Worrell won nine and lost just three of the 15 Tests he captained. He had a 60 percent win ratio and of course his team revolutionised a kind of attacking play, killing the "decade of draws".
Massively disagree, but I can see his point. We could debate this all day, but in the end, the criteria we pick is still arbitrary. Gary thinks longetivity and contributions during that period matters. Which it does, but he thinks that's worthy enough to call him the best, well I disagree. But can see his point.
60% wins after a handful of tests, in no way guarantees a similar % after 110 tests.
Smith in many ways have had more changes to deal with in his lengthy tenure so that has to count for something.
In my thread I did not feature Smith as even a good captains but having reviewed his performance post retirement has reminded me of what he has really achieved.
My criticism off late is him sitting back and waiting for something to happen rather than trying to make it happen and that was most evident in the recently concluded series against the Aussies.
