Rejecting 'analysis by checklist' and 'skill absolutism' since Dec '09
Rejecting 'selection deontology' since Mar '15
'Stats' is not a synonym for 'Career Test Averages'
Originally Posted by Jeffrey Tucker
Last edited by Prince EWS; 15-05-2010 at 05:17 PM.
Clarke's alteration of his technique has definitely reduced his ability to score quickly. He has to have his arms completely freed up to hit the ball powerfully - which is why he still cover drives so well in Test cricket. If you bowl at the stumps, he can't hit powerfully from the region of mid-off and mid-wicket; which is really the key region for a good Twenty20 player to be able to hit the ball and score boundaries.
I am a big fan of the notion that regardless of what people have to say about Clarke's batting in T20's it must be pointed out that he is captaining a side that has has gone undefeated in what must be around 10 games (including a tie), many of which have included absolute crushings of the opposition.
This being said, with the way he bats you have to assume it will only be so long before his slow-scoring costs us a game. Obviously due to him being the next text captain the selectors will not remove him (even though I think White should be our next LO captain with Pup as test captain), but surely he should be placed somewhere else in the order, or at leasted used an a way that if we are collapsing he can come out early, if we are scoring at 12rpo Dussey/White can come out first.
The thing that worries me is that Clarke does at times not seem capable of scoring boundaries in t20 games. I'm not suggesting that he should be able to come out and play like Warner or Afridi, but he is known as one of the best batsmen in the world. Surely he should be able to clear the rope more than he does?
Just doing a quick search to see if there is indeed any pressure on the media, found this article interesting:
Michael Clarke is becoming the modern-day Mike Brearley | The Australian
Think it's a bit early to be calling his captaincy Brearley-esque, but I found this part very illuminating:
Cricket Australia last night endorsed the selection panel's decision to appoint Clarke "110 per cent". "We're talking about a new-age sport that is writing its own rules about the concepts that count and Michael Clarke is a new-age all-rounder, T20 cricketer who understands the needs of the new game," a CA spokesman said.
"He can get through overs quickly, efficiently and effectively and take wickets and he's a batsman willing to sacrifice himself for the team going down the order.
"He's undefeated as a captain, which is exceptional."
Talk about damning with faint praise
I'd almost guarantee that they are amongst the most talented ball strikers in the world but it's what's between the ears that is the problem
Cricket Web's current Premier League Tipping Champion
- As featured in The Independent.
"I don't think that they'll come close to us to be honest."
- Steve Smith before the Ashes
I'd be hesitant to pin all the credit on his captaincy, tbh. Captains in all forms are important and Clarke has been really good but, at last, picking two of the most destructive pace bowlers in T20 cricket instead of the guys they want to give a run before the next Test series has been a massive factor. Get the feeling they've gotten the selection right rather than the choice of captain.
Comparing him to Brearley is a bit of a stretch; the team is playing to its potential overall rather than playing well above itself. The batting is a worry, though.
Last edited by Top_Cat; 16-05-2010 at 02:59 AM.
I think the lack of questioning of Clarke's place could be to do with an in-built snobbery regarding the formats - he's an excellent Test batsman, so there's no way he can't play a bit of hit and giggle.
His poor showing in LO is mystifying, back at his ODI peak what made him so good in the middle order was how few deliveries he wasted, he had one of the lowest, if not the lowest dot ball percentages around. His problem in T20 isn't a lack of hitting ability as such, it's the fact that he can't get scoring at all, he doesn't push singles or twos anywhere near enough. Look at Mike Hussey - as he showed against Pakistan, he's got the ability to bomb it over the ropes when needed, but before he went mental in the last couple of overs, his strike rate was already quite high because he was regularly turning 1s into 2s.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)