the crickEt captain

cricket is the best of all strategy games, you may think about chess now. But ain't that a more on "paper" game? 

the strategist on field, the captain plays and manipulates his pieces/players just like a military general- you observe the enemy, analyze them, understands the 'battle' field, figures out his/her strengths and weaknesses, balances the pros and cons, and to top it all, everything of this is done in real time. 

team games have captains, but more as a namesake with the coach taking up the leadership position and players merely taking his orders. no other game comes anywhere closer to cricket on its dependence on captain and his leadership. even baseball, the closest counterpart of cricket, does not depend on the captain so much.

this is more relevant in test cricket as it is spread over 5 days. the battle feild changes, weather changes, people changes, pitch changes. the fella who went for a duck in the first innings could come back and hit a double century, the bowler who took 8 wickets in the first could be beaten left and right in the second. The job of the captain as a strategist is still relevant but reduced when the game was shortened into the 50 over format. This has become less so in the 20-20 format. This change is typical of military strategy too. Battles planned over shorter durations weighs heavily on the might of the strategist rather than the planning whereas war plans over larger durations are a game of wit, might and strategy.

the way the captin responds to these sitations and events and how he cleverly manipulates and swerves around is the epitome of a strategist and leader. a successful cricket captain is that's why such an asset to the team as a good military general or ruler.