Where Next For Kevin Pietersen?

[wfdu_ben91]

Clarke better then Pietersen? Most people forget that most of Clarke's runs (barring last years Ashes) have come when other batsman have scored heavily and it's not as if England's bowling attack was great either.

For the better part of Pietersen's career he has carried England's batting and has basically be the man in batting since the very day that he walked into the English side. Clarke on the otherhand has been nechered through an ongoing process where he came in an scored runs when others had done well and has gradually gotten better. Apart from his debut 100, Clarke has never done anything greatly special.

 

[Spark]

Clarke better then Pietersen? Most people forget that most of Clarke's runs (barring last years Ashes) have come when other batsman have scored heavily and it's not as if England's bowling attack was great either.

For the better part of Pietersen's career he has carried England's batting and has basically be the man in batting since the very day that he walked into the English side. Clarke on the otherhand has been nechered through an ongoing process where he came in an scored runs when others had done well and has gradually gotten better. Apart from his debut 100, Clarke has never done anything greatly special.

You'd have to also ignore the home series against SA, the home series against NZ, the recent series against NZ... basically the last two years of his career when he's been in good form, funny that.

And it's a ludicrous argument in fact, because it basically implies that any Australian batsmen batting below Ponting in the last decade or so basically had it easy the vast majority of his time because he scored most of his runs after the other batsmen had scored. Purely because the top order of Hayden, Langer (especially because of these two), Ponting and Martyn/Hussey were so consistent and so profilgate, No5 and No6 would usually be walking out at 3/250 or 4/300, not 3/100 and 4/150 and at risk of going to all out 200-250 (a situation that Clarke has very consistently found himself in over the last 18 months and been increasingly consistent at). It's hardly their fault the players above them have scored heavily, and what are you gonna do - tell them to not score, so you can "prove" that you can score in tighter situations?

So while it is fair to say Pietersen has had a better career than Clarke thus far the logic you use is very poor indeed.

 

[andyc]

What Spark said. Very shaky logic.

 

[Sir Alex]

Australia has never needed clarke more than in the last three years. Particularly with all the retirements and hussey and Ponting ordinary. He's stepped into the role of being their mainstay splendidly.

 

[Spark]

Australia has never needed clarke more than in the last three years. Particularly with all the retirements and hussey and Ponting ordinary. He's stepped into the role of being their mainstay splendidly.

Ponting hasn't been that bad. He's been pretty unlucky TBH, lots of runouts and hooks to fine leg. He's still averaged pretty decently.

However you will see that if both Ponting and Clarke don't have a good day then the chances of one of our all-too-regular collapses increases by a lot.

 

[wfdu_ben91]

You'd have to also ignore the home series against SA, the home series against NZ, the recent series against NZ... basically the last two years of his career when he's been in good form, funny that.

And it's a ludicrous argument in fact, because it basically implies that any Australian batsmen batting below Ponting in the last decade or so basically had it easy the vast majority of his time because he scored most of his runs after the other batsmen had scored. Purely because the top order of Hayden, Langer (especially because of these two), Ponting and Martyn/Hussey were so consistent and so profilgate, No5 and No6 would usually be walking out at 3/250 or 4/300, not 3/100 and 4/150 and at risk of going to all out 200-250 (a situation that Clarke has very consistently found himself in over the last 18 months and been increasingly consistent at). It's hardly their fault the players above them have scored heavily, and what are you gonna do - tell them to not score, so you can "prove" that you can score in tighter situations?

So while it is fair to say Pietersen has had a better career than Clarke thus far the logic you use is very poor indeed.

It's not a ludicrous argument because it's been so blatantly obvious watching the course of Clarke's career. After coming back into the Australian lineup, he had about 4-5 series' in a row where he scored heavy when Australia weren't in trouble and that beefed up his average big time. His had opportunities to do special things, but yet has always seemed to fail when it counts the most.

 

[Matt79]

Like Adelaide in 06/07? Or India in 04?

 

[Spark]

It's not a ludicrous argument because it's been so blatantly obvious watching the course of Clarke's career. After coming back into the Australian lineup, he had about 4-5 series' in a row where he scored heavy when Australia weren't in trouble and that beefed up his average big time. His had opportunities to do special things, but yet has always seemed to fail when it counts the most.

What's your definition of "counts the most"?

Chasing 500 against Flintoff bowling thunderbolts? That certainly counts, because it's impossible...

There have been plenty of occasions over the last few years where Clarke has top scored by some distance in a total of 200, 250. Gabba 08/09 - comes to mind. Plenty of occasions where he's come in at 3/100 or played through 4/150. IE this season Hobart, Basin Reserve. Edgbaston (no, you can't ignore the Ashes. That is definitely where it counts the most...) where he came in at 3/150 which quickly became 4/160, but effectively 4/60.

No, he hasn't done it every time, but no one can ever do it every time.

 

[wfdu_ben91]

Like Adelaide in 06/07? Or India in 04?

When Ponting and Hayden got tons before Clarke came in?

India 2008 @ Perth - Gets out for 81 instead going onto make a big hundred and win Australia the match.
South Africa 2008 @ MCG - Gets out for 30 odd in the second innings when Australia are under pressure of losing their first home series in 15-20 years.
England 2009 @ Lords - Done well to get as much as he did, but had he gone that extra mile and gotten Australia home (when we had 4 wickets left to get 150 odd) then it would've been a case of Clarke becoming a great batsman instead of a good one.
England 2009 @ The Oval - Fails in both innings and gets out to a really cheap shot in the 1st innings when it is do or die for Australia's Ashes campaign.

 

[Matt79]

So Australia weren't in trouble in Adelaide, that's what you're saying?

 

[wfdu_ben91]

So Australia weren't in trouble in Adelaide, that's what you're saying?

4/260 on the flattest pitch in Australia.

 

[Spark]

When Ponting and Hayden got tons before Clarke came in?

Yeah, and 100 behind the follow-on target at 5-down...

India 2008 @ Perth - Gets out for 81 instead going onto make a big hundred and win Australia the match.

I will point out when he got out it was 8-250 chasing 415... I don't think him getting a 100 or not made too much difference.

South Africa 2008 @ MCG - Gets out for 30 odd in the second innings when Australia are under pressure of losing their first home series in 15-20 years.

After making 88 not out in the first innings which pushed Australia from 5/220 and looking like all out 250 to almost 400.

That defeat was most definitely NOT his fault.

England 2009 @ Lords - Done well to get as much as he did, but had he gone that extra mile and gotten Australia home (when we had 4 wickets left to get 150 odd) then it would've been a case of Clarke becoming a great batsman instead of a good one.

Indeed, it would have made him Bradman-esque. Unfortunately...

Moreover, did you see how Flintoff was bowling? It's a miracle that both he AND Johnson managed to last 5 overs, don't think they would both have managed the two sessions required.

England 2009 @ The Oval - Fails in both innings and gets out to a really cheap shot in the 1st innings when it is do or die for Australia's Ashes campaign.

It was a terrible shot, yes. But how is 3/90 any worse than 4/160 and 100 behind?

Now shall we talk about the 168 after 4/160? The 166 after 3/90? The 98 out of a total of 200? The aforementioned 103*? The 138 that was the centrepiece of the first innings total in last year's Sydney test, allowing Australia to get to almost 450 after being 5/160 and 6/240, which allowed them to both keep the ranking and gave the necessary momentum to have the confidence to win in the return series?

I'm not saying he's perfect. He shouldn't have charged Swann at Lord's to that particular ball (but I doubt it would have mattered). He shouldn't have chipped Broad to short cover. I will readily admit he gives his wicket away far too easily BUT he is becoming very good at digging us out of a hole.

 

[andyc]

Let's try and keep this on topic guys, there's a thread already for discussion about Clarke. Am happy to move posts from here to there if people want to keep up this discussion, but otherwise let's try keep to KP

 

[Matt79]

Clarke's scorecards for:
Bangalore 04 (151). Gilly scored with him, but came in at 4-149, hardly dominating.

Nagpur 04. Came in at a respectable 4-238, but was last man out at 398. Ponied up again in the second innings.

Brisbane 04. Came in at 4-128 and produced a brilliant ton on debut in Australia.

Lords 05. Top-scored in the match with 91 in the second innings.

Adelaide 06. Yeah, it was a flat deck, and Ponting also tonned up and Hussey scored big to. Nevertheless, Clarke came in at 4-257, with Australia still requiring another 100 runs merely to avoid the follow-on. He batted for 5 hours and with his captain made Amazing Adelaide possible.

Brisbane 07. 145*, admittedly after the rest of the order had fired as well and the bowling of the Lankans was struggling, but its still a big unbeaten 100 against a bowling line up including Murali.

Melbourne 07. Top scored in the second innings after coming in at 3-139.

Perth 08. Top scored, easily, in the second dig after coming in at 3-117. You say he should have gone on and tonned up and won the game for Australia, I say that he and Johnson were the only thing that made our second innings respectable.

Mohali 08. Top-scored in our woeful second innings with 69 when Haddin (34) was the only other bloke to get past 30.

Brisbane 08. Scored 98 out of the team's total of 214.

Adelaide 08. Came in at 3-155, was out for 110 with the score 6/428.

Sydney 09. Scored 138, coming in at 3-109, leaving at 7-379.

Lord 09. Scored 136, coming in at 3-78 in the second dig.

Edgbaston 09. Scored 103*, coming in at 3-137 in the second dig.

Hobart 10. Scored 166. Sure, Ponting dominated with a double century, but who was keeping him company almost the entire time, having come to the crease with the innings teetering at 3-71?

Sorry for the multiple links, but the contention seemed to be that Clarke only scored runs when Australia was in control anyway, which as these examples show is simply wrong. I've listed a lot of innings here, but I left out the big scores he got when Australia were already in charge.

 

[Spark]

you seem to have made 137 into 317

and should point out that the mohali 69 probably would have been 70* had he not gotten out (last man)

yeah, move it andy.

 

[GuyFromLancs]

Clarke better then Pietersen? Most people forget that most of Clarke's runs (barring last years Ashes) have come when other batsman have scored heavily and it's not as if England's bowling attack was great either.

For the better part of Pietersen's career he has carried England's batting and has basically be the man in batting since the very day that he walked into the English side. Clarke on the otherhand has been nechered through an ongoing process where he came in an scored runs when others had done well and has gradually gotten better. Apart from his debut 100, Clarke has never done anything greatly special.

Yes, yes and yes again.

Pitersen > Clarke any day for me.

-Pietersen has carried the mantle of being a South African batsman who has already forced himself into England's all time XI in 5 short years,

-had the burden of being England's only genuinly world class batsman

-played most of his tests in seaming English tracks

-averages a fraction under 50 despite a prolonged slump,

-maintains a Lara-esq strike rate

-has more centuries in exactly the same amount of tests despite playing for a poorer team

-is a better ODI player,

-is better to watch

-etc etc etc.

 

[Spark]

-Pietersen has carried the mantle of being a South African batsman who has already forced himself into England's all time XI in 5 short years,

All-time?!

 

[Matt79]

Yes, yes and yes again.

Pitersen > Clarke any day for me.

-Pietersen has carried the mantle of being a South African batsman who has already forced himself into England's all time XI in 5 short years,

-had the burden of being England's only genuinly world class batsman

-played most of his tests in seaming English tracks

-averages a fraction under 50 despite a prolonged slump,

-maintains a Lara-esq strike rate

-has more centuries in exactly the same amount of tests despite playing for a poorer team

-is a better ODI player,

-is better to watch

-etc etc etc.

Seaming English decks like Cardiff, Lords, The Oval??

Maybe "the poorer team", which incidently has beaten Australia in 2 of the last 3 series played between the two, is partially a consequence of KP not being as good as Clarke?

 

[Spark]

Seaming English decks like Cardiff, Lords, The Oval??

Maybe "the poorer team", which incidently has beaten Australia in 2 of the last 3 series played between the two, is partially a consequence of KP not being as good as Clarke?

Would say that Pietersen definitely well in front of Clarke in 05, but that's because Clarke wasn't really up to it (this was before he was dropped). And Pietersen basically didn't play in 09.

Overall though I don't see too much wrong with that post, apart from the all-time bit (), and the "prolonged slump" bit (you want to see a prolonged slump? Hussey through the Aus 08-09 season right up until the Oval...). Otherwise it's mostly a case of personal preference. He's English, he prefers Pietersen, I'm Australian, I prefer Clarke

 

[GuyFromLancs]

All-time?!

Accoring to Cricinfo, yes.