Based on no particular knowledge but an interest in the game at the time, I thought Tony Greig was perhaps the 'index' case illustrating the TCCB's collective incompetence - or so it seemed to me at the time - to reliably pick and appoint a team captain, let alona a balanced side that could bat, bowl and field.
TG was the first (I remember) to suffer an appalling lack of form from the almost the moment of his appointment. I T Botham was another classic example of the same thing. I used to wonder how it was that these lions of men were able to be taking wickets and hittig the ball out of the ground one week and the next shaking their heads in disbelief as the umpire's finger went up.
I came to the conclusion that Bedser, Compton etc. or whoever were increasingly desperate for some sort of saviour for the game (and if you watched cricket in the 70s you will remember Dennis Lillee, Geoff Thompson, Michael Holding and Joel Garner simply destroyed the England batting order and made them look like a Sunday team that had put the wrong pads on)
But 'The Selectors' had to be forced to learn anew a business principle. Just as the best salesman does not naturally become the best sales manager, the player with the best form is not the ideal candidate to captain the national side.
I had no problem with Packer and the 'World Series'. I have always believed that people should do what they are good at and if they get paid for it that's great. I think the TCCB crapped itself because they realised if it took off they might be forced to actually do something for a bloody living!
Raise a glass to TG, no diplomat in any sense but helped to instigate a change in the sport that saw it develop a universal appeal as opposed to the vague elitism it had tried - unsuccessfully - to promote up to that point.
Just my opinion.