THE GOOGLY: USAIN BOLT A GENIUS? NO. SHANE WARNE, PERHAPS

Lord Coe's big call begs question: what has sporting ability got to do with intelligence?

It was enough to make me spit out my lager and spring athletically out of the starting blocks (otherwise known as the deep recesses of my sofa). “Usain Bolt,” declared Lord Seb Coe on the BBC’s coverage of the scintillating World Athletics Championship (yawn), “is a genius...”

Errr… right. But wait, hear him out. "He is the best sprinter of all time," said Coe, ex-Olympic jogging ace and now president of the IAAF. "Usain Bolt is a genius. I can't think, other than Muhammad Ali, of anybody who has so had an impact inside or beyond their sport. You can have the Friday-night-in-the-pub conversations about who is the best footballer or tennis player, but there is no argument about this guy in sprinting."

Well that may well be the case. I don’t follow such things closely, you understand, but Bolt has won eight Olympic gold medals, and stayed drug free. Top man!

But being a fast runner is a long way from being a genius, in my book anyhow. According to dictionary.com, a genius has "an exceptional natural capacity of intellect, especially as shown in creative and original work in science, art, music…” So no mention of sport…

And surely there has to be more to genius than just running in a straighter line faster than your rivals. There must be a certain degree of intelligence involved in choosing what you eat, when you train, how to use certain muscles and so on. But genius in sport needs more, doesn’t it? Now if we are talking cricketers…

Shane Warne was a cricketing genius, was he not? Of course there was a practical skill, being able to land the ball where he wanted. But also there was knowing where to put it. Working a batsman out. Analysing his strengths and weaknesses. Setting him up. Leg-break, leg-break, leg-break, then suddenly the googly, or flipper… or even the zooter (or whichever one of the 611 variations he had in his arsenal).

We have former Nottinghamshire slow left-armer Jim Hindson in our office. This is the scenario he described. “I bowl three or four dot-balls and I can feel the pressure building on the batsman. It’s intuition… It’s then about holding that ball back, like Phil Tufnell’s ‘ball-on-a-string’… you need the skill to execute it perfectly. Get it wrong and the ball can be short and sit up… the batsman can rock back and smash it for four. Get it right, the batsman charges down the pitch and he can be beaten all ends up…” Yes, but is it genius?

Likewise quick bowlers – can they lay claim to genius? What about the three-card trick – bouncer, bouncer, then full, fast one (or yorker)… brilliantly done, there is no disputing that the paceman has out-thought the batsman (take a bow Gary Ballance) – but can it be called genius?

What about batting? David Gower was surely a genius, wasn’t he? His eye for the ball, timing, feet movement, panache – but they are not the skills of a genius necessarily, are they? More of a gifted sportsman, even an athlete like Bolt. So what constitutes batting genius?

I’d argue pacing a run-chase could qualify – step forward Michael Bevan, Graham Thorpe, Neil Fairbrother, Virat Kohli and MS Dhoni. Although they don’t just need intelligence for that – they need nerves of steel, strength, precision of placement and skill.

Coe mentions Ali. Cricket’s equivalent is Garry Sobers. There is nothing the man could not do. Bat beautifully, bowl seam, bowl swing, bowl spin. Catch like a dream. Genius, though?