What are the qualities of a good captain?

[MenInG]

What makes a great international captain? Is it purely down to the number of wins and losses on their record – or is there more to it?

Sky Sports pundits Michael Atherton, Nasser Hussain and Shane Warne - all of whom led their respective national teams - get down to the nuts and bolts of captaincy in our in-depth podcast, which you can watch in full on the video below.

The trio discuss the characteristics that make a successful skipper, reflecting on the highs and lows of leading a side and look back at some of the captains who inspired them.

As Nasser says: "Good or bad, it's a fantastic job. If someone said you had your time again and you didn't have the captaincy - no way."


BRAND OF CRICKET

Warne: "I don't think the percentages are that important, the win-loss ratio - I think it's the way the team plays.

"England have won their first ever World Cup under Eoin Morgan. I don't know what his win-loss ratio is but I know England are the best one-day side in the world because Morgan's got their players playing a great brand of cricket and you can tell they play for him and they trust him.

"It's the same in the Test match arena and as an individual player. People don't remember your stats - they remember 'did you change the game and deliver when your team needed you?'"


MAN-MANAGEMENT

Nasser: "I think a captain has to be true to himself. Even international cricketers, in that dressing-room now, when the coach and captain are talking and you've had an average day, your gut feeling will be 'is he talking about me?'

"So when you have those chats is important, when do you have those meetings after a bad day and what do you say?

"We judge captains on those little bits of tactical brilliance, but actually the words you say - what Eoin Morgan says to Jofra Archer at the end of his run in the Super Over - that small stuff can be just as important."


A 24/7 JOB

Warne: "A captain is not just out on the field. There are different parts to the captaincy - and at 8pm or 9pm, when you're sitting in your room, you're like the roadside assist.

"One of the players might say 'I want to have a chat' and you've got to be available all the time. I always believed personally that captaincy brought out the best in me, it made me think clearer.

"It takes you a bit of time to make sure everyone around you is OK and still concentrate on your own game. When your own game suffers, that's when it can affect your captaincy too because you're not as confident about trusting your gut feeling."


PRESSURE

Nasser: "It does get on top of you and you need good people you trust. There'd be people who tell you what you wanted to hear because you're the captain and there are people who would tell you the honest truth.

"That was the difference between being an England captain in our era and being Mark Taylor or Steve Waugh. If you're captain and you have (Glenn) McGrath one end and Warne the other, you are therefore winning more games and you're under less pressure.

"If you're losing a lot of games, the media will get on your case, your family become concerned about you and it's a tough job. But you still know it's a great job and you have to get through those periods."


USING THE X-FACTOR

Warne: "Captaincy should be able to get the best out of individuals. There are times when it's easy to throw the ball to Ben Stokes, but if someone or the team's not having a great day, how do you turn that around?

"That's why you want to have those X-factor players in your team that can inspire others. There's not many like an Andrew Flintoff, someone that can drag the team with him.

"The captain has to make sure he gets the best out of Andrew Flintoff all the time and allows him to be Andrew Flintoff, not somebody else. There are moments when a captain can win you the game through tactical nous but there are a lot of things that go outside that."

https://www.skysports.com/cricket/n...sain-and-shane-warne-analyse-art-of-captaincy

 

[marlonbrowndo]

Basically think of the qualities of Azhar Ali. The opposite of those

 

[MenInG]

Basically think of the qualities of Azhar Ali. The opposite of those

1. BRAND OF CRICKET
2. MAN-MANAGEMENT
3. PRESSURE

Azhar fails all!

 

[Local.Dada]

I was going to open a similar thread so thanks mods in advance for saving me from another merge.

My question is every Pak expert on YouTube has this catchphrase “Mindset” which they repeat a zillion times. In fact our Vikrant Gupta has recently caught this Mindset bug as well.

Can someone explain to me what it is in a cricketing context because apparently that is more important than fitness,skill,experience, form,records etc ?

 

[Justcrazy]

Some are captains , some are leaders.

A good captain is one , who leads from the front and brings himself on when it gets tough. Those sort of character is respected by other players.

 

[MenInG]

More from Nasser Hussain on this subject:

"I think a captain has to be true to himself. Even international cricketers, in that dressing-room now, when the coach and captain are talking and you've had an average day, your gut feeling will be 'is he talking about me?' So when you have those chats is important, when do you have those meetings after a bad day and what do you say? We judge captains on those little bits of tactical brilliance, but actually the words you say - what Eoin Morgan says to Jofra Archer at the end of his run in the Super Over - that small stuff can be just as important."

And Shane Warne:

"A captain is not just out on the field. There are different parts to the captaincy - and at 8pm or 9pm, when you're sitting in your room, you're like the roadside assist. One of the players might say 'I want to have a chat' and you've got to be available all the time. I always believed personally that captaincy brought out the best in me, it made me think clearer. It takes you a bit of time to make sure everyone around you is OK and still concentrate on your own game.When your own game suffers, that's when it can affect your captaincy too because you're not as confident about trusting your gut feeling."

 

[Junaids]

1. BRAND OF CRICKET
2. MAN-MANAGEMENT
3. PRESSURE

Azhar fails all!

Look at Pakistan in this series. Who exemplified those characteristics?

I suspect that Shan Masood ticks all three boxes to a point.

But in terms of handling pressure and imposing a brand of cricket, it was actually Shadab Khan turning things around in the First Innings at Old Trafford.

Pakistan was drifting to oblivion and playing passive, survival cricket.

But Shadab took the game by the scruff of the neck, taking no risks but running quick singles, playing positive shots and putting the bowlers under pressure.

I’d give Shan Masood the 2021-23 World Test Championship cycle as skipper, then make Shadab the long-term skipper.

 

[therealAB]

Three aspects of captaincy:
Man management
Leading from the front
Tactical abilities

Imran for example had brilliant man management. He was a bit past his prime, so he wasn’t as good as he had been and was no longer Pakistan’s best player but he managed to unify a bunch of quite disparate individuals

Border is someone who led from the front. Initially he wasn’t great tactically but he learnt. The same with man management, losing the players to a rebel tour looks a bit bad but by the end of his career he was fantastic in this regard

Taylor is someone who was a great tactician, Notably better than all the Aus captains post WsC in this regard

In my opinion, there has never been a captain who perfected all three aspects of captaincy. Maybe someone like Frank Worrell would run the closest.
Some captains have also mastered two aspects. Clarke batted fantastically as captain, and was very good tactically but his management was terrible

 

[Ellipsism]

Pakistan hasn't had a decent leader in a while, and I'm afraid Babar doesn't fit the bill either. The selection of his mate Usman Qadir in the last couple of T20 squads based on zero performances of note (heck, he could barely make the playing XI of a PSL side) doesn't inspire much confidence.

 

[shamaan]

Man management
Pressure
Self belief
Adaptation

 

[AamchiMumbaikar]

Azhar and Babar both do not fit that role. Shan or Shadab can step up.

 

[MMHS]

1. BRAND OF CRICKET
2. MAN-MANAGEMENT
3. PRESSURE

Azhar fails all!

Add the most important one - he fails in that too: being automatic choice in playing XI.

 

[Suleiman]

Assertive decision making on the field and off the field
Makes the team on merit
Good at reading the game / not being a robot who goes through the motions
Says something about cornered tigers to the players before the game

 

[MenInG]

Add the most important one - he fails in that too: being automatic choice in playing XI.

Of course - capabilities as a batsman/bowler are important but how do we explain Mike Brearley?

 

[shady]

This isn’t in order of importance.

1. Communication - One of the most essential and overlooked parts of captaincy. As captain you're the voice of the team. Which means everything you say to the press, to your teammates, and management holds weight. Players should have no confusion about their role in the team, what is required of them, and the style of cricket that is to be played. Clive Lloyd was incredible at this, among many other things, as he got a team of individuals from different countries to share in a collective vision and sense of purpose. That can only happen if you have the ability to communicate at a very high level with all different kinds of people.

2. Man Management - In order to manage teammates effectively, you must have a good understanding of the men who you captain. Not just as cricketers, but as people as well. You have to make a lot of decisions that can cause friction in a dressing room. In a competitive environment where livelihoods are at stake, players must have confidence in your judgement. This is probably the hardest part of captaincy since it requires a lot of time invested which is why most team sports delegate this responsibility to a coach.

3.Ability - Pretty obvious one, there’s no point in being captain if your not good enough to play for the team. Generally, the better your abilities, the more respect you command in the dressing room which ultimately makes your other duties as captain easier.

4.Tactical Nous - It isn’t enough as a captain to simply understand the different tactics available to them. The key is to be able to marry that tactical knowledge with a solid understanding of their own team’s strengths and weaknesses and an ability to read and assess match situations quickly and proactively. Misbah was good at this as a test captain, particularly in home (UAE) conditions.

5.Resiliency - Being a captain is a stressful, demanding job that is going to have plenty of tough moments. You have to be able to face any and all challenges with a resiliency that inspires you teammates to do the same. If the players think the captain can be easily rattled, it shakes the confidence of a team.

Ideally an international captain should have all these traits to a reasonable degree.

 

[MMHS]

Of course - capabilities as a batsman/bowler are important but how do we explain Mike Brearley?

British media hyped, Oxbridge Grad, superstar Captain who was brilliant for his level - English County, where he averaged 40+ as opener. At highest level, he averaged 20ish and ran away with his tactics when tougher challenges came. His W/L ratio is so good for robbing Packer reject Aussies 5-1 & PAK 2-0, then a Greg Chappell less Australia 3-0 (series was 3-1, the loss under Botham) where he had Ian Botham at his brilliant best. Otherwise, he lost to Greg's Australia 3-0, was hammered by Lloyd's WIN and allowed Viv Richards (& Collis Kings) to post a target of 290. from 99/4, in 1979 Final. He might not even had played for England, let alone lead them, had Tony Greig not left for WSC at 31.

 

[Markhor]

1) A captain must justify their own place in the side through performance. How can someone like Azhar Ali look at a fellow player in the eye and ask them for more runs when he isn't producing himself ?

2) Man management. Javed Miandad was tactically astute but was a horrible man manager hence why players rebelled against his captaincy twice.

Every player is different. Some players need a kick up the backside, others require an arm around their shoulder.

3) Vision. Don't look to wing it series by series. Where do you want to take the team in 4-5 years time ? Look at how Eoin Morgan transformed England's ODI fortunes. After the debacle at the 2015 World Cup, he outlined a new brand of cricket, and put together a core group of 15-16 players that fit his vision, while sidelining those like Gary Ballance, Ian Bell, James Anderson and Stuart Broad who were part of the old order.

4) Tactical nous. Captains like Nasser Hussain, Stephen Fleming and Allan Border were able to get the most out of limited resources compared to other nations at the time. If they couldn't dominate, they'd look to be hard to beat. Sometimes they were criticised for being defensive, I remember Fleming's NZ away to Australia in 2001 getting some stick, but they emerged with a credible 0-0 draw away to an ATG side.

In a close game, no sport scrutinises a captain's decision making quite like cricket. Again, see Azhar at OT in the last Test...

 

[MenInG]

Think some captains have been blessed with great squads to work with as well.

 

[Cricketrenew]

1. Positive attitude in all circumstances.
2. Thinking quickly.
3. Not reliant on coach to make decisions.
4. Attacking.
5. Making right choice at toss.
6. Being honest.
7. Winner.

 

[KP From India]

Do the captaincy the way you like, but the winning percentage should be at least close to 60%(+- 2/3%).
I dont expect every captain to have it 75% or 77% like Ponting or Llyod. These were freakish sides.
For the captain leading good to decent team( one of batting/bowling is matchwinning and other suit is workable).
Captains winning 35-38% matches cant be termed as tactically asute even if they pretend themselves on field.

 

[KP From India]

For eg. people praise Stephen Fleming over the top for his tactical asuteness etc.
But end of the day he lost more matches than he won. And NZ were certainly more than decent side at least in ODIs with Astle, Fleming, Twose, Styris, Bond, Vettori,Mills, Tuffee and allrounders like Cairns, Harris.Add to that a brilliant fielding unit.If that side is given to someone like Dhoni, he would churn out 65% success from that side.

 

[MMHS]

Do the captaincy the way you like, but the winning percentage should be at least close to 60%(+- 2/3%).
I dont expect every captain to have it 75% or 77% like Ponting or Llyod. These were freakish sides.
For the captain leading good to decent team( one of batting/bowling is matchwinning and other suit is workable).
Captains winning 35-38% matches cant be termed as tactically asute even if they pretend themselves on field.

Mashrafee had a winning percentage probably less than 35%, and if it’s against top 8 teams, might come down to 10-12% ..... he was more smarter than combined astuteness of this PAK management of Azhar-Misbah-WY + Indian captain Kohli. A Captain is often as good as his team, but PAK’s case is a double impact - both captain & team is complementing each other’s.

 

[topspin]

Look at Pakistan in this series. Who exemplified those characteristics?

I suspect that Shan Masood ticks all three boxes to a point.

But in terms of handling pressure and imposing a brand of cricket, it was actually Shadab Khan turning things around in the First Innings at Old Trafford.

Pakistan was drifting to oblivion and playing passive, survival cricket.

But Shadab took the game by the scruff of the neck, taking no risks but running quick singles, playing positive shots and putting the bowlers under pressure.

I’d give Shan Masood the 2021-23 World Test Championship cycle as skipper, then make Shadab the long-term skipper.

Pretty much this.

 

[topspin]

1) A captain must justify their own place in the side through performance. How can someone like Azhar Ali look at a fellow player in the eye and ask them for more runs when he isn't producing himself ?

2) Man management. Javed Miandad was tactically astute but was a horrible man manager hence why players rebelled against his captaincy twice.

Every player is different. Some players need a kick up the backside, others require an arm around their shoulder.

3) Vision. Don't look to wing it series by series. Where do you want to take the team in 4-5 years time ? Look at how Eoin Morgan transformed England's ODI fortunes. After the debacle at the 2015 World Cup, he outlined a new brand of cricket, and put together a core group of 15-16 players that fit his vision, while sidelining those like Gary Ballance, Ian Bell, James Anderson and Stuart Broad who were part of the old order.

4) Tactical nous. Captains like Nasser Hussain, Stephen Fleming and Allan Border were able to get the most out of limited resources compared to other nations at the time. If they couldn't dominate, they'd look to be hard to beat. Sometimes they were criticised for being defensive, I remember Fleming's NZ away to Australia in 2001 getting some stick, but they emerged with a credible 0-0 draw away to an ATG side.

In a close game, no sport scrutinises a captain's decision making quite like cricket. Again, see Azhar at OT in the last Test...

Excellent post Markhor. Do you think it's a must for any proposed captain of the side to be a natural leader or can they make up for this in other aspects of the role? For e.g. tactical nous, as you mentioned.

 

[KP From India]

That 60% winning percentage is for the teams who are matchwinning in one department and workable/decent in other department, someone like Ind (2002-2011) or Pak(1996-2003) or NZ (1999-2008).
There is no way to conclude that if any of the above 3 teams given to Mortaza, he would make it 60-65% winning team.

 

[Robert]

Of course - capabilities as a batsman/bowler are important but how do we explain Mike Brearley?

Brears was carried as a player, but he kept winning. He was the only skipper to get the best out of Ian Botham, was tactically highly astute and an excellent motivator. “He had a degree in people” said Rodney Hogg - literally so now, as he is a psychotherapist.

He was blessed with a very fine fast bowler in Willis, an excellent spinner in Underwood and of course the great Botham. He didn’t have a great batting side - an aging Boycott, an underperforming Gooch and Gatting.

He had two superlative fielders in the vee - Randall and Gower, plus the world’s two best keepers in Knott and Taylor.

He was very clever by retiring before ten tests in a row against WI, and then returning to lead the come-from behind Ashes win in 1981, sealing his legend.

 

[Markhor]

Excellent post Markhor. Do you think it's a must for any proposed captain of the side to be a natural leader or can they make up for this in other aspects of the role? For e.g. tactical nous, as you mentioned.

It does help but someone with an understated personality like Kane Williamson has led New Zealand well because he leads from the front and generally reads conditions better than others.

In other words I could tolerate Azhar's uninsipiring timidity if he was a tactical savant. But he's as much of a tactical genius as I am a Ballon D'Or winning goalscorer.

 

[Hasan123]

Good communication
Man management
Good tactically
Leading from the front
Setting good examples to younger players and future generations

 

[ElRaja]

as much as i hate to say it pakistan have not had a world class captain since wasim akram, i still remember him giving a young saqi a slip and a silly point in an odi. wasim was tactically aware and generally aggressive, unfort for pakistan the off field stuff tarnished everything.

misbah was the right person for the job at the time, but that was cricket in the uae, slow, stodgy and attritional, so right up his street, also he had a world class batsmen in yk and also ajmal when he was allowed to bowl. his tactical captaincy style however was very passive.

the problem with azhar is that hes a very average player who had a 2 or 3 year purple patch, his captaincy, like his batting is limited and formulaic, and you get the impression highly influenced by misbah. furthermore the support staff of mushie, who never really had any leadership experience and waqar, who was pbly one of the worst captains pakistan ever had doesn't help.

i dont think anyone in this team shows any particular leadership potential, i agree with [MENTION=132916]Junaids[/MENTION] observations about shadab, but he is so far from locking down his position in the team i dont see how he is a viable candidate, even if after 2 or 3 years.

 

[Hasan]

Key attributes of a good leader:
- responsibility
- stability
- vision and strategy
- respect
- positivity
- communication
- support and guidance
- proactive

These attributes and skills are applicable not just in sports but all walks of life.

 

[sweep_shot]

A good captain should be able to inspire the team. Someone like Imran Khan.

Also, a good captain has to lead from the front. He has to perform well.

 

[MMHS]

To me, all other qualities of a cricket Captain is around 1%, rest is one quality - ability to lead from the front. Someone who makes the XI on merit in every condition and good enough in one core skill to take responsibilities which should draw respect from team.

Australia always appoint one of their best players as Captain (unless he is in a very specific trait like Lillee, McGrath, Healy, Rod Marsh.,.) and back him to run the show - I like that. And that’s why the names of Australian captain often draws respect (& fear) among their opponents as well. I actually am not a fan of “tactical genius” Captain who doesn’t command a spot in playing XI on player’s merit.

 

[ManFan]

Like Richie Benaud said (himself a very fine captain), it’s 90% luck and 10% skill.

But do not try it without the 10% skill required.

 

[BalluBalleBaaz]

International level captains generally have had experience captaining u19s sides. They need to foster good working relationship with cricket board to make key decisions.

 

[Thunderbolt14]

To me, all other qualities of a cricket Captain is around 1%, rest is one quality - ability to lead from the front. Someone who makes the XI on merit in every condition and good enough in one core skill to take responsibilities which should draw respect from team.

Australia always appoint one of their best players as Captain (unless he is in a very specific trait like Lillee, McGrath, Healy, Rod Marsh.,.) and back him to run the show - I like that. And that’s why the names of Australian captain often draws respect (& fear) among their opponents as well. I actually am not a fan of “tactical genius” Captain who doesn’t command a spot in playing XI on player’s merit.

Thoughts on Tim Paine?

 

[The Viper]

Leading from the front is one of the most important skills. You need to set the standard. This is where Pakistan have struggled with Sarfaraz Ahmed and Azhar Ali both not performing with the bat.

 

[MMHS]

Thoughts on Tim Paine?

You know why he was appointed. I give a list, from memory since 1900 - Monty Noble, Vic Trumper, Clem Hill, WW Armstrong, C McCartney, W Woodfool, DG Bradman, AL Hassest, IWJohnson (Should have been KR Miller, but for Bradman), R Benaud, RB Simpson, W Lawry, IM Chappell, GS Chappell, (RB Simpson, GN Yellop, Kim Hughes during packer days) AR Border, MA Taylor, SR Waugh, RT Ponting, A Gilchrist, M Clarke, S Smith ..... Tim Paine - can’t you see something in it?

 

[therealAB]

Thoughts on Tim Paine?

Tim Paine has been a fantastic Australian captain. Did what was required and managed to rejuvenate and reestablish respect within Australian cricket

 

[Last Monetarist]

Think Paine's done a very good job under difficult circumstances, his team seem to be united under him and there's a degree of healthy respect for the position from fans and opponents alike which probably wasn't there for Australian captains since Ponting resigned in 2010. Michael Clarke had a testing relationship with teammates and the public, while Smith always came across as aloof and distant, arguably too individualistic to be captain.

Paine stands out as a good leader of men, and his keeping is beyond reproach, so I don't really think the criticism is merited, which tends to be mostly from people in Asia. Yeah, he won't be rated as high as Chappell, Border, Taylor, Waugh or Ponting, but believe he is the right candidate to lead in the current era of Australian cricket.

 

[Mamoon]

Sometimes I feel the likes of Misbah and Paine get excessive credit for finding themselves in the right place at the right time.

We talk a lot about how they helped their sides regain respect and restore dignity etc., but what else was going to happen?

After the tampering scandal and the amount of bad press Australian cricketers received especially in Australia, it is not like the players were going to do something stupid again right away.

You could have made anyone captain at that point and we would have seen a change in behavior from the Australian players.

Essentially, Paine is benefiting from the fact that Australia does not seem to have a wicket-keeper who has the ability to bat properly in Test cricket, and he is the best glovesman in a bunch of mediocre Test batsmen.

Similarly, the 2010 scandal shook the foundations of Pakistan cricket. There was bound to be a change in attitude once the Pakistan Test side got rid of the usual trouble-makers and invested in docile individuals like Azhar and Shafiq for the long-run.

Anyone could have captained the side in that period and there wouldn’t be any significant controversies. Asif, Akhtar, Yousuf, Afridi, Kamran, Razzaq and of course Butt were all done with Test cricket by then. So what was going to happen if Misbah wasn’t there to restore so-called respect? Nothing.

 

[Last Monetarist]

Sometimes I feel the likes of Misbah and Paine get excessive credit for finding themselves in the right place at the right time.

We talk a lot about how they helped their sides regain respect and restore dignity etc., but what else was going to happen?

After the tampering scandal and the amount of bad press Australian cricketers received especially in Australia, it is not like the players were going to do something stupid again right away.

You could have made anyone captain at that point and we would have seen a change in behavior from the Australian players.

They needed someone with the right personality traits to take charge at that time, you couldn't have had aggressive, combative characters as captain under the circumstances. Being in the right place at the right time isn't something worth any criticism. Now the problem for Paine, something that Misbah and the PCB fudged, is the risk that he carries on too long. CA should be looking at succession planning right now as Paine has a maximum of 18 months left at the highest level.

 

[marlonbrowndo]

Sometimes I feel the likes of Misbah and Paine get excessive credit for finding themselves in the right place at the right time.

We talk a lot about how they helped their sides regain respect and restore dignity etc., but what else was going to happen?

After the tampering scandal and the amount of bad press Australian cricketers received especially in Australia, it is not like the players were going to do something stupid again right away.

You could have made anyone captain at that point and we would have seen a change in behavior from the Australian players.

Essentially, Paine is benefiting from the fact that Australia does not seem to have a wicket-keeper who has the ability to bat properly in Test cricket, and he is the best glovesman in a bunch of mediocre Test batsmen.

Similarly, the 2010 scandal shook the foundations of Pakistan cricket. There was bound to be a change in attitude once the Pakistan Test side got rid of the usual trouble-makers and invested in docile individuals like Azhar and Shafiq for the long-run.

Anyone could have captained the side in that period and there wouldn’t be any significant controversies. Asif, Akhtar, Yousuf, Afridi, Kamran, Razzaq and of course Butt were all done with Test cricket by then. So what was going to happen if Misbah wasn’t there to restore so-called respect? Nothing.

Well put

 

[Markhor]

Similarly, the 2010 scandal shook the foundations of Pakistan cricket. There was bound to be a change in attitude once the Pakistan Test side got rid of the usual trouble-makers and invested in docile individuals like Azhar and Shafiq for the long-run.

Anyone could have captained the side in that period and there wouldn’t be any significant controversies. Asif, Akhtar, Yousuf, Afridi, Kamran, Razzaq and of course Butt were all done with Test cricket by then. So what was going to happen if Misbah wasn’t there to restore so-called respect? Nothing.

We've had plenty of controversies shaking Pakistan cricket and hadn't learned one bit from them. From the matchfixing scandals, revolts against captains, oathgate, drug taking, the 2007 World Cup debacle, the list goes on. We needed a captain after 2010 to restore respect and rebuild the team.

 

[MenInG]

Root not leading from the front with the bat but his team doing better than Pakistan - Also his captaincy hasnt been that great but its who he has in his team that is doing wonders.

 

[Firebat]

Azhar leading from the front better than his counterpart, according to Warne:



"We talk about all the good batsmen in the world and the really good players in the current day. We talk about Joe Root and what a wonderful player he is in the game, and he's also got 17 Test match hundreds, as Azhar Ali has 17 Test match hundreds, but [Azhar] got it in 16 less Test matches"

"When we talk about the Joe Root's, Kane Williamson's, Steve Smith's and Virat Kohli's, Azhar Ali even though he hasn't had a great series here so far, he's showing what a great player he is, and also when you look at his record, he's a terrific player over a long period of time"