Alastair Cook resigns as England captain

Heck of a run. Root?

Expect Cook to stay on as opening bat and make many more runs for England. Hope Root is not getting the captaincy too soon and that it won't damage his batting. Would like to see him at 4, rather than three.

yeah im worried the extra pressure and dealing with the media will affect root. would have preferred just to leave him to bat for a while longer, but who else is there?

thanks for everything Chef. I would have rather he had stayed for a bit, but hope he gets plenty of runs with the bat.

If Root replaces him I wonder if they will stand him down from future T20 games as he will need a break.

Cook is Eng's most successful opening batsman.......a successful albeit not a great captain in his own right.....lived the life under the spotlight, hogged the limelight, faced the darkness that comes with such a job ... and has reached the expiration date about now.

And a well timed move to move on from captaincy and focus on  batting where he has 5 more years, 50 more tests and 4,000 more test runs to offer...

What does not leave a good taste in the mouth...is that behind the thin veil of "let him make his own decision" ...there was a sugar coated  but quite overt whispering  campaign seeded in his own coach and perhaps fueled by elements within ECB.

A gentleman, a nice bloke a good captain ...wish him good luck and that we get to see 5 more years of him as an opener

Think England could stand to move forward from the Strauss/Cook tendency to go safety first

Not all that much of a surprise, the noises coming out of the India tour were suggesting it was likely to happen. England play so much cricket nowadays that burn-out is a real issue, so perhaps best that he takes a step back and focusses on his batting now.

Like others I worry that pushing Root into the position gives him a bit too much to do, but not sure there are that many (any?) other options. Moeen doesn't strike me as a captain, and has a large workload also. Same with Stokes. Take a wild punt on Hameed, similar to what SA did with Smith? (albeit Smith was more experienced at the time). Broad?

thought about broad but with fast bowlers and his injuries hes not always guaranteed to be around. add to it him being 30 which is getting old for a fast bowler he would be only a short term fix, but could give root a couple of years just to concentrate on his batting.

Not suprised to be honest, but he's had a good crack at it, and there were certainly a lot of highs during his captaincy, he will still be permanent member of the test side for years to come...Root is the successor again no suprise, and he is defo ready, i highly doubt it will affect his batting, infact IMO he will score even more runs as captain, hopefully from number 4 though

Root may be OK, as there have been a number of England captains who have batted better as skipper than when in the ranks.
Root also had to watch some of the Indians making vast scores this winter while he was making 70s and 80s, so he may want to grind out the big daddy 100s and the captaincy will give him extra responsibility.
Don't expect a challenging declaration at the start of his tenure, though. Some may recall his match as stand-in Yorks skipper at Lord's when he set Middx 472 and they walked it!

Thanks for the memories Cookie. Hope you go on to create plenty more just as an opener. Deserves to be ranked up there with England's all time greats.

Still a bit uneasy about appointing Root as skipper though. As an outside shot, how about bringing Eoin Morgan back into the test fold? He at least has experience of captaincy and turned our T20 team into a fairly exciting and successful outfit.

There's no candidate other than Root surely?

I wouldn't have seen this a year ago, but it was pretty clear he had had enough after the winter tours and some clear disagreements on selection.

Hopefully it will free him up to get back to his run scoring best.

Roots older than Cook was when he got the captaincy first isn't he?
And surely has more international games under his belt

Cook was not a bad captain, seemed to improve over time and there wasn't really anyone else that could have stepped in when he took over. Wins in India and South Africa were most memorable for me, but inevitably the media are focusing on the two Ashes wins as that is of course "the only series that matters" (note: sarcasm)

I think Root is in the same position now i.e. the only real option as he's the only other pure batsman that is certain of their place in the side. I can't see them appointing a bowling captain (Broad) or an all-rounder (I include Bairstow in that) so Root it is

Gooseberry wrote:Roots older than Cook was when he got the captaincy first isn't he?
And surely has more international games under his belt

I would think "no" on both counts.
Cook got the gig when he was 27, Root 26. I don't know how many games Cook has played overall, but I'd hazard 140ish, 59 as captain, take away two from the 2010 Bangladesh tour when he was a stand in, leaves 82-83? He was also appointed ODI skipper in 2011, if memory serves.

Cook is a fantastic batman and a lovely gentleman, but he wasn't a very good captain. In home conditions Anderson and abroad pretty much did as they pleased, they didn't really did Cook's input. But in conditions where seam bowlers couldn't bowl the majority of the overs Cook's lack of thinking out of the box exposed him. Whilst Ali and Rashid where pretty poor bowlers, you never felt Cook ever trusted them.

Going forward aggressive captaincy is the way forward and my option would be Bairstow, minus the wicket keeping duties.

Is it fair to say Cook winning a Test series in India was the biggest achievement by an England captain (outside of 2005 Ashes) since... ? Fair argument to say certainly since the turn of the century.

Certainly had some highs as a skipper - the aforementioned Indian tour, winning in SA and an unlikely Ashes win. But the lows were pretty damn low as well. Not a captaincy record that will live long in the memory for sure. But always cam across as a top bloke, and the England players seems to really like him.

Got to be Root to replace him I think. Never liked bowling captains, and Root is the only batsman sure of his place! Bairstow is an interesting shout, but I don't think he'll be giving up the gloved anytime soon and Root has always seemed a more natural captain than JB to me. Would be really excited by MFC's shout of HH too, but could never see the ECB taking that punt.

JDizzle wrote:Is it fair to say Cook winning a Test series in India was the biggest achievement by an England captain (outside of 2005 Ashes) since... ? Fair argument to say certainly since the turn of the century.

yes that's not a mean achievement......few teams have managed that 

Aus once in 2004-05 which was a more even series and rained out last day.... saved Aus in Chennai letting them sneak a 2-1 

SA in 1999 which was Cronje's last and deemed to be a fixed series.......

and then you have to go back to 1987 Pak won their first test in india and 1-0 series win

and Eng before that in 1984-85 captained by Gower got past India 2-1 in also a close series

Hardly Earth-shattering news. I think it was fairly clear at the end of the Indian Tests that his head was gone and with it his batting form.

I think he as at times a decent captain - took a while to grow into the role and be anything other than conventional. An interesting stat is that he holds the records for both most wins and most losses as an England captain (the latter surprises me slightly as I would have expected Atherton to hold that distinction).

Difficult to see who other than Root can take over - hardly any other batsmen are guaranteed a place, Anderson and Broad too old, Stokes too firey and Moeen in a bit of an uncertain spot (is he a batsman who bowls or a genuine spin bowling all-rounder?).

Not unexpected ; though to be honest I had thought the delay in any announcement until now suggested he might have reconsidered his - fairly evident - desire to be free of that pressure after the Indian series . Certainly management would have preferred he stay on for one more year (presumably they share the doubts raised by several on here about whether it might be just a little early for Root ?) ; but it was clear in India that he was losing the singleminded desire to do the job that is pretty much essential for success - so he realistically had to pass the baton before the summer , with the difficult assignment in Australia looming...

I think the timing is good for Cook - he is young and fit enough to continue as a batsman without it feeling like a bit of winding down ; and he left of his own volition so there won't be any bad feelings. Hopefully the removal of what had become a burden will enable him to lift his batting (and slip catching) back to its best.

If it is Root (and I presume it will be ; while noting imaginative suggestions above I can't see anyone else : Bairstow might be an option as he seems to be a thinking player but the gloves are probably enough for him) then the crucial issue is how it will affect his batting ; and here I agree with Sir Fred and Wisden that he probably needs to go back to four - at least for the time being.

I don't expect dramatic changes on the tactical side ; off field coaches seem to have a big input these days. But hopefully his own sunny personality helps to keep the rest of the team buoyant on the difficult days - I think he'll do OK.

And my own thanks to Cook for five years of wholehearted endeavour in one of the toughest jobs in sport ; he was no Brearley but he did pretty well for a fellow who never appealed as a "natural" captain. I think he probably copped a touch more criticism than was fair at times , and it occasionally appeared to get to him ; but he always gave his best for his team. And has stepped down at a convenient time for his successor which was a final example of good timing

kingraf wrote:

Gooseberry wrote:Roots older than Cook was when he got the captaincy first isn't he?
And surely has more international games under his belt

I would think "no" on both counts.
Cook got the gig when he was 27, Root 26. I don't know how many games Cook has played overall, but I'd hazard 140ish, 59 as captain, take away two from the 2010 Bangladesh tour when he was a stand in, leaves 82-83? He was also appointed ODI skipper in 2011, if memory serves.

He was limited over captain in 2010 and deputised as test captain as well. So let's say pretty much the same age.
You're probably right on games ....I wad thinking root would've played a lot more limited over stuff but I'm not so sure on reflection.
Can't be arsed to properly check but experience and age wise there's not a great difference. There was a lot of talk of Cook not being ready etc when he was given it.

For me what's more interesting now is what this doss with the limited overs captaincy. They have said they will announce before the ODI series...which means there's ano outside chance of making him all formats captain.
Not that Morgan Stanley done a bad job but it would remove the issues of split captaincy and give the job to a player who would be first name on the team sheet in all side for the long term.
I only give it anow outside possibility though, Morgan Stanley place as a player is pretty secure and although the odi and t20 sides haven't been living up to hype recently there's no great indication of panic button just yet.

A little surprised by the timing (wasn't expecting it yesterday) but the decision certainly wasn't a shock. That seems to be the general view here. Furthermore, no one anywhere appears to be saying it was the wrong decision. In all the circumstances, the right move at about the right time.

England's best two captains in my watching lifetime have been Brearley and Illingworth. Cook falls a long way short of their tactical and inspirational qualities in my book but it needs to be recognised that a Test captain's role has changed over the years , particularly off the pitch, and now comes under far more media scrutiny. Cook rarely seemed at ease during interviews and I suspect that got to him in recent times as much as the absence of a decent spinner.

Whilst Cook's leadership never reached the heights of his batting, he was a decent guy in charge who, as far as I could tell, always gave of his best. That was clearly commendable although sometimes it wasn't enough. He seemed ill equipped to handle and answer questions about the Pietersen saga (a gracious tribute and dignified silence about that aspect from KP_f above). There again, that's probably a bar too high for many to see, let alone reach.

I very much hope that Cook can now maintain his enthusiasm for the game and concentrate on his batting. I don't regard that as certain as some posters. Adjustments are not always easy to make, however they are caused. He has the ability and relative youth to score a lot more runs. What I can't judge from here is whether the enthusiasm for that will continue to be greater than the pull of a quiet life on the farm together with a few handsomely paid trips to the Sky studio.

Even with support and encouragement from Cook, it will be a difficult job for the new skipper. I've said before that there are pluses and minuses with the Central Contracts system. A definite minus is that there is now no opportunity for a Test player to learn and put into operation captaincy skills in the backwaters of county cricket.

Anyway, I can't realistically see anyone else than Root.

A captain is really only as good as his team, or, even more precisely, as good as his bowlers. Brearley once pointed out just how relatively unsuccessful Clive Lloyd had been as captain of Lancashire compared with his excellent Test captaincy record with the Windies.
Doubt whether any of the great England captains of the past would have done much with the sides England turned out in India on the recent tour.

sirfredperry wrote:A captain is really only as good as his team, or, even more precisely, as good as his bowlers. Brearley once pointed out just how relatively unsuccessful Clive Lloyd had been as captain of Lancashire compared with his excellent Test captaincy record with the Windies.
  Doubt whether any of the great England captains of the past would have done much with the sides England turned out in India on the recent tour.

Yes although I feel Lloyd often doesn't get the full credit he deserves as a Test captain for getting the utmost out of a disparate group of individuals.

Cook was definitely a captain who led by example with the bat, rather than brilliance in terms of tactics and on the field. Overall I'd say he was alright, but not really a difference maker either way. As JDizzle pointed out some great highs, but some really low lows as well (Headingley 2014 against Sri Lanka probably the lowest)

Root the obvious choice and should be him - think like Kohli/Smith he could flourish

Cook needs 4,800 odd runs to overtake Sachin in tests. He's scored 1000+ a year essentially over his career. Do we think he does it? I certainly think dropping the captaincy and just playing as a bat improves the chances of this greatly (he could conceivably play five more years - slip fielder, grinder with great experience with the bat)

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Cook was definitely a captain who led by example with the bat, rather than brilliance in terms of tactics and on the field. Overall I'd say he was alright, but not really a difference maker either way. As JDizzle pointed out some great highs, but some really low lows as well (Headingley 2014 against Sri Lanka probably the lowest)

Root the obvious choice and should be him - think like Kohli/Smith he could flourish

Cook needs 4,800 odd runs to overtake Sachin in tests. He's scored 1000+ a year essentially over his career. Do we think he does it? I certainly think dropping the captaincy and just playing as a bat improves the chances of this greatly (he could conceivably play five more years - slip fielder, grinder with great experience with the bat)

Tendulkar & Dravid both played until almost the age of 40...and while they were not quite up there with their mid 50s average...in the last 2 years...they were easily averaging between 45-48....and hence holding their place.

Misbah is still going strong at aged 40+ as is Younis and as did Chanderpaul

specialist test match only format batsmen these days can be expected to play until the age of 40.....

and if Cook plays even until 39ish and in the last two years tapers off to just averaging 40+ ( against his to date career avarge of 46.5)...he would still hold his place and would have gotten  past Tendulkar on test runs in about the 38th year

Its a long time since an England test batsman stayed on to that kind of age. Struggling to think of anyone in the last 20 years older still playing tests for england than Strauss when he retired at 36....and he was a relative late comer to internationals.

Go back to the 90s and it wasnt unusual for England players to carry on to their 40s. Now its rare they make it to the mid 30's.

It has been a long time but as kpf rightly points out cook is now tests only, and touch wood has never had injury issues and is incredibly physically fit. I don't see why he can't continue until late 30's/early 40's

Gooseberry wrote:Its a long time since an England test batsman stayed on to that kind of age. Struggling to think of anyone in the last 20 years older still playing tests for england than Strauss when he retired at 36....and he was a relative late comer to internationals.

Go back to the 90s and it wasnt unusual for England players to carry on to their 40s. Now its rare they make it to the mid 30's.

Gooch

and even in his 41st and 42nd year...his last two for Eng Gooch played 17 tests for 1300 runs @ average 40+

G'bat. Have to disagree with you about Clive Lloyd as Windies skipper. Any of us could have captained those great sides. At any one time just perm two bowlers from the four fast bowlers selected and then - with the rules in place at the time - get them to bowl as many bouncers an over as they like and bowl around 12-14 overs an hour for no longer than six hours a day.

And Cook doesn't have a technique that massively relies on his eye*, unlike a KP or even Ponting (although he did make adjustments to compensate). It is fairly basic and he should be able cover his eyes going slightly, which gives him a better chance of going on late in his career.

*Obviously all Test players must have a decent eye to some extent!

Cheers chef.

Led England to 2 Ashes series victories, along with overseas victories in South Africa and India (scoring 562 runs at 80.28).

All that having inherited a divided side, albeit a very talented and experienced one, following 'textgate'.

I fully expect that he will go on to score plenty more runs as an opening batsman without the extra pressure of captaincy. A regular opening partner will definitely help extend his longevity in the side I'd imagine - let's hope Hameed fulfills his promise!

I think it is the perfect time for Cook to stand aside. I think it was evident that the weight of captaincy was weighing heavier and heavier on Cook's shoulders and it was becoming more of a chore to him. It is a job that you have to be 100% tuned into and dedicated to and as soon as doubts of continuing creep in it is time to call it a day. I'd say he can be proud of his tenure what with two Ashes triumphs and tours wins in South Africa and India. That can't be sniffed at.

For me Joe Root is the man for the job. He is no longer the young kid on the block. He has played over 50 test matches and is a prolific run scorer and not too shabby a spin bowler when called upon so has a full understanding of field settings etc. He has always been a bubbly personality so that will help keeping spirits up out on the field when things aren't going so well and I see him being as more of a pro-active rather than reactive captain.

sirfredperry wrote:G'bat. Have to disagree with you about Clive Lloyd as Windies skipper. Any of us could have captained those great sides. At any one time just perm two bowlers from the four fast bowlers selected and then - with the rules in place at the time - get them to bowl as many bouncers an over as they like and bowl around 12-14 overs an hour for no longer than six hours a day.

Hi Sir Fred - I fully agree that Lloyd as West Indies skipper had great bowlers available to him. Indeed, when we ran the Hall of Fame threads here a few years back, I strongly argued the case for each of Holding, Marshall, Garner and Roberts. And, yes, I accept that the rules in place at the time suited them well.

However, I feel there's more to Lloyd's captaincy than that. It was his decision to play a 4 man pace attack and ''fight fire with fire'' following his side's trouncing at the hands of Lillee and Thompson. In doing so, he brought a ruthlessness to the side which had often been lacking in earlier years as their Calypso style cricket failed to win as much as it entertained.

With that ruthlessness, there was also a determination and responsibility which had been encouraged by Lloyd's immediate predecessor Kanhai and which he (Lloyd) built upon and developed further. An important element here - and credit to Lloyd for wanting him in the side - was Gomes, never a domineering great but a vital and reliable support act, especially on the few occasions that the real batting stars failed to light up the skies.

Also worth bearing in mind, that with great players - and, notwithstanding my comment about Gomes, most of the West Indies team during Lloyd's reign were - often comes great egos. I'm trying to recall a certain former England batsman of recent years but his name escapes me! Anyway, there were no such problems for Lloyd as he got a bunch of disparate cricketing greats from politically racked islands playing for each other and as one.

So, yes, Lloyd had very fine tools for the job but he (at least for West Indies, if not Lancs) helped make them and looked after them well. Would he have done any better than Cook with his (Cook's) side against India this winter? Probably not. Would Cook have done as well as Lloyd with the same resources that were available to Lloyd? I've no doubt Cook would have been helped by having better players around him but I'm not convinced Cook would have done as well as Lloyd did. Remember that Botham the captain did not get as much out of Botham the player as Brearley achieved.

KP_fan wrote:

Gooseberry wrote:Its a long time since an England test batsman stayed on to that kind of age. Struggling to think of anyone in the last 20 years older still playing tests for england than Strauss when he retired at 36....and he was a relative late comer to internationals.

Go back to the 90s and it wasnt unusual for England players to carry on to their 40s. Now its rare they make it to the mid 30's.

Gooch

...who played his last test 22 years ago and retired from all cricket 20 years ago.
There's been the odd player who's kept going in County cricket but tests ...he was the last of the old men.

I may be worng but I'm pretty sure there's been no one past about 36 since him playing tests for england. I

Alec Stewart? - but you are right anyway, these older players are the exception to the norm

The likes of Vaughan, Trott, Trescothick, Thorpe, KP, Strauss and probably Bell were all finished by the age of 35 (for various reasons of course)

Thought so and was checking whilst VTR was posting - my man Stewart was 40 when he played his last Test in 2003. However, as said, the exception rather than the norm in recent years.

Back in the '70s I can recall several England Test players who were 40 or pushing it (and looking it! ) including Edrich, Close, Cowdrey, D'Oliveira, Illingworth, Titmus and Gifford.

Crikey OK ...I need to follow my own a advice and fact check more!
I really had completely forgotten how old he was (is)

Just on this point : the players VTR lists above were mostly taken out of the game by issues beyond their control ...injuries , mental/emotional problems , "dressing room disharmony " ...
Stewart , the exception , remained fit , happy and in pretty good form to the end ; and so finished his career at a time of his own choosing - and at a fairly advanced age for an international.
Sure it is unusual : but that is because most players have either had enough of the pressure of matches and the rigorous training required to keep up with the game by their mid thirties ; or have lost form ; or their bodies are letting them down - or a combination of those.
Cook (at present) seems very fit , has had no injury problems , and - at least by his own words - retains the desire to continue for the foreseeable future ; so there is no apparent reason why he couldn't carry on for the time required to surpass all batting records. His own form has slipped a little in the last couple of years but still remains pretty respectable , and may potentially improve again with the removal of captaincy pressures.

Of course we have no way of knowing whether any or all of these
factors will change over the next year or two ; neither has Cook. But I think at the moment all possibilities remain open. I'd give him at least a fifty-fifty chance of passing the run record...

I'm actually looking forward to seeing our opening partnership this summer. I think we could see a rejuvenated Cook now he is free of the burdens of captaincy. He can go back to what he did best; relentless accumulation of runs at his own pace within his own bubble. At the same time Hameed has the opportunity to cement his own place in the team and become a great opener in his own right, but initially in the shadow of cook.

It's been said that captaining the England cricket team is one of the hardest jobs in sport and, arguably THE hardest job in British sport. What does everyone reckon on this?

sirfredperry wrote:It's been said that captaining the England cricket team is one of the hardest jobs in  sport and, arguably THE hardest job in British sport. What does everyone reckon on this?

Sir Fred - I can think of a few Sunday second XI captains (including myself in the past) frantically phoning around the morning of the game in an attempt to make up the numbers who would have been happy to swop places.

Btw, you still unmoved on Lloyd?

sirfredperry wrote:It's been said that captaining the England cricket team is one of the hardest jobs in  sport and, arguably THE hardest job in British sport. What does everyone reckon on this?

From an expectation point of view I don't agree with that at all, the publicity and attention that Football and Rugby as well a whole of other sports get mean captaining those sides is far harder.

The football captaincy is a lot more part time than the cricket one tbf

BBC reported that Strauss interviewed Root, Stokes and Broad for the captaincy

Is there really  any doubt about Root  not  getting this?

Or is this juts a meeting to inform the other 2 deemed "seniors"...that Root has been chosen...get behind him and support him

I'd prefer Stokes or Broad personally, think their openly competitive nature is exactly what the team needs and doesn't hinder our best batsmen with the captaincy.

Why do people think captaincy is always going to hinder rather than enhance? Root could play like Kohli is with the captaincy for all we know

Posted with the customary caveat that I'm hopelessly out of date with the modern game, but also noting guildford's appreciation of the captaincies of Brearley & Illingworth, isn't captaincy rather more difficult nowadays?
More tests played, more demands on players' time, and fitness, cricketing sideshows around the world attracting players, not to mention the already noted greater media demands.
It's hardly as if any captain can expect to keep a solid nucleus of Test cricketers together, and surely this will get worse for new captains, especially as the Anderson/Broad combo disappears into the sunset?

On a side note, and echoing the occasional quiz thread we keep on the golf board:
I was sorry to see the recent death of one of the first two brothers to play in the same Test for England, only repeated since by Hollioakes, not to mention having another brother be chairman of Coventry City for ten years. All from the cricketing hotbed of Hereford.

kwinigolfer wrote:Posted with the customary caveat that I'm hopelessly out of date with the modern game, but also noting guildford's appreciation of the captaincies of Brearley & Illingworth, isn't captaincy rather more difficult nowadays?
More tests played, more demands on players' time, and fitness, cricketing sideshows around the world attracting players, not to mention the already noted greater media demands.
It's hardly as if any captain can expect to keep a solid nucleus of Test cricketers together, and surely this will get worse for new captains, especially as the Anderson/Broad combo disappears into the sunset?

On a side note, and echoing the occasional quiz thread we keep on the golf board:
I was sorry to see the recent death of one of the first two brothers to play in the same Test for England, only repeated since by Hollioakes, not to mention having another brother be chairman of Coventry City for ten years. All from the cricketing hotbed of Hereford.

Hi Kwini - captaincy has certainly changed considerably over the years. I don't think Illingworth would have coped well with daily demands for interviews from Sky. There again, you couldn't have had a better man to stand up to certain angry Australian supporters as beer cans were hurled at England fast bowler John Snow. All very different.

You're right about the extra demands although there seem a small army these days to deal with some of them - performance directors, cricket managers, batting, bowling and fielding coaches, fitness leaders, team statisticians, etc, etc. Not convinced more is better but still! At least in England, Central Contracts do allow the ECB to keep a solid nucleus of Test cricketer together although I'm far from sold on that contractual situation.

As for your side note, I did notice the passing of Peter Richardson and brother of Dick who both played for England. The other brother is Bryan who saw the once (almost) mighty Coventry City out of the top tier of English football and on a (so far) never ending spiral but that is another story.

You, Kwini, and maybe the Corporal will like this - Peter Richardson's death now leaves Alan Oakman as the sole survivor from the England team of the Ashes Test in which Jim Laker took his 19 wickets.