My post has clearly been interpreted in that manner it seems, fair enough.
FWIW I would take KP over Clarke. My opinion. If you don't agree with that, thats fine. I can completely understand that. Don't start taking the proverbial over it because it goes against your own opinion.
In terms of matchwinning, yes I do think KP is more of a matchwinner than Clarke. However, that isn't to say that Clarke isn't a matchwinner. There is a big difference and many other factors impact on it. Have a look at Clarke's recent two doubles over SA. Australia didn't win either. My thoughts are that if KP gets that double, he gets it quicker and gives the bowlers more time to bowl a side out. Aus needed two wickets to beat South Africa at Adelaide. Is it entirely implausible to suggest that with an extra hour they wouldn't have got them ? It isn't.
KP is not getting that double quicker than Clarke did on that day. He scored 200 in two sessions.
KP bats bloody fast, but that was just ridiculous.
EDIT: It's also a completely superfluous point as Australia declared. If Clarke wanted another half an hour he could have gotten it.
Last edited by Spark; 12-12-2012 at 08:09 AM.
+ time's fickle card game ~ with you and i +
get ready for a broken ****in' arm
Parmi | #1 draft pick | Jake King is **** | PM me for my list of CW posters you shouldn't talk cricket with in Cricket ChatCome and Paint Turtle
I don't think its a crazy opinion. I disagree with it but its not ridiculous.
KP's knock in Mumbai was epic, one of the best I've ever seen.
But Clarke's played match winners too. Just happens some of his great knocks are in draws/losses. Tendulkar has the same - very rarely is it down to the batsman imo.
That's like saying Tendulkar should have a higher top score than Lara because his average was higher. Er, no.
And again, it's irrelevant because Aus declared second innings.
Last edited by Spark; 12-12-2012 at 08:11 AM.
It is also completely irrelevant. Averages don't work like that.
If you can find an instance where KP has scored a huge score quicker than that, you might have a point, but otherwise it's just flat out fallacious.
Pietersen scored 151 in 212 minutes on a turner at Colombo, averaging a run every 1.4 minutes. Harder pitch to bat on yet scored faster.
Even in Mumbai, where it was an absolute bunsen, he was marginally slower. He scored 186 in 316 minutes, averaging a run every 1.69 minutes.
All I am demonstrating is that it is not beyond the realms of possibility.
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.
I mean, we haven't even mentioned Cape Town yet. Oh wait... I just did.
Last edited by Spark; 12-12-2012 at 08:34 AM.
If SS1 is such an England fan then why no posts about the current tour to India?
You convicts are feeding the troll with each bite.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)