What makes a captain?

What makes a captain?

The popular misconception is that your captain is your best player, your star.

The universal quality looked for in every captain, is undoubtedly leadership. A good captain must rally the troops on and off the field, take a game by the scruff of the neck and have the pluck to take responsibility for a poor performance (only after they’ve thrown everything at the opposition in the face of defeat!).

A captain’s level of responsibility will differentiate depending on the level of the club they play for.

Outside the professional game, a team’s captain has a very prominent role in the team. In University ‘Sports Societies’ a captain will receive offerings (often in the way of lager) and good will in return for a place in the team, with the captain also acting as manager. Whilst the system helps build team morale and camaraderie, skilled players are often overlooked, if the captain doesn’t warm to them or they are unwilling to partake in ridiculous initiations.

I, myself, have only ever been made captain twice. The first occasions was at primary school, when my head teacher experimented with giving me the armband of our football team, and needless to say the role went over my head. All I knew was that a defender kicked the ball when the other team had it! The second, a little more recently, was a term as captain of a five aside football team. Whilst we were dreadful I took the ‘Gatorade’ sweatband that was my armband very seriously although my main duty was hammering on the door of students that made up my team, still in bed half an hour before kick-off.

The effect of the armband, a boost rather than a burden.

The responsibility of captaincy usually enhances the athlete unto which it is bestowed. Whilst the armband cannot always tame some of sports wildest characters, an abrasive personality is a strong one, a trait that makes a strong captain. The likes of Eric Cantona and Roy Keane have been involved in their fair share of off the ball incidents, but no-one would doubt their ability to lead, with their antics helping them achieve cult hero status. Avid sports fans will no doubt be aware of the off the field controversy that constantly plagues Joey Barton. However similarities can be drawn between the likes of Barton, Cantona and Keane, with his bold character, and nerve makes him an ideal captain. Barton has flourished since being given the armband. His new found responsibility has allowed him to be a stronger role model, a box needing to be ticked for any aspiring captain.

The role of captain varies between each sport, and each captain will take on their own style of leadership.

Due to these differences, a captain can take a role of varying prominence. For instance in football, the captain takes a more motivational role than tactical, and their attitude towards the game, and their intensity should set a precedent for the rest of the team, whereas in cricket, the captain is very much the coach’s tactical general on the field, with the coach further from the action than in football. A cricket captains off the field duties usually include an involvement in squad selection as well as an organisational role with regards to training.

In some sports a player’s position will require them to lead.

On a rugby pitch your likely to hear the screams of a scrum half organising their forwards, and the teams fly halves calling out plays to the backs. In Rugby Union, the half backs are very much tactical leaders on the pitch, captain or not. The same can be said for a quarterback in American Football, who, when the offence team are on the field, is charged with creating and running set plays. Your quarterback calls all the shots.

Cut out for captaincy?

In this instance, does the natural leadership required to be a quarterback or scrum-half, mean that the role of captain within a Rugby or American Football becomes diminished? Will a captain feel undermined if other members of the team have increased responsibility, or is the ability to keep a team with too many chiefs, a test of a captain’s leadership? Does every sport have a position that natural lends itself to captaincy and if so, why isn’t it the case that the majority of rugby union teams have half-backs as captains, when so many offensive NFL captains are quarterbacks?

The popular misconception is that your captain is your best player, your star.

I think the captain doesn't necessarily have to be your best player, it won't hurt if he is, but he must be a player you will ink onto your team sheet, rather than pencil in.

A captain’s level of responsibility will differentiate depending on the level of the club they play for.

I agree that the level you play at will determine the responsibility. As an amateur it is most likely team talks and a little motivation will do the trick.

As a professional player, the responsibility will be to lead by eaxmple, be an ambassador at events and presenting a wholesome image. There will be input on gameplans and most likely input into team selections. On field mainly decision making and discipline and motivation.

The role of captain varies between each sport, and each captain will take on their own style of leadership.

I am not sure which type of captain will be most effective, but if I use South Africa's cricket team as an example, we have had Hansie Cronje the ultimate man manager, Shaun Pollock who came from the right breeding stock, and Graeme smith who leads from the front.

In some sports a player’s position will require them to lead

Perhaps to a certain extent yes, but in my opinion the best leader on the team and most respected player should be captain irrespective of his position. You find these days that within a team the defensive lines of a rugby team may be led by the midfield player. The line out may be led by the lock making the line out calls etc. So even if the captain is the fullback, he will have other leaders making calls during certain facets of the game.

Cut out for captaincy?

I think natural leadership comes from character, it is inbred, there may be other players hugely respected, but simply not up to the task of leading men. Jaques Kallis for one is a player highly repsected, but not leadership material.

First of all 'best player' is a little inaccurate when describing modern sides. (oops - only in my opinion) Yes, they probably do exist still. But in the top 8 or 9 sides, it's getting increasingly difficult to identitfy them. Teams are run to exacting terms - not much room any more for 'journeymen'. Each postition has its responibilities and many sides have specialists in every position. You hear it so often now - he's a 12, he can't play 13. He's a 6, he can't play 7.

So, if the precision of the role of each position has come to that level, how can you truly say there is a 'best' player on the field.

'Best' in longevity and reputation? Yes, I think they obviously still exist but again, in good sides, it gets problematic pointing them out. Just who is the 'best' in the All Blacks? McCaw or Carter? You'll hear a lot of opinion but they'll both have their champions.

So, in good sides, I'm finding that the whole game has become so scientific and professional that it's hard to talk about 'best' in any practical sense. If the team doesn't function, the star can often suffer too - one needs the other equally.

In the past, I personally have always liked the idea that your 'star' player isn't your captain.

Firstly, the star knows he's the star and therefore doesn't need the accolade.

Secondly, star and captaincy to one player gives the impression that you have a one man side - concentrate on him and you could unsettle the rest.

Thirdly, the player who should be captain tends to show captain qualities - even before captaincy.

In an Irish context, Sexton is a young man; but from the beginning he was never afraid to shout and moan and call his 'star' players to account if he thought they were slack. He speaks, he cajoles and he does it all naturally. He doesn't really care who the real captain is, he's doing his own captaincy on instinct. A player like him was born for captaincy.
On the other hand, O'Driscoll in my mind was never captaincy material. Much too self contained, much too interested in his game than in overly analysing the overall rhythms. He is and always has been an individualist within the team, doing mostly his own thinking and acting. And yet, he was so obviously our 'star'.

my point was that it was a misconception that your star should be your captain

Most important thing is communication skills with the ref. Everything else can be done by non-captains. It should be become less significant the higher up you go.

One of the first names on the team sheet if fit.

There is a difference between the captaincy and the player. You don´t have to be the star of the team but you need to be always picked. If you choose a captain who you are going to sub off or not select then you've chosen the wrong guy. Case in point, John Smit. A leader, undoubtedly, but not a better player than Bismarck so the wrong call.

A captain therefore stays on the field and therefore commands the respect of the other players at all times. You cannot captain from the sidelines.

Just as a player can grow as a player, so too can a player grow as a captain. McCaw took a while to grow into the role as captain. He wasn't as street smart as Tana Umaga or Sean Fitzpatrick. He had the rapport but that is not enough. You have to time your little talks with the ref and you have to know what to say. You have to have a good tactical awareness and the ability to make the right decisions at the right times. That has nothing to do with your abilities as a player nor can be learned from an instruction manual.