*Official* Australia in India 2010

[robinjr]

loved Clarke when he had his old helmet and hair

 

[Jayzamann]

kids playing seconds XI out there.

That's a pretty tiny nutshell.

 

[Son Of Coco]

Right, so he shaved his head?

Changed his appealing style too.

 

[Furball]

It's not even a question of "power hitting" - at his peak Clarke was amongst the list of players with the lowest dot ball percentage around.

He's had a few big knocks in the last 6 months that have come at a pretty slow pace, because at times he's looked incapable of getting off strike. In his last innings he played 61 dot balls - if he could have converted half of them into singles then he'd have scored 141 runs for the innings at a SR of 101.43 (and that's an inexact way of calculating it, because if he'd gotten off strike, he wouldn't have faced the next ball, so his SR would have been even higher.)

If you change that to just 15 more singles (and also removing 15 "next balls") then his innings would have been 126* (124) - a SR of 101.61

 

[Jono]

Ex-****ing-actly

 

[sifter132]

It's not even a question of "power hitting" - at his peak Clarke was amongst the list of players with the lowest dot ball percentage around.

He's had a few big knocks in the last 6 months that have come at a pretty slow pace, because at times he's looked incapable of getting off strike. In his last innings he played 61 dot balls - if he could have converted half of them into singles then he'd have scored 141 runs for the innings at a SR of 101.43 (and that's an inexact way of calculating it, because if he'd gotten off strike, he wouldn't have faced the next ball, so his SR would have been even higher.)

If you change that to just 15 more singles (and also removing 15 "next balls") then his innings would have been 126* (124) - a SR of 101.61

I think what's happened is that he's realised that he won't power shots to the boundary and so he's focused on the other option - placement. Trouble is he's trying to be too precise and too greedy with his placement. Quite often you'll hear him groan loadly in the stump mic after he finds the in-fielder, and I imagine it's because he's got this 'perfect' shot he wants to play, 2 metres away from the fielder. But by hitting so close to the fielder, you are of course going to find them more often, and hence we are seeing more dot balls from Pup.

The other part is that because he's batting higher up and with the added responsibility (and seniority) that comes with it, he doesn't want to hit the ball in the air. He used to chip over cover, but now he's keeping it down and going for the perfect on the ground shot instead.

 

[Jono]

Lots of rain making tomorrow's game unlikely from what I've read.

 

[social]

I've been in India for a week and in 2 cities (Mumbai and Dehli), I reckon I've seen more people playing organised games than there are registered players in almost any other country

You would not believe how popular the game is here and if India doesnt dominate cricket for the foreseeable future then it'll be because of issues other than talent pool

 

[GotSpin]

I've been in India for a week and in 2 cities (Mumbai and Dehli), I reckon I've seen more people playing organised games than there are registered players in almost any other country

You would not believe how popular the game is here and if India doesnt dominate cricket for the foreseeable future then it'll be because of issues other than talent pool

While I always like to hear about the popularity of cricket, sheer numbers don't necessarily produce great talent. Islands of the West Indies to testify

 

[Jono]

West Indies numbers are dwindling tbh

 

[GotSpin]

West Indies numbers are dwindling tbh

Obviously the example isn't great now but it was.

 

[Jono]

But I would argue that along with some awful management and coaching, the fact that so many people from the West Indies saw other sports as more lucrative has played (how large is up for debate) in their downfall.

 

[GotSpin]

All I was trying to put across is that sheer numbers don't guarantee quality talent, it's a number of other factors too plus sheer luck

 

[Jono]

Nah I agree, but I'd say that India and England have been proof of that really, rather than West Indies.

 

[Prince EWS]

Nah I agree, but I'd say that India and England have been proof of that really, rather than West Indies.

Bangladesh and, to an extent, Scotland are pretty good examples too. On the flip side, New Zealand.

 

[Flem274*]

Zimbabwe and Australia good shouts.

Australia and West Indies > NZ as proof of the flip side tbh

 

[Uppercut]

Sorry, Michael Clarke just scored a century at a strike rate of 80 and he's being slagged off? Surely more of the blame should go to the openers who managed 9 from 35 balls between them? Putting serious pressure on Clarke and Hussey to re-build and make scores. It's ridiculous; without Clarke's century, and without Clarke being there at the end Australia wouldn't have got anywhere near the score they managed. Sure, Cameron White batted awesomely, but without Clarke there as security, there's no way he would have been able to unleash like that with the pressure of setting a total.

The thing is that this is Clarke's best-case-scenario- he rebuilds the innings from two wickets down, goes on to make a century, and Australia make par. Yet still there are reasonable criticisms that can be made.

It was certainly a good innings- much better than Clarke not playing at all, obviously- but this is the ABSOLUTE BEST Clarke will do in an ODI, and even with Cam White going ****ing nuts in the last five, it only took his side to a par score that they were, imo, still second favourites with. That's a massive problem for an ODI player because- as others have rightly pointed out- the majority of his innings won't be so good, and when he goes for 25 off 60, the team would arguably be better off playing air in his place.

His inclusion makes sense now because the Aussie batting lineup is particularly weak, but surely for the World Cup in India, where a par score is a good bit higher than average, a player like Clarke has very little value at all. If he plays really, really well, he might take you to a score that isn't all that far below what you should be aiming for.

 

[Furball]

His inclusion makes sense now because the Aussie batting lineup is particularly weak, but surely for the World Cup in India, where a par score is a good bit higher than average, a player like Clarke has very little value at all. If he plays really, really well, he might take you to a score that isn't all that far below what you should be aiming for.

Their line up is weak because of Clarke's presence. A hallmark of their home series vs Pakistan was Michael Hussey hitting quickfire scores in the lower order to guide the Australians to a par score.

 

[Uppercut]

Their line up is weak because of Clarke's presence. A hallmark of their home series vs Pakistan was Michael Hussey hitting quickfire scores in the lower order to guide the Australians to a par score.

Haha nah, their lineup is just weak. Their bottom six in the last match consisted of Smith, Hopes, Hauritz, Hastings, Starc and McKay.

 

[silentstriker]

I've been in India for a week and in 2 cities (Mumbai and Dehli), I reckon I've seen more people playing organised games than there are registered players in almost any other country

You would not believe how popular the game is here and if India doesnt dominate cricket for the foreseeable future then it'll be because of issues other than talent pool

It's a four letter word that starts with a B and ends with an I.

Try getting involved in one of the local cricket or state associations and you'll know what I mean.