Duncan Fletcher extolling the virtues of Michael Vaughan as the greatest captain on the planet has encouraged me to write this post that has been knocking around in my skull for a while.

Good captaincy (by my own traditional definition) has forever been synonymous with tactical superiority, with mental dominance, and often with nuggety rearguard batting performances at match turning times. The so-called “Captains Innings”.

Of players that slot into that stereotype, Steve Waugh springs to my mind as does Nasser Hussain and Stephen Fleming (amongst many others I could add). These are the captains of ‘knuckling-down’ and ‘digging-deep’ and for Fleming in particular, being a master of batsmen-specific field placings and bowling strategies. These qualities all might be seen to contribute to the make-up of a good captain, particularly when they are wrapped inside the persona of a man who is visibly in charge. The Boss!

But hard-nosemanship (I know there’s no such word but I liked it too much) comes at a cost, and often that cost is the added pressure the players feel in performing under a Despot. I remember one particular bollocking Hussain gave a player in the outfield for not ‘paying attention’ at a moment in a certain game where he clearly felt the need to exert some dominance on his own team. Whilst it lets the players know who’s in charge, this type of ‘man-management’ style does not encourage the team harmony so freely flowing under Michael Vaughan’s leadership.

Vaughan’s captain’s jersey is cut from an entirely different cloth. He is far from a nuggety batsmen (there were countless heart-stopping times during the Ashes that I wished he were), and he does not cast a dominant shadow over his players. In fact the opposite, he encourages them to bask in the sunshine. The whole England team positively absorbed UV Rays all summer long and it was ultimately their most effective sun-tan in two decades.

And whilst I’m tiring of hearing how players this year are so keen to ‘express themselves’ this lexicon proves the point that Vaughan’s captaincy is a much more inclusive and relaxed affair.

All of which makes him, in my book at least, an outstanding ‘leader’ as opposed to an outstanding ‘captain’. Are the two different? I think so.

My own definition of a leader is one who extracts maximum from his or her team. Who creates an environment where the total of the team’s output exceeds the sum of the player’s individual talent. It is one who facilitates enjoyment, confidence, teamwork and passion whilst always making decisions that take the unit closer to a shared strategic vision.

All great leaders have goals and Vaughan was quick to establish a new objective as soon as he had recovered from his Ashes hangover;

“We want to beat every team in the world over the next two years”

Vaughan has been receiving unequivocal praise from the likes of Flintoff and Fletcher praising the relationships they have with him and (subtly) pointing out the added value that he brings to the team above his predecessor. Where Hussain ruled with an iron fist, Vaughan massages with a gentle hand.

But to simply agree with Fletcher and position Vaughan as the best Captain in the world does a disservice to the likes of Stephen Fleming, who for me at least, rates very highly on the aforementioned ‘traditional’ captaincy skills.

Whilst Vaughan has leadership skills in bucket-fulls I am uncertain that his wider range of captaincy skills far exceed those of his peers? Is he say, a better tactician than Fleming? A better rearguard (or any other guard) batsmen than Ponting?

So to try and conclude something from this ramble, I guess it depends on what you deem as the measurement of great captaincy that determines who sits atop the rankings. Vaughan is up there with the best, but is not for me a clear and worthy holder of the number one spot when measuring the range of skills that constitute a great captain.

That being said, leadership can be an oft overlooked aspect of captaincy and yet it is leadership, ultimately above all else, that makes champions of men. And on that basis who could argue against Fletcher? At least for now!