The Michael Clarke appreciation thread

[Prince EWS]

Originally Posted by BoyBrumby

Notwithstanding our own skipper's current travails, I'm surprised more of the old heads in the Aussie media haven't been talking about Clarke's direness in the format. Back when Tubby was having his nightmare run before the 97 Ashes the usual suspects (Chappelli, Harvey...) were all lining up to say you pick your best 11 players and a captain from them.

Fair to say already Clarke's no Taylor as captains go and he's having a Barry Crocker with the bat too. If he's one of the best 6/7 2020 batsman I'm a coffee bean.

I think it's a genuine case of the journalists in the country not bothering to actually analyse the T20 team much.

[Prince EWS]

Originally Posted by andyc

Indeed, that's what's so frustrating about it. It's like he thinks that motoring at a run a ball is the way to go in T20s.

Yeah, indeed. This wouldn't even be so bad if he scored a lot of runs doing it though - for example before this tournament Misbah averaged about 48 with the bat at a strike rate of 115 or so. Having someone like this in the team may negate the opportunity to score really, really big totals batting first if they bat up the order, but what it does do is give the team more consistency and decrease the likelihood of posting totals that are simply not defendable at all. This is what Clarke does in ODIs really - he makes the side a lot more consistent in the scores they post and if you have a good bowling attack this actually works pretty well batting first. The real problem with Clarke in T20s is that he anchors for a little bit and then just gets out - he serves absolutely no purpose at all.

[Debris]

Originally Posted by BoyBrumby

Fair to say already Clarke's no Taylor as captains go

No-one is

[Top_Cat]

Originally Posted by Prince EWS

I think it's a genuine case of the journalists in the country not bothering to actually analyse the T20 team much.

We're winning, never change a winning combination, [insert cliche], etc.

[vic_orthdox]

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.

[AlanJLegend]

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?

[andyc]

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

[Teja.]

[Spark]

Originally Posted by andyc

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:





Talk about damning with faint praise

Yeah, I saw that

I don't think you'll see a great deal of pressure while we're winning, though...

[social]

Originally Posted by Jono

Yeah he was.

The common theory is he's tightened up his technique so much to make him a MUCH better test player, that its affected his pyjama cricket game.

IMO he, Kallis, Dravid etc are all very similar in that they have a test mentality when it comes to batting and they struggle to shrug that off when it comes to the shorter format

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

[social]

Originally Posted by andyc

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:





Talk about damning with faint praise

Big difference is that Clarke can bat at the highest level, Brearley was literally hopeless

[Sir Alex]

Originally Posted by social

Big difference is that Clarke can bat at the highest level, Brearley was literally hopeless

Has he captained in test matches? I think it was a tongue in cheek reference to his T20 captaincy.

[BoyBrumby]

Originally Posted by andyc

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:





Talk about damning with faint praise

Ha, interesting incongruity between CA's 110% backing of Clarke's primacy and the suggestion he's ready to give T20 away when/if Punter retires from ODIs after the next world cup.

[Top_Cat]

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.

[GingerFurball]

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.