• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Michael Clarke

Flem274*

Flem274*

123/5
People never get credit for how good they are until 20 years after they retire though

Then we'll be the old men saying some nuffy was no clarke
 
Black_Warrior

Black_Warrior

Cricketer Of The Year
OverratedSanity said:
Hm, get where you're coming from. But you have to remember in 2011-12, it was pretty much unanimous that Clarke was the best in the world. He smashed around everyone, not just India like you insinuated. No one expected that to continue but I doubt anyone expected a dropoff this sharp. Even with Ponting and Tendulkar, they never quite reached tailender levels of awful. They just become below par, not utter ****e like Clarke has become. I doubt even you thought Clarke's decline would be this sharp.
Click to expand...
No I didn't and I don't believe that one dreadful series says a lot about Clarke as a player who has 8500 runs at 50 over 100 test matches. I am not aware of what the fitness status is on Clarke but if he remains fit and continues to play, I do expect him to score some runs and bat much better than he has this year.

I think Clarke will ultimately end his career with a record that will be a true reflection of his ability, 8,500 plus runs, about 30 centuries, with an average hovering around 50. A tad short of the Sangas and the YKs, but still one of the top 10 batsmen of his generation.
 
Last edited:
Prince EWS

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
I think it's somewhat fitting that you're posting all this with a Pietersen avatar, as I think I'll remember Pietersen and Clarke in similar ways -- batsmen who achieved great heights as opposed to batsmen with truly great careers befitting of some of the innings they could play. Pietersen achieved his dizzying heights more in the quality of individual innings he could play, while Clarke's defining characteristic will always be his awesome peak (which did include some real Pietersen-esque gems tbf, like his 151 in SA), but I think comparisons can be drawn anyway.

Overall you'd have to rate them a tier below Sanga and Younis -- at least I would by my methodology -- but they'll be just as memorable for reasons other than the overall quality of their careers.
 
Last edited:
9

91Jmay

International Coach
Clarke and KP would be slightly ahead of YK for me just about, but Sanga tier above them all comfortably.
 
C

CaptainGrumpy

Banned
91Jmay said:
Clarke and KP would be slightly ahead of YK for me just about, but Sanga tier above them all comfortably.
Click to expand...
The underrating of Younis Khan is going to get close to hitting ridiculous levels.

54 average, 30 centuries in just 101 tests, a positive century to 50 conversion rate, a second team innings of 52.66 (yes over 50 in the second innings).

Anyway you spin it, Clarke and KP have played more tests, have a batting average under 50 and scored less centuries, and less runs, than Younis. Clarke is 39 in the second innings and KP 38.

Give me Younis at crunch times any day, but as a spectator KP is probably the best entertainment, on and off the field.
 
Last edited:
Black_Warrior

Black_Warrior

Cricketer Of The Year
And this is what I meant when I had said that Clarke is rated a bit too highly than his ability. YK has more runs, more centuries, higher average than Clarke in less number of games. YK does not play at home since 2009, and if we look at trends in test cricket over the last 5 years, home advantage can make the difference between 5-0 and getting 60 all out, not mention YK's ridiculous fourth innings average, and having to bat almost every time at 10/2.

Yet ask majority of people on this forum, Clarke would be rated higher than YK...in fact if asked to name top 5 batsmen, some might even forget YK.
 
9

91Jmay

International Coach
****ing hell, are you seriously going to spin UAE as not favourable home conditions for YK? Also he has played 12 matches against Zim/Ban which is a nice chunk and more than KP/Clarke added together. He is quality though and his longevity can't be ignored. I'd still at least take Clarke over him though.
 
Black_Warrior

Black_Warrior

Cricketer Of The Year
But what about YK's runs in India and Sri Lanka where a lot of overseas batsmen have failed? Why doesn't he get credit for those runs because they are not 'difficult' enough as Adelaide?

And there's a lot more to 'home conditions' than what is favourable. England got a favourable pitch in MCG 2010 but would you call that 'home conditions'? Home conditions also involves playing in conditions you started as a first class cricketer, where you played all your life, where you know the ground inside out, its tricks and secrets.
 
Last edited:
9

91Jmay

International Coach
Black_Warrior said:
But what about YK's runs in India and Sri Lanka where a lot of overseas batsmen have failed? Why doesn't he get credit for those runs because they are not 'difficult' enough as Adelaide?

And there's a lot more to 'home conditions' than what is favourable. England got a favourable pitch in MCG 2010 but would you call that 'home conditions'? Home conditions also involves playing in conditions you started as a first class cricketer, where you played all your life, where you know the ground inside out, its tricks and secrets.
Click to expand...
So you are questioning whether Younis knows the UAE ground better than any other test players? He has as much knowledge of those conditions as any player in history of the game. If that is your definition of home advantage then a handful of players ever get that. Mark Wood had never played at Cardiff before the Ashes series in a first class game. Would that not count as 'home advantage' for him then no matter what pitches are like?
 
C

CaptainGrumpy

Banned
91Jmay said:
So you are questioning whether Younis knows the UAE ground better than any other test players? He has as much knowledge of those conditions as any player in history of the game. If that is your definition of home advantage then a handful of players ever get that. Mark Wood had never played at Cardiff before the Ashes series in a first class game. Would that not count as 'home advantage' for him then no matter what pitches are like?
Click to expand...
Countries Michael Clarke averages over 50 in: Australia
Countries Younis Khan averages over 50 in: Bangladesh, India, England, NZ, Pakistan, UAE, Zimbabwe.

Younis possibly would have averaged over 50 in Australia if had not missed a tour during his "peak" but that really is a case of what could have been.
 
Last edited:
9

91Jmay

International Coach
Clarke averages 49.5 in NZ and has never batted in Zimbabwe and has two innings in Bangladesh including a not out 23. Younis record is excellent on the road, and his purple patch of last few years has been great but Clarke at his best is a better player for me.
 
hendrix

hendrix

Hall of Fame Member
Younis is comfortably above Clarke. Each has their strengths and weaknesses, obviously, but Younis has had a better career and is just a better batsman.
 
C

CaptainGrumpy

Banned
91Jmay said:
Clarke averages 49.5 in NZ and has never batted in Zimbabwe and has two innings in Bangladesh including a not out 23. Younis record is excellent on the road, and his purple patch of last few years has been great but Clarke at his best is a better player for me.
Click to expand...
So what you're basically saying is that Clarke averages 25.5 in Bangladesh and under 50 in New Zealand?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top