation that Cronje was offered $150,000 by a bookie to be paid to a charity to ensure that the Centurion Test had a positive result.
The Centurion remains a black mark forever in Test cricket history, and a huge lesson to everyone that what looks too good to be true, usually is.
As always, this piece is not meant to be a defining list of great victories that resulted from ill-conceived declarations, but instead, another piece that should whet the appetite of Roarers to kick off a discussion of their favourites!
Let the opinions roll!
Anindya Dutta
Roar Guru
Let's have some examples! Should be enjoyable if he was as consistent as you say ?
Anindya Dutta
Roar Guru
Yeah. I look at that second innings India scorecard and go - Ouch!
Anindya Dutta
Roar Guru
I was at Eden Gardens for this match! Remember a lot of it. Yallop's innings was superb. It was very disappointing as a young kid that India finally could not win the match. Yashpal Sharma gave it a real good shot.
Ants32
Roar Rookie
Every declaration David Hookes made as captain of South Australia! He was truly unfathomable at times. :D
Ants32
Roar Rookie
This must be the match you were referring to, i guess: http://www.espncricinfo.com/wisdenalmanack/engine/match/63245.html
Ants32
Roar Rookie
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/current/match/63162.html Classic case of the WIndies bouncing a team out in the 70's/80's halcyon days of speed demons. :/
Anindya Dutta
Roar Guru
Haha ok the Knight Rider will chill for a while then ? What a wonderful analysis of the captaincy of some of Australia's most successful captains. You really should write a pice with the above as basis on Captains. Yes, I read James' piece on Border on The Roar and commented on it as well. I am a huge fan of Border and totally agree on his impact on Aussie Cricket, a legacy carried on by Taylor and Waugh and Ponting to a degree. Clarke was disappointing and I am not a big fan of Smith's captaincy yet.
Matthew H
Guest
Hi Anindya, thanks for the cool response. Easy there Knight Rider with all that Kolkata stuff, I don't want to have to go all Kenny Powers on you lol. Interesting perception of Aussie captaincy, and a fair way of looking at it. This week there was also an article on Allan Border on The Roar, and I always really thought (as a kid mind you) he was reluctant captain grumpy after the Greg Chappell implosion and Kim Hughes being chucked in and cracking and the Australian team a total mess. When you look at his tenure and legacy though it is unreal. He won back the Ashes in England and built an 11-1 record over the old enemy in his last three series against them and just missed beating WI (heartache), In his last match M Taylor opened with M Slater, the Waugh brothers were in the middle order and McGrath and Warne were both bowling. He then handed that team to M A Taylor who is the best captain I have ever seen. So if you take the last half of Border's tenure and add it to Taylor's for 10 years Australia had two of the best captains cricket has seen, remarkably both of them differing enough to be distinguishable. I have no doubt that the Aussie bowlers became great partly due to Taylor's captaincy and believe that Mitch Johnson would have been a great under him too. Now your point about great cricketers becoming great captains comes into it with Waugh and Ponting, two of the best cricketers Australia has produced. We all know great cricketers don't always make great captains.... Botham anyone? Certainly Waugh was like a combo of Border's toughness and Taylor's acumen. Ponting dropped off a touch though?, not winning a series in England or winning a test against India in India (perhaps a little unlucky there). Bear in mind that Gilchrist won 2/3 of his tests through that time including 2/3 in India with Ponting missing. Clarke a disappointment for me, too aggressive and reactionary and it shows in his stats, worst series record of the last 25 years. Smith is a bit of an unknown at this stage but has a good early record and has always looked a wonderful cricketer. The great tragedy of Australian captaincy in my mind is that S K Warne never got it. Deserved it, even though he was (and possibly still is) a flog. If you think that until 2005 Border was a selector (and probably the most important one) it seems more than a coincidence that his years are the real glory years. 1991 - to present Series Results for Australian Captains (total:wins-draws-losses) Border 15 : 8-3-4 (unlucky not have 9 wins - the WI tour of Aust) Taylor 14 : 11-0-3 Waugh 18 : 13-3-2 (Gilchrist) 4 : 3-0-1 Ponting 27 : 18-2-7 Clarke 16 : 8-2-7 Smith 5 : 4-0-1
Anindya Dutta
Roar Guru
True that. Why declare in the 3rd innings if your fall back position is not a draw? I agree. A "sporting declaration" without this in mind, is just a recipe for potentially handing the opposition the game.
Paul Potter
Roar Guru
Thanks. Your point about Australia's captains is a decent one - borne out by the debate when Ponting continued on in Clarke's team as a batsman. In other teams, where the captain continuing on past his captaincy is much more frequent, it wouldn't have raised as many eyebrows. For example, consider India and Tendulkar, Ganguly, Dravid all continuing on after their captaincy days. The only one of that Indian generation I can remember leaving as captain was Anil Kumble. What I like about debates like this is when people separate the idea and the execution. Only in the Cronje case could the idea and execution be considered truly wrong, for obvious reasons (the motivation). My idea of a good declaration is one where the captain thinks about winning, with losing and drawing way back in the distance. Only when the wider context definitively supports an ensure draw-first, win-second declaration is a closure something I like. The point of the game is to win, after all. Obviously, sometimes the scope for latitude is so big that the idea doesn't matter. For example, we might think that a captain should declare with a lead of 550 on the third night to allow his bowlers an hour at the opposition, but if that captain chooses to bat for two more hours, it shouldn't affect the result of the match. After all, a Test attack should be able to bowl the opposition out in 5 and a half sessions in the fourth innings or indeed any innings.
Anindya Dutta
Roar Guru
Fantastic discussion gentlemen! Was a lot of fun reading this exchange. Just my two bits on this. First I am from Kolkata originally, so I hold the permanent bragging rights over every Aussie I ever meet ? But more seriously, I think Ponting was a seriously good captain with a great head on his shoulders. Australia has been blessed to have had some great cricketers also turn great captains when given the chance. Perhaps far more than other countries. There have also been the Ian Chappells who I am less than eneamoured with, but on the whole it's been very good leadership indeed. And in the end, as I have kept saying on both these threads, hindsight is 20 20, and many justified decisions at that moment, on that day, to the Captain, in hindsight, seem terrible today. That's what makes cricket what it is and why we love it so much!
JohnB
Guest
Thanks Anindya - even if that isn't the reason, interesting factoid!
Paul Potter
Roar Guru
Ponting I think gets harshly judged as a captain. I would agree that if you look through his declarations, particularly ones in the first innings, they were always (or nearly always) built on trying to win the game. Sometimes, particularly against India, his fourth innings targets were pretty stiff (based on the premise that batsmen wouldn't bat as well when a draw was the best they could hope for), but the logic worked pretty well. I think the follow on stuff gets a bit blown out of proportion. Most of the times since Kolkata have been naturally conducive to batting again. Ponting did enforce the follow on occasion, either when he had no other choice or he thought it would have a major effect on the series (see that Aus-WI series, in NZ in 2010 and Aus-SL in 2007). It's worth noting that on both occasions in Australia that he lost a bowler to injury in the Test immediately after the one in which he enforced the follow on (Siddle at Adelaide against West Indies, MacGill at Hobart against SL). There should be no blanket rule, it just depends on the circumstances. If a team struggles to bat in the fourth innings, the only way they're going to improve is by experiencing that situation until they succeed. It's why I was happy to see Australia bat second three times against SL - their third first innings of the series was the best.
Matthew H
Guest
That's a fair point Pottsy and a great way to look at it. Is it fair to say that declaratons were one of Ponting's strength as a captain? I certainly think M Taylor was safe but still exceptionally good at declarations too. With Australia's history of being dodgy in their second innings and especially in the 4th innings of matches it should just almost be a rule that Aus do not declare in their 1st innings and do not enforce the follow on ever lol.
Paul Potter
Roar Guru
Perth 2009 was a close call, but I actually think it was an excellent declaration. Because it came before tea, it gave Australia three starts (before tea, after tea, and the start of day three) and because of Chris Gayle, they definitely needed all three. Gayle caned the attack on day two before he was one of the two West Indian wickets to fall on that day, but Australia hit back with 8-98 on day three.
Matthew H
Guest
Colombo 1992 Sri Lanka v Australia. Arjuna Ranatunga (many Australians' favourite ever Sri Lankan cricketer lol) calls time on Sri Lanka's first innings at 8/547 with Kaluwitharana still in on 132* and a lead of 291. Australia then spanked 471 (without anyone scoring a century, 40 from McDermott at 9 and 35 from Warne at 10) and then rolled Sri Lanka for 164 to win by a tiny 16 runs. Ranatunga himself cracked a ton in the 1st innings and went for a duck in the second. Leeds 1981 England v Australia. Kim Hughes closes Australia's first innings at 9/401. Admittedly DK Lillee and Alderman were batting, but Australia would fall just 18 runs short of England in the 4th innings after enforcing the follow-on and being set 130 runs to win (ouch). Close Calls Perth 2009 Australia v West Indies. Ponting retires hurt in the 1st innings and declares Australia satisfied at 7/520. After dispatching WI in the 1st innings for 312 Australia were rolled for 150 leaving WI a target of 359. After a valiant effort WI fell just 34 runs short of Australia. Nottingham 1973 England v New Zealand. Ray Illingworth is feeling pretty comfortable in the third innings of the test with a lead of 479 runs. England had scored 250 in the first innings and rolled NZ for 97, coming into the their second innings with a lead of 153. With Dennis Amiss and Tony Greig scoring tons, and Amiss still there on 138* Illingworth called time at 8/325. NZ then had two centurions of there own with captain Congdon hitting 176 and V Pollard getting to 116. Unfortunately the bowlers couldn't keep it going and NZ fell just 39 runs short of what would have been a famous victory. Declarations seem very fraught with danger and I imagine most captains would have a story or two. It seems there have been very few declarations allowing the bowling team to just get the wickets in time, indeed I refer to them as close calls rather than brilliant declarations. A special mention should go to Jackie Grant who declared both of the Windies innings against Australia in Sydney 1931 and won the match by bowling Australia out on the final day to win by 30 runs, possibly the only real case I can make for a truly bold and successful declaration (and pair of them at that) that has allowed a team to bowl the opposition out for a modest target (251) in a reasonable time frame (most of the last day), in that case surely masterfully taking advantage of the situation with WI in the lead at the end of day 3, rain meaning all of day 4 lost and presumably a difficult wicket on day 5.
Paul Potter
Roar Guru
1979. It's the only tour to India in his time playing for Australia, so that must be it.
Anindya Dutta
Roar Guru
Not quite Nanda. Gaekwad, Vishwanath and Brijesh Patel were among those retired hurt if I remember so it was the top and middle order. Bedi and Chandra among the bowlers I think.
Nanda
Guest
True. I am wirting this from memory. I think the test when Bedi declared was the last test at Jamaica. Jamaica was a seriously fast wicket in those days and with Holding, Roberts and Marshall being given a free reign to bowl fast and bounce the batsmen. I dont think there was restriction on the number of bouncers in a over in those day. Also one should also note that of the 5 wickets, from what I remember, one of them was hurt and the other 3 were spinners including Chandra. All of them, even in the best of times are not batsmen and given the pace of the WI bowlers it just seemed right to protect the bowlers. Bedi should have just said that and moved on rather than rant of intimidatory bowling.
Anindya Dutta
Roar Guru
Do you remember when this was?