FaaipDeOiad
Hall of Fame Member
Okay okay... now I hate to say "I told you so", but... 
-
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 - all hype, no performance
- Thread starter howardj
- Start date
King_Ponting
International Regular
haha Micheal clarke all hype no performance? I think not
Neil Pickup
Request Your Custom Title Now!
One knock, Sean, one knock. Let's see how the rest of the summer pans out. I'd be surprised if he averaged above 35.
, anyway nice to some of Pup's critics silenced for now...
FaaipDeOiad
Hall of Fame Member
35 isn't that bad... certainly enough to keep him in the team. I never actually said he would have a dominant series, merely that he would do well enough to keep himself justifiably in the team, and cleraly he's done pretty well today.Neil Pickup said:
King_Ponting
International Regular
The first test of a series is normally the match were Clarke makes a big one. Ie India and Australia
Mister Wright
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
IMO he will be like Greg Blewett. Naturally gifted, and elegant, however, too many technical flaws to be a consistent test match player.
After 13 Matches:
Greg Blewett: 13 matches, 22 innings, 2 not outs, 769 runs, 115 HS, 38.45 avg, 2 hundreds, 5 half centuries.
Michael Clarke: 13 matches, 19 innings, 1 not out, 771 runs, 151 HS, 42.83 avg, 2 hundreds, 3 half centuries.
Very close statistics there.
In the next match, Blewett scored his 214 and brought his average up to 46, then it hovered around 40 for his 46 match career.
After 13 Matches:
Greg Blewett: 13 matches, 22 innings, 2 not outs, 769 runs, 115 HS, 38.45 avg, 2 hundreds, 5 half centuries.
Michael Clarke: 13 matches, 19 innings, 1 not out, 771 runs, 151 HS, 42.83 avg, 2 hundreds, 3 half centuries.
Very close statistics there.
In the next match, Blewett scored his 214 and brought his average up to 46, then it hovered around 40 for his 46 match career.
Kevin_Pietersen
Cricket Spectator
I disagree.I think Michael Clarke will become an excellent test player..he will hang around the Australian team for a long time and I have a feeling that he will become a legend in the game.His inexperience showed when he got out for 91 at Lords, he got frustrated with Hoggard's consistent line outside the off stump and decided to go for a big shot, all he needs to do his have more patience and try not to hit out all the time because at some stage of his career he will come in when Australia are in a very difficult position and he will need his patience and his technique to bat well.
He was playing that innings of 91 at Lords like a ODI innings!! He needs to adapt his game to tests a bit more and he will be a COMPLETE player in my opinion.
He was playing that innings of 91 at Lords like a ODI innings!! He needs to adapt his game to tests a bit more and he will be a COMPLETE player in my opinion.
age_master
Hall of Fame Member
indeed, hes also a middle order batsmen rather than an opening batsman, and hes one of the better players of spin in the world. not to mention hes one of the best fielders in the side too.aussie said:
FaaipDeOiad
Hall of Fame Member
I'd expect him to be more like Mark Waugh, in all honesty. A long time player who always did enough to keep himself in the team, excelled in one day cricket, but was never quite world class in tests. He certainly has the potential to be more though, so we'll see.Mister Wright said:
age_master
Hall of Fame Member
FaaipDeOiad said:
throw in abit of Michael Slater as well (not just because he got out in the 90's
)
Mister Wright
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I have no problem with him, he is one of my favourite players, and I love watching him bat. He just did not have the technique to be successful at test cricket. Probably should have been given more of a go in ODI cricket.Monty said:
Mister Wright
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Perhaps. However I do think he'll be dropped a few more times than Mark Waugh.FaaipDeOiad said:
Mister Wright
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Perfect for test cricket? He had 46 matches to prove his worth, he opened, batted at 3 and the middle order, had more than enough chances to prove his worth. I don't think he scored a century in his last 15 tests or something like that. He just wasn't up to test class cricket.Monty said:
FaaipDeOiad
Hall of Fame Member
Yeah. It's a bit sad really that such a stunning batsman to watch couldn't quite hack it, but there were better choices in the end.Mister Wright said:
Obviously, he's not even close to making the test team now, nor should he be, and calling for him to be recalled is ridiculous. I never quite understood state bias in cricket. I guess it could be because I've lived in several states over the years, but I've never felt the slightest inclination to support players from one state over another in terms of selection or anything else. My favourite players in domestic cricket are Tait, Watson and Hussey. Not sure if McGrath, Lee and Katich being my favourite players in the test team shows bias or not really.