Profiles / Andrew Hughes / 28 October 2008 / 2 Comments

Andrew Hughes looks at the career and attributes of Durham and England all-rounder Paul Collingwood and tells us why he's still got a big part to play in England's future in all forms of the game.

It is sometimes said of Paul Collingwood that he makes the most of his talent, which is a mealy mouthed English way of saying that he isn't that good. The polar opposite of a Collingwood would be someone like Mark Ramprakash, an individual apparently dripping with talent. But an unfulfilled talent is no use to anyone. How many of Ramprakash's dashing cameos actually helped the England cause?

The mistake often made about batsmen is to regard them merely as machines. All people want to know is how strong their technique is. Yet technique is nothing without the right mental qualities. If we were to guess what that might be, we would probably say, determination to succeed, toughness to weather the difficult times and a dash of aggression to seize opportunities.

Colly ticks all those boxes, though he is perhaps more of a terrier than a collie, he is undoubtedly a working breed. That he eschews the expansive off side game in favour of an obdurate defence and a range of leg side shovels does not mean he can't bat. His percentage based style is a legacy of his early years in the England set-up. Perennial understudy, bits and pieces stand-in, he worked hard on all aspects of his game to make himself more appealing to a selectorial eye. And once he was in, he intended to make the most of it, even if it meant he had to be prised away from the batting crease.

He has many virtues. One of the best fielders in the world at backward or cover point, a useful limited overs dobbler of swingers and slower balls, he is the stabiliser in the batting order. Coming in at five, six or seven, asked to steer the team home or to staunch the flow of wickets, he is undoubtedly one of the best limited overs batsmen this country has ever produced.

When he took the England one day captaincy last year, it was assumed that this tough, nuggetty cricketer would excel and there were some early successes, against India and in Sri Lanka. But his captaincy ran into the buffers with two series defeats to New Zealand, finally coming off the rails altogether amidst the wreckage of Elliotgate at the Oval. By common consent, his refusal to withdraw his appeal whilst Grant Elliot lay injured was a violation of the spirit of the game and though his apology was accepted, it was clear the whole saga affected him. His resignation, in the wake of Vaughan's headline grabbing abdication, was characteristically muted.

As a captain, his overall record was mixed, worse than Vaughan, Atherton and Hussain, but better than Stewart and Adam Hollioke. And it has to be remembered that he was leading a team drastically short on experience. Even the old hands such as Bell and Anderson were hardly leaders on the field. In the heat of battle, there was no-one to offer sound advice or wise counsel and at the Oval it showed.

It is also the case that Collingwood is not a natural captain. Like Gooch before him, he found it hard to rouse his troops to the same level of commitment and determination that he took for granted when he pulled on an England shirt. He didn't seem to enjoy the leadership role and whilst he was too phlegmatic to react badly to criticism, it was clear that the pressure of being captain contributed to a deterioration in his batting form. His prudent batting became cautious and indecisive.

With his Test career on the line, he showed his character at Edgbaston, restoring his reputation with a belligerent, brave century. Freed of the burdens of captaincy, he now has a second chance to cement his position as the pugnacious rock of the England batting line-up, starting in India next month.

Before that though, he has a shot at a serious payday in the Stanford Super Series. England were massive favourites before the tournament began but their hit and miss showing against Middlesex on Sunday has seen their odds lengthen. You can back them at [1.67] to win the big money game next Saturday with the Stanford Superstars, equally underwhelming in their one match so far, on offer at [2.22]