This article is credited: "Andrew McLean is a presenter of The Cricket Club, New Zealand's only national radio cricket show."
It ends:
"As the side's captain, leading batsman and most experienced player the time has come for Fleming to lead New Zealand to an against-the-odds upset. To achieve that he needs to score runs in the way that Martin Crowe and John Wright did when they captained their country.
[snip stats showing Crowe and Wright averaged much more as captain than when not captain, while Fleming doesn't]
"Reaching the levels Wright and Crowe attained when entrusted with the captaincy will be extremely difficult from a purely statistical point of view, by virtue of Fleming's longer tenure. However anything less than lifting his game to a higher level will most likely ensure New Zealand's last-decade Test run against Australia will remain dismal. So the time has come to say: Would the real Stephen Fleming please stand up?"
On whose authority does this McLean fellow issue an ultimatum that Fleming must lead his relatively weak side to a highly unlikely victory against the best side on the planet? And what is unreal about the Fleming who has been performing these last ten years? Just because Mr McLean decided several years ago that Fleming had the potential to be a great batsman, why does that fantasy suddenly have to be turned into reality?
It seems to me that the real Stephen Fleming is exactly what we have seen over the last few years: a decent player, but not a great one, but who usually does a pretty reasonable job as captain of getting a bit more out of his players than you might expect. I don't think it's at all surprising that his stats are very similar indeed to those of Nasser Hussain. I suppose he's taller and more elegant than Hussain and plays more classically, so you might expect him to do a bit better, but I can't really remember watching Fleming and ever thinking I was seeing a master batsman at work.
Is McLean an idiot or a fantasist, or have I missed something about Fleming?
This article is credited: "Andrew McLean is a presenter of The
Cricket> Club, New Zealand's only national radio cricket show.">
It ends:>
"As the side's captain, leading batsman and most experienced player> the time has come for Fleming to lead New Zealand to an> against-the-odds upset. To achieve that he needs to score runs in the> way that Martin Crowe and John Wright did when they captained their> country.>
[snip stats showing Crowe and Wright averaged much more as captain> than when not captain, while Fleming doesn't]>
"Reaching the levels Wright and Crowe attained when entrusted with
captaincy will be extremely difficult from a purely statistical point> of view, by virtue of Fleming's longer tenure. However anything less> than lifting his game to a higher level will most likely ensure New> Zealand's last-decade Test run against Australia will remain dismal.> So the time has come to say: Would the real Stephen Fleming please> stand up?">
On whose authority does this McLean fellow issue an ultimatum that> Fleming must lead his relatively weak side to a highly unlikely> victory against the best side on the planet? And what is unreal about> the Fleming who has been performing these last ten years? Just
because> Mr McLean decided several years ago that Fleming had the potential to> be a great batsman, why does that fantasy suddenly have to be turned> into reality?>
It seems to me that the real Stephen Fleming is exactly what we have> seen over the last few years: a decent player, but not a great one,> but who usually does a pretty reasonable job as captain of getting a> bit more out of his players than you might expect. I don't think it's> at all surprising that his stats are very similar indeed to those of> Nasser Hussain. I suppose he's taller and more elegant than Hussain> and plays more classically, so you might expect him to do a bit> better, but I can't really remember watching Fleming and ever
thinking> I was seeing a master batsman at work.>
Is McLean an idiot or a fantasist, or have I missed something about> Fleming?>
Cheers,>
Mike
At times he's looked All-World; at other times (like now), he's looked like a rusty club cricketer. My own view is that NZ's lack of depth meant he got thrown into international cricket without the requisite background, and its lack of administrative sense meant he got handed the captaincy too soon as well. Both of these hindered (probably permanently) his development as a batsman.
