How good was Michael Vaughan as a Captain in ODIs?

[shahidrazzaq]

I'm sorry, but I just had some fun browsing Statsguru and what I saw was appalling.
Here are the stats of a top order batsmen who captained an English side for 4-5 years.
Filtered stats are matches in which he was captain.



I understand he led an Ashes winning Test team, and he averaged a decent 41 in that format, but for someone to lead 60 ODI matches for a team which such high expectations and maintain an average on par with Shahid Afridi...At least Afridi can bowl and Afridi almost averaged the same as him in Tests. )

I don't want this to be a bash thread but, I believe you have to be a player before a leader. You have to have a spot on the team first before becoming a captain and maybe I need someone to help me understand why he was involved for so long. This isn't a team with an administration such as the PCB where players who just linger around and not produce for their team can be granted lengthy careers.

 

[Savak]

What are Mike Brearley's stats? These types of captains get the long rope when they have great players at their disposal.

 

[Gilly]

Something wrong there, Vaughan averaged 36 as captain with 9 hundreds.

 

[CricketCartoons]

^ That is for ODIs.

 

[Zohaib Shah]

Twitter aside Michael Vaughan was a pretty average cricketer. I think he's more famous on twitter then his whole international career.

 

[AZ]

Twitter aside Michael Vaughan was a pretty average cricketer. I think he's more famous on twitter then his whole international career.

absolutely false, if he anything he was a world class player whose career was ruined by injuries.

one of the most attractive and classical batsmen of the early/mid 2000s, loved watching him bat.

 

[Convict]

Twitter aside Michael Vaughan was a pretty average cricketer. I think he's more famous on twitter then his whole international career.

He was brilliant in the 2003/04 Ashes

He was a good player who had moments of greatness.

Very good Captain though.

 

[tempus123]

I don't want this to be a bash thread but, I believe you have to be a player before a leader. You have to have a spot on the team first before becoming a captain and maybe I need someone to help me understand why he was involved for so long. This isn't a team with an administration such as the PCB where players who just linger around and not produce for their team can be granted lengthy careers.

Usually many captains were good players before they became captain (at least earned their places just fine), even Ganguly was at a time not earning his place in the team when he was captain..

 

[Jang]

Twitter aside Michael Vaughan was a pretty average cricketer. I think he's more famous on twitter then his whole international career.

Someone with 18 centuries and a average of 41.44 is not a average player.

The reason his ODI average is low because most English player dont take ODI"s seriously. David Gower's ODI average was also only 30, even in though in the early 80's he scored some brilliant ODI innings.

 

[Savak]

Easily had the best cover drive in the game.

 

[Saqs]

He batted well with Tresco, and also was a decent captain to boot.

60 matches is about right, although he may have played more if there were no injuries.

 

[pakistanigoneaussie]

Im a fan of his

was pretty fortunate to have a guy like Marcus Trescothick though

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

Trescothick was a damn good batsman.

Very aggressive. Still remember his drives.

No idea about his stats. Just talking based on watching him.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

And not surprising Trescothick averages 37 in ODI with a 85 SR which is awesome.

 

[Varun]

He won one of the Ashes series he captained (2005), so probably got the long rope on the back of that as you would expect in England.

 

[Saqs]

And not surprising Trescothick averages 37 in ODI with a 85 SR which is awesome.

Yeah Tresco was the best English LOI opener I've seen for a long time.

 

[Mamoon]

Twitter aside Michael Vaughan was a pretty average cricketer. I think he's more famous on twitter then his whole international career.

No just no. He was a top drawer batsman and his timing was impeccable. Not to forget the greatest cover drive ever, arguably.

 

[Buffet]

Twitter aside Michael Vaughan was a pretty average cricketer.

A pretty average ODI player but he was a good test player.

I think he's more famous on twitter then his whole international career.

You have that impression because he is a great troll. As a player he wasn't in that league

 

[thivaakar]

Trescothick was a damn good batsman.

Very aggressive. Still remember his drives.

No idea about his stats. Just talking based on watching him.

Remember his openings with Nic Knights during the 2002-2003 ish period. Poor Trescothick had some mental issue

 

[Zohaib Shah]

He was brilliant in the 2003/04 Ashes

He was a good player who had moments of greatness.

Very good Captain though.

I don't know man I just never saw anything special about him. He looked like a poor man's Dravid to me. Maybe its because I have a different taste.

absolutely false, if he anything he was a world class player whose career was ruined by injuries.

one of the most attractive and classical batsmen of the early/mid 2000s, loved watching him bat.

I started watching cricket in 2007 so I never saw much of him. What ever I saw of him I wasn't too impressed by him. In the end of the day it was just my opinion. I never tried to make it seem like it is the be all and the end all conclusion.

Someone with 18 centuries and a average of 41.44 is not a average player.

The reason his ODI average is low because most English player dont take ODI"s seriously. David Gower's ODI average was also only 30, even in though in the early 80's he scored some brilliant ODI innings.

I don't look at cricket as a mathematician. I look at cricket as artistry. The sight of a cricket ball hitting the cricket bat is pure artistry to me. Vaugh just did not fit in the mold of art I wanted to see. I don't care about his numbers.

No just no. He was a top drawer batsman and his timing was impeccable. Not to forget the greatest cover drive ever, arguably.

If he was such a top drawer batsmen then why don't I hear much about him besides that Ashes victory or twitter account?

A pretty average ODI player but he was a good test player.





You have that impression because he is a great troll. As a player he wasn't in that league

Before I got serious about cricket. I used to love Odi's more since they were very colorful to me and eye catching. And here you say Mr.Vaugh wasn't impressive in it? No wonder he is not my favorite cricketer.

 

[robelinda]

Probably the classiest test batsman since 2000. All timing and batting perfection when in top form. Easily the most classical cover drive in the game. Some of the comments in this thread are borderline idiotic. i watched every ball he faced in international cricket, artistry at the crease.

 

[shahidrazzaq]

The reason his ODI average is low because most English player dont take ODI"s seriously.

You can't seriously use that as an excuse. "most English player dont take ODI"s seriously"
This is your career. This is your life. You show up to play and perform.
In my perspective, what you just said is equivalent to "Oh Shahid Afridi could be the best all-rounder of all time if he just didn't have a terrible shot selection."
That's a big IF. And you're just supporting me by saying he doesn't take game seriously. Another reason he wasn't suitable to lead a team.

one of the most attractive and classical batsmen of the early/mid 2000s, loved watching him bat.

Sometimes I thought Yasir Hameed, even the infamous Imran Farhat, could strike the ball beautifully.
His shots might be attractive, but his average of 27 isn't attractive. Henceforth the reason for this topic.

The fact remains that 27 is sub-mediocre and you can't use an excuse that he didn't play enough matches.
He had a lengthy run.

 

[Adil_94]

He was a good Test player and was a prettt good English captain. However he is overrated by the English press never seemed to kick on after the 2005 Ashes before that he was world class from 2002-2005 after he was an average batsman due to injuries and a loss of form. And in ODIS he was always mediocre

 

[zulfiqar]

Since this thread is about ODIs, I'm not sure why so many people are bringing in his text exploits. An average of 27 is absolutely horrible! He wouldn't make any team with that kind of a batting average as someone who bats in the top 4. What a poor poor ODI batsman. YK is two leagues better than him, and YK is absolutely horrible at ODIs.

Really surprised how bad he was at ODIs honestly. If classic cover drives got you a spot in the team despite horrible performance, Yasir Hameed would've wished he was born British.

 

[UP]

I don't know how good he was but he was a hell of a stylish player:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7d-If78gjI

 

[CricketCartoons]

How good a captain was he in ODIs? No one cares, not least the British.

 

[shahidrazzaq]

Just thought I'd put this here.

Hamilton Masakadza


Tatenda Taibu

 

[Amir]

Like Younus Khan, both batsmen are just too orthodox. In ODIs you need a little innovation and both batsmen lack it in the one day arena. They had the shots but could not pierce the infield. And unlike in tests, the higher run rates of the ODI put on more pressure. In tests, you can take your time and not feel worried.

 

[Sandeep]

Very very stylish batsman! Gorgeous player..

 

[Sakss]

Only his cover drive was a treat

 

[robelinda]

His pull shot was glorious too.

 

[Sherlock]

Good Test player when on form. Average ODI player though. Great Captain

 

[Scrolln]

Why are people defending him by bringing in his test exploits? Yes, he was a good test batsman who looked like the best player in the world when on song. He will be forever remembered for winning the 2005 Ashes.

Doesn't change the fact that he was a rubbish ODI player as his stats suggest.

 

[Justcrazy]

He was very average batsman , poms over the years have played a lot of average players in shorter formats they never played shorter format that seriously

 

[shahidrazzaq]

Like Younus Khan, both batsmen are just too orthodox. In ODIs you need a little innovation and both batsmen lack it in the one day arena. They had the shots but could not pierce the infield. And unlike in tests, the higher run rates of the ODI put on more pressure. In tests, you can take your time and not feel worried.

Unlike Michael Vaughan, Younis Khan at least averages 32 in ODIs with 6 centuries to his name. And many match winners. I know of a couple decent innings I actually remember of Vaughan's. One of them being his fifty vs West Indies in WC 2007.

YK is not the greatest ODI player, but is still in a whole different category than Vaughan.

Michael Vaughan

Younis Khan


People keep talking about his Test career and the style of his batting. Both are irrelevant to the point I am trying to establish.

Let me refresh everything:

Michael Vaughan is a good TEST batsmen. Michael Vaughan led a team that beat a legendary Australian squad in TESTS. Meaning, Michael Vaughan is a good TEST player and TEST captain. But for ODIs, throw that all out of the window.
==================================================
In almost 100 games, he averaged under 30 with a SR under 70. If you play that many matches playing that poor, you take him out of the team! Not make excuses for why he's performing bad. Stop poor performances by not letting poor players play.

 

[Kwremb]

Unlike Michael Vaughan, Younis Khan at least averages 32 in ODIs with 6 centuries to his name. And many match winners. I know of a couple decent innings I actually remember of Vaughan's. One of them being his fifty vs West Indies in WC 2007.

YK is not the greatest ODI player, but is still in a whole different category than Vaughan.

Michael Vaughan
View attachment 46436
Younis Khan
View attachment 46437

People keep talking about his Test career and the style of his batting. Both are irrelevant to the point I am trying to establish.

Let me refresh everything:

Michael Vaughan is a good TEST batsmen. Michael Vaughan led a team that beat a legendary Australian squad in TESTS. Meaning, Michael Vaughan is a good TEST player and TEST captain. But for ODIs, throw that all out of the window.
==================================================
In almost 100 games, he averaged under 30 with a SR under 70. If you play that many matches playing that poor, you take him out of the team! Not make excuses for why he's performing bad. Stop poor performances by not letting poor players play.

He was in the team for his captaincy, England surprisingly played an attacking brand of cricket under his captaincy spear headed by Tresco, Flintoff and Kevin Pietersen. That's why he was in the team purely as a Captain, but got the sack after 2007 world cup. Its not like he played 200 odis, he played less than 100 most of which as Captain.

 

[Amir]

Unlike Michael Vaughan, Younis Khan at least averages 32 in ODIs with 6 centuries to his name. And many match winners. I know of a couple decent innings I actually remember of Vaughan's. One of them being his fifty vs West Indies in WC 2007.

YK is not the greatest ODI player, but is still in a whole different category than Vaughan.

Michael Vaughan
View attachment 46436
Younis Khan
View attachment 46437

People keep talking about his Test career and the style of his batting. Both are irrelevant to the point I am trying to establish.

Let me refresh everything:

Michael Vaughan is a good TEST batsmen. Michael Vaughan led a team that beat a legendary Australian squad in TESTS. Meaning, Michael Vaughan is a good TEST player and TEST captain. But for ODIs, throw that all out of the window.
==================================================
In almost 100 games, he averaged under 30 with a SR under 70. If you play that many matches playing that poor, you take him out of the team! Not make excuses for why he's performing bad. Stop poor performances by not letting poor players play.

After all your analysis...the only conclusion is that both are mediocre one day batsmen.

 

[shahidrazzaq]

After all your analysis...the only conclusion is that both are mediocre one day batsmen.

)
I'm not saying YK is a good ODI batsman, but my main point on that comparison is that he's still a level ahead of Michael Vaughan.

 

[Robert]

I don't want this to be a bash thread but, I believe you have to be a player before a leader. You have to have a spot on the team first before becoming a captain and maybe I need someone to help me understand why he was involved for so long. This isn't a team with an administration such as the PCB where players who just linger around and not produce for their team can be granted lengthy careers.

It's curious that Vaughan never duplicated his often scintillaing test performances in ODIs. I don't know why. Just not suited to the short form....

He was one of those guys whose game suffers when he becomes captain. Prior to that, his test form was a sensation.

Best captain since Brearley too. Tactically sound, very good man-manager and excellent at getting under the skin of the opposition.

 

[Saqs]

It's curious that Vaughan never duplicated his often scintillaing test performances in ODIs. I don't know why. Just not suited to the short form....

He was one of those guys whose game suffers when he becomes captain. Prior to that, his test form was a sensation.

Best captain since Brearley too. Tactically sound, very good man-manager and excellent at getting under the skin of the opposition.

You rate him better than Nasser? Interesting. I'd have thought they were both on par with each other although Vaughan reaped the rewards of Nasser hard work and ended up achieving better results.

A shame that England has gone from two masters in the art to two 'yes men' who really are lacking in imagination (although Strauss was considerably better than Cook)

 

[DHONI183]

An extremely random bump, but one innings of Michael Vaughan that I will never forget is his partnership with Marcus Trescothick against Australia in the semi-final of the ICC Champions Trophy 2004. Some amazingly classy stroke-play from both and it was a treat to watch. Vaughan was surprisingly up for it on that day in an ODI match.

[MENTION=59855]robelinda[/MENTION] Is it possible for you to organise the highlights of the aforementioned game?

 

[Robert]

You rate him better than Nasser? Interesting. I'd have thought they were both on par with each other although Vaughan reaped the rewards of Nasser hard work and ended up achieving better results.

Vaughany benefitted from having a better fast attack than Nasser, and from meeting an Aussie side that was experiencing a bit of a dip. But he did win ten tests out of eleven, and won in SA.

Nasser copped the full force of the great Aussie side but had those wins in Pakistan and SL, coming from behind in the latter.

They were both very tough. Vaughan was very good at winding up the opposition, particularly Ponting.

So in summary, I don't know who was better!

 

[Mamoon]

Michael Vaughan was from my school of batting and right up my street.

Only if I could care about stats . . .

 

[DHONI183]

An extremely random bump, but one innings of Michael Vaughan that I will never forget is his partnership with Marcus Trescothick against Australia in the semi-final of the ICC Champions Trophy 2004. Some amazingly classy stroke-play from both and it was a treat to watch. Vaughan was surprisingly up for it on that day in an ODI match.

[MENTION=59855]robelinda[/MENTION] Is it possible for you to organise the highlights of the aforementioned game?

Well, [MENTION=59855]robelinda[/MENTION], the great, contacted me to direct me to the YouTube video below from his huge, huge collection.....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QgHdQcpXHy0

He played some awesome shots! After or alongside Sachin Tendulkar´s 98 against Pakistan in the 2003 World Cup, I might just rate this as the best ODI innings in terms of classical stroke-play.

 

[robelinda]

 

[Fastandfurious]

Watched the video, what a batsman. Seriously underachieved.

 

[The Viper]

There was jealousy in England team when Kevin Pietersen bagged massive IPL contract: Michael Vaughan

Former England captain Michael Vaughan feels Kevin Pietersen shouldn't have ever played for the national team again after the 2012 Text-gate controversy in which he was found guilty of sending messages against then-skipper Andrew Strauss to the South African team players.

Pietersen was axed from the England squad for the 2012 Lord's Test against the Proteas after it was revealed that he sent texts about Andrew Strauss and then-coach Andy Flower to the rival team players during the Headingley Test. The controversy led to a major public fallout between Strauss and Pietersen even though both reconciled after retiring from the sport.

Vaughan, who captained the English team from 2003 to 2007, opened up on the issue stating that some players still suffer from the controversy even today.

“It had a huge effect on English cricket for a while and I still think it has a massive effect on a few individuals. I still think there are a few who have come out of this worse,” Vaughan told foxsports.com.au.

There were rumours floating around at the time that Pietersen, who was born in Pietermaritzburg, had even suggested ways to get Strauss out in his some of his messages. Vaughan said if that was the case then Pietersen, who featured in over 270 internationals, should have never been given a chance to play for England again.

“I’ve never seen 100 per cent clarification that that was the case, but if he did, I personally said at the time and have said it since, he shouldn’t have ever played for England again.

“If an England player, doesn’t matter who it is, (is) found to be texting the opposing international team how to get one of your own players out I don’t think he should have played for England again,” Vaughan said.

Vaughan also claimed that Pietersen's multi-million dollar IPL deal had made his England teammates jealous which further tarnished his image in the dressing room. Pietersen was among the first few England players to feature in the IPL and was the joint-costliest buy in the 2009 auction along with teammate Andrew Flintoff.

It was his $1.55 million contract with the Royal Challengers Bangalore which made his teammates think that Pietersen chose the cash-rich league over playing Test cricket for England.

“I think there was a lot of jealousy. And the players will completely deny it now but I think there was at the time when Kevin was on a massive contract.

“There were all sorts of whispers and rumours of cliques in the team. There was a little band of a few; Graeme Swann, Tim Bresnan, (James) Anderson, (Stuart) Broad and Matt Prior. The whispers were they were on one side and Kevin was kind of standing on his own on the other side.

“It wasn’t anything other than that Kev around that time wanted to go to the IPL. That’s how it all started to blow up and that’s when those factions came into play.

“He was saying to the team he wanted to play because it would further the development of the one-day team and all the one-day players would get the chance to play there and improve their game. They deemed that he just wanted to go for the money. He was on a big contract while not many of the other players were even getting sniffed at.

“It was very much Kevin against the team in terms of that one,” Vaughan said.

https://www.indiatoday.in/sports/cr...-gate-scandal-ipl-contract-1669665-2020-04-22

 

[Bhaijaan]

He was a liability as a batsman. One of the most mediocre ''specialist'' players to ever lead a major cricket nation on the field in ODI cricket.

Was definitely a much better test cricketer however.

I wish his coaches had strictly told hint o focus more on scoring meaningful knocks than on trying to look elegant.

As a a batsman MV is the opposite of Dhoni. One is elegant but annoyingly never delivers. One always delivers but is so annoyingly ugly to watch.

 

[BoomBoomCricket]

Runners up in 2004 Champions Trophy.
5th out of 16 teams at the 2007 World Cup.

 

[sweep_shot]

Vaughan was an alright captain. Better than other captains (England only) from that period.

 

[Varun]

Vaughan was the quintessential England player. Took only one format seriously and was subpar in that, while the rest of the world featured the likes of Tendulkar, Lara, Ponting, Kallis, etc. around him.