*Official* Road to 2013 Ashes

[SS1]

The way people talk about the Colombo ton fascinates me frankly, it's as if they've all forgotten that it was at Colombo.

In addition, doing it in terms of minutes is just bizarre, for the obvious reason that over rates vary depending on where you're playing.

This is a really strange way to make a really strange point. Clarke can score crazy fast nowadays. Like KP. The reason for the difference in strike rates is that Clarke didn't play like that before, but that's not relevant now. Accept that and move on.

You keep on moving those goalposts.

I have nothing to accept. I've already acknowledged that I think Clarke is a great batsman. Its in minutes because thats the stat I found, nothing else. FWIW I rated his innings at Colombo higher than the one in Mumbai, due to the context of it. Now, you asked me to find where Pietersen had scored a big score quicker than Clarke at Adelaide. I just did and whats more it was on a tougher wicket. I did that solely to demonstrate that it is not implausible to suggest Pietersen could have done exactly the same thing. Clarke is not some 'uber' being from another planet. He's the same guy that went weeks without a score and wasn't even wanted as the Australian captain until he began his great form. Now, everybody is so far up his backside they can't see the light of day. I'd prefer KP, you and most other Aussies would prefer Clarke. Thats the top and bottom of it. Fair enough. There is no need to start inferring that Colombo is Lords MKII or moaning about it being in minutes and justifying Clarke's strike rate. It is what it is. Both great players and will be pivotal to the Ashes.

 

[benchmark00]

tbf I can't see anywhere here where SS1 has said he prefers Pietersen.

 

[Spark]

For what it's worth the only other time I've ever seen "minutes" being seriously used to analyse an innings in a non match-saving context are Tests from like the 1920s.

 

[SS1]

For what it's worth the only other time I've ever seen "minutes" being seriously used to analyse an innings in a non match-saving context are Tests from like the 1920s.

Well, espncricinfo obviously don't seem to mind it....

2nd Test: Sri Lanka v England at Colombo (PSS), Apr 3-7, 2012 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

Higher strike rate for KP in Colombo than Clarke in Adelaide. Doesn't matter if you compare minutes, balls, whatever.

 

[benchmark00]

Analysis is the same as reading scorecards. Who was on test debut is a good way of analysing a game too.

 

[SS1]

Must dash now anyway. I'll leave you southern hemisphere types to keep telling yourselves that Clarke is the greatest thing since sliced bread, despite the evidence that keeps being placed before you.

And heres an emoticon too.

 

[benchmark00]

And with .1 of a minute to spare!

 

[Prince EWS]

The way people talk about the Colombo ton fascinates me frankly, it's as if they've all forgotten that it was at Colombo.

It wasn't at the SSC though; it was at P.Sara. Two different grounds in Colombo; one is flat and the other is mother****ing flat. P.Sara is the former.

 

[NUFAN]

I do find the minutes aspects pretty funny.

Its hard to say who is more of a match winner, but a KP ton is always pretty special and the term ATG gets floated about whenever he reaches three figures, it doesn't necessary happen yet with Clarke.

Anyway both bats are going to be huge wickets for their opponents throughout the Ashes - Australia have to get rid of Cook first.

 

[Spark]

They go about their work in different ways: KP is more a showman whilst Clarke is still fairly orthodox (though he has added his aerial shots to his repertoire in the last year again).

Really, in terms of scoring pace there isn't that much to separate them these days, which is why I find the claim that KP scores his big innings definitely quicker than Clarke just plain silly. They both rack up huge scores in hardly any time at all. If your definition of "matchwinning" is just a big ton at high speed, then they're equally matched IMO, and it's pretty obvious why.

Unless, of course, you didn't bother to watch the innings in question.

 

[Daemon]

why are minutes irrelevant but sessions aren't?

 

[Prince EWS]

I find both Clarke and Pietersen to be slightly over-rated itbt. Pietersen moreso. World class batsmen no doubt but Clarke is a 50/50 call for my World XI and Pietersen isn't really in contention at the moment (lock for the Second XI though). You can all fight me.

 

[benchmark00]

Possibly leaving out the best batsman in the world for your world XI, gutsy move. Justin Langer type move.

 

[Spark]

why are minutes irrelevant but sessions aren't?

True. I was making more a general point - generally speaking, 100 in a session is regarded as ****ing quick, so that's a useful yardstick. Never seen minutes before though in this context.

It's just a strange argument though. I do not understand how anyone could watch that knock and think, "nah, someone else could have scored substantially faster". Unless you're talking something ludicrous like Gilchrist or Sehwag going bonkers or super rare once-in-a-decade-knocks, that's really the upper limit to how fast you can score a substantial innings.

 

[benchmark00]

It's because generally two sessions average out to be roughly 60 overs, 30 overs a session. 180 balls. Say you face half those balls, that's approx 90 balls. Means you're scoring fast if you get a hundred.

 

[NUFAN]

I find both Clarke and Pietersen to be slightly over-rated itbt. Pietersen moreso. World class batsmen no doubt but Clarke is a 50/50 call for my World XI and Pietersen isn't really in contention at the moment (lock for the Second XI though). You can all fight me.

What four middle order bats are above these two?

Amla
Kallis
Sangakkara and who else?

I'm expecting Chanderpaul but given the 3 names above there is no way Id go Chanders, Mahela etc above Clarke or KP.

 

[Spark]

Don't think Mahela is that close. Even ABdV would be closer IMO.

 

[Pup Clarke]

Amla's just all-round better than Clarke I'd have to say. I just feel that a guy like Amla has the technique and mental fortitude to ride out a period of sustained pressure that Clarke just couldn't deal with for too long imo.

Would love to see how often Clarke gets bowled in tests percentage wise, think he could be potentially quite fallable to a guy bringing the ball back into him often - like an Onions.

 

[Spark]

Yeah I'd probably pick Amla right now as well. The guy just doesn't seem to have an obvious weakness at the moment, a lot of his dismissals in the series came from good "fortune" or brainsnaps more than actual flaws in his game. Clarke tends to try and hit his way out of a period of intense pressure - which is working, tbf, but it's risky.

 

[Prince EWS]

I'm expecting Chanderpaul.

Yeah correct.

It'd hard to balance the team really; I want both Amla and Sangakkara in there but it's hard because they've both scored all their runs at three and you wouldn't really want Kallis lower than four either. Until a couple of weeks ago my option was to just cheat and make Amla open, but Cook's more than forced his way in as a specialist opener now. Chanderpaul and Clarke are without doubt the best lower middle order players going at the moment so I'd probably include them both and (controversially?) leave Amla out, but it's hard. Any of that entire top six barring Kallis could find themselves out of my side on any given day if I was asked to name one, including either of the openers. Seven just doesn't go into six. Pietersen is in the next tier down for mine.