Historically why have more than 95 % of times BATSMEN been CAPTAIN, not BOWLERS ?

[rangeelaraja]

Among major cricketing powers Shaun Pollock was captain of RSA for sometime. But that is an outlier.

 

Look at Australia, India, Eng, NZ, WI, Lanka....etc when was the last time they had a bowler captain  ?  Kapil Dev was an exception for some years just like Shaun Pollock.

 

What explains this lopsided allocation of captaincy ?

 

 

 

 

NOTE: I am disregarding the country that NZ abandoned recently. For them using bottle caps illegally , scratching the ball,  biting the ball in front of cameras.....etc etc..a bowler captain is required to supervise such cultural thuggery.  I am only talking about civilized cricketing major powers.

 

 

 

Edited November 8, 2021 by rangeelaraja

[Khota]

Scoring runs is entertaining.  Crowds come to see sixes not lbws.

[AKane]

Batting is not based on whim/idea/choice/thought of a captain.

 

You have a spot - when it is your turn, you go out to bat. When you get out you come back. Besides pencilling in your spot the captain is not in the picture including for himself as a batter.

 

Bowlers are different - who bowls is decided by the captain including when, for how long, from what end  + the field set for that bowler.

 

That is why a batsman standing in the field can make the decision about the bowlers better than bowlers themselves who tend to over or underbowl themselves as a matter of choice they have to exercise. Theoretically it should not matter but practically human nature intervenes when there is a choice involved. Bowling is a lot of work in the field and bowling + thinking about the other bowlers + field setting can overwhelm bowling captain. Batsmen just have to field when fielding and can do the thought work better rather than bowlers who have to think about their bowling first and foremost.

[sarcastic]

6 minutes ago, AKane said:

Batting is not based on whim/idea/choice/thought of a captain.

 

You have a spot - when it is your turn, you go out to bat. When you get out you come back. Besides pencilling in your spot the captain is not in the picture including for himself as a batter.

 

Bowlers are different - who bowls is decided by the captain including when, for how long, from what end  + the field set for that bowler.

 

That is why a batsman standing in the field can make the decision about the bowlers better than bowlers themselves who tend to over or underbowl themselves as a matter of choice they have to exercise. Theoretically it should not matter but practically human nature intervenes when there is a choice involved. Bowling is a lot of work in the field and bowling + thinking about the other bowlers + field setting can overwhelm bowling captain. Batsmen just have to field when fielding and can do the thought work better rather than bowlers who have to think about their bowling first and foremost.

Good post.

Batsmen are generally more suited for setting fields and rotating bowlers as they are not also thinking of what to bowl and not getting tired due to that.

Having said this, we do have bowler captains and most of these are bowling allrounders such as IK, WA from Pak, Kapil and Kumble from Ind and Hadlee from NZ and so on.

[Vancouver]

Bowlers are more injury prone.

 

Bowlers exert themselves and get fatigued, decision making is worse when a person is fatigued. They also are super frustrated and you don't want them to command other players.

 

[urbestfriend]

1. Generally there are more batsmen in a team than bowlers - Test teams often play with 7+4 , and ODI 6+4+1AR etc , so batsmen has more chance to play than bowlers

2. Batting position is often fixed and not change always, but bowlers can change according to the pitch and weather etc. So having a bowler as captain makes the XI selection difficult 

3. Pace bowlers are often injury prone, and needs to be replaced. So having a fast bowler as captain is always risky unless he is very fit like Kapil dev and never gets injured. 

4. Having a spinner as captain is feasible, but teams often play with one spinner and having him as a captain is difficult considering there are pitches where one needs 4 fast bowlers and a spinner allrounder can take the spinner job. 

 

Considering all this, batsmen often becomes captain as that gives more stability and freedom for team selection based on the pitch condition etc.

[Trichromatic]

1. A team has 7 batsmen 4 bowlers usually. A bigger pool of players to choose from.

2. Bowlers are more injury prone than batsmen. 

3. A captain may not be the best batsman, however usually they would be good enough. Batsmen are likely to retain place in all conditions. Same can't be said about bowlers. Ashwin didn't play even a single test in Eng. Your best pacers may need rest time to time, your 3rd or 4th pacer may not find place in all matches.

4. Batsmen of fielding team are usually more free than bowlers.

5. Bowlers need more break even during their bowling when they are done with their spell.

 

[passion47]

Imran , wasim and waqar were all successful captains for Pakistan 

[kirkutfan]

Bowlers are the mazdoor (labor) class in cricket. This is a batsman’s game. Logically, there is no real reason for not considering a bowler to lead. Kumble did fine, when he got his chance to lead India.