da prosport bet： Stephen Fleming, who stands on the threshold of becoming the most cappedone-day captain, talks on the art of leadership
Siddhartha Vaidyanathan in Mohali24-Oct-2006
‘Ultimately the buck stopswith me, in the playing sense, and you have to see if your captaincy ishindering or helping your game’ © Getty Images
One hundred and ninety four is the highest score in a one-dayinternational. Come tomorrow and it will also be the number of one-daygames in which Stephen Fleming has led New Zealand, beating ArjunaRanatunga’s record. In an age when captains are swapped on a seasonalbasis – in some countries even on a daily basis – he’s stayed pilot forclose to a decade. It’s been a journey that’s seen someone who “didn’tknow what was happening” turn into one of the shrewdest minds in thebusiness. Better still, the end isn’t anywhere in sight.”I didn’t know what I was doing in my first game,” he reminisced whenasked of the March day in1997 when he led New Zealand for the first time in an ODI. “My styleof captaincy has gone 360 [degrees] and more; I’ve used different stylesand developed different ways. Probably now, with the advantage ofhindsight I’m at a point where I’m discovering just how importantleadership can be. And that comes down to being in the job for so long.I’m thankful for being given such a long run.”Captaining New Zealand couldn’t have been easy. Out of the 25 men who’veled, seven didn’t manage more than five Tests. Only 12 captained awinning team and just two others – Geoff Howarth and Jeremy Coney – havewon more Tests than they have lost. To present-day audiences Coney mightappear to be a stand-up comic providing a lot of mirth but hishard-as-nails approach catapulted New Zealand to one of the leading sidesin the ’80s. His assessment of Fleming is worth noting: “He has amariner’s gaze,” he told Cricinfo. “There’s a calmness,” says Coney aboutFleming’s on-field countanance, “he has a word here and there, puts in alot of introspection and thought. At times it would have been veryfrustrating – with the team playing inconsistently. But he’s got throughit all very impressively.”Fleming spoke of the hard times, moments when he thought of throwing inthe towel. “Giving up the captaincy for the betterment of the side issomething I’ve grappled with,” he continued. “Ultimately the buck stopswith me, in the playing sense, and you have to see if your captaincy ishindering or helping your game. Yes, I have thought of giving it up.”In his first 15 innings as captain, Fleming managed just two fifties. Infact, throughout his career he’s endured phases of low scores (once in1998-99 he strung together 23, 21, 23, 5, 16, 9 and 0). “It comes down tohow you play as a batter,” he reflected when asked about captaincypressures. “I’m certainly not as good a captain when I’m underpressure batting wise. The decision making is not confident as it shouldbe when you’re under pressure with your batting. I think I’ve been in thegame long enough to know that I can set that aside and concentrate on mycaptaincy even if my batting is not going well. The hardest time is whenyou’re under pressure with both. The bottom-line is that I didn’t want togive up when the times were bad, I didn’t want to give the opportunityup.”Fleming’s longevity doesn’t confirm to Steve Waugh’s assertion aboutcaptains having shelf-lives. So what’s the secret? Where does he summonthe energy and inventiveness to lead day after day? “I’m still gettingmassive satisfaction from leading,” he responded, “and that’s an importantthing to acknowledge. Even after ten years, there’s a drive and desire toget better as a captain. It’s as intense as it’s always been from day one.I understand the shelf-life talk but I’ve tried to be innovative andencourage leadership. There’s still a lot to achieve – winning this[tournament], winning the World Cup, encouraging people like Vettori,Oram, Bond and the Marshalls to develop their leadership along with me.They’re the next group of leaders that this team has.”He completely agreed with the notion that established captains oftenreceive more credit than they deserve. He’s also quick to point out theflipside. “You’re only as good as your team’s performance,” he assertedwhen asked if captaincy is over over-estimated. “You must remember theflipside as well – when you captain and your team loses, there aresubtleties that you miss, something that don’t work out. But if you’re inthe game for that kind of recognition, you’re there for the wrong reasons.Team success is what counts. There have been great sides with averagecaptains. And there have been very good captains who haven’t had too muchsuccess.”So what advice would the Stephen Fleming of today offer to the Stephen Flemingwho walked out to toss in his first game? Is leadership a naturalattribute or does one learn on the job? “You learn most of it,” he saidintrospectively. “If you’re observant and if you have the man-mangementskills in order then half of it sorted out. Then there’s the tacticalside, then development side. If you walk around thinking you’re a leader,you’re a long way from it.”In India and talking about captaincy, there was no way Fleming could avoid the inevitable query – the captaincy credentials of Rahul Dravid and Sourav Ganguly. At this stage, Fleming felt, it wouldn’t be appropriate to compare them. “Captaining India is probably the toughest job around, considering the pressure from fans and number of people who follow cricket,” said Fleming.”Both have contrasting styles and both are very strong personalities.Sourav had quite an emotional streak but Rahul seems more calculated andmore measured. Now they’re examples of different styles and can alsocomplement where their teams are.”Teams develop naturally depending on styles,” he continued. “I don’tthink you should compare. You need to respect what Sourav did – he broughta lot of spark and passion to the side. In a way he was a littledifferent, because there was always a passive approach from India. ButSourav was very confrontational. Rahul is quite measured. It willbe interesting to see over time how they measure up.”