Would Stuart Broad make the world's strongest XI?

[CWB304]

Clarke's the best batsman in the world at the moment. So he's my first choice batsman. There's no doubt in my mind at all.

No, not even close. And I like Clarke.

 

[Prince EWS]

Yeah, no way is Clarke better than Sangakkara, Kallis or Chanderpaul. He's in my World XI but that's as far as it goes.

 

[benchmark00]

Yeah, no way is Clarke better than Sangakkara, Kallis or Chanderpaul. He's in my World XI but that's as far as it goes.

Out of those three you listed, only Sangakkara comes close to Clarke as a batsman at the moment. But it's not surprising you have listed the other two, because you place importance on different things to me when rating batsmen. It's why you rate Kallis better than Ponting... somehow.

Clarke is not a soulless accumulator. He brings his team mates into the game more. There's more to his batting than scoring runs, it's how he does it and how he works with his batting partner. Over the course of the next 6-12 months, watch him go ahead of the pack.

 

[vic_orthdox]

I see where you're coming from, but Clarke to me is just as likely to go awol in his next series as go nuts again.

 

[benchmark00]

I see where you're coming from, but Clarke to me is just as likely to go awol in his next series as go nuts again.

I think that's more the old Clarke. He's had the ability to do what he's done over the last 6-12 months for ages, but now he's doing it more consistently. He's only going to get even more consistent for mine. So right now, he's my #1.

 

[Spikey]

Clarke's the best batsman in the world at the moment. So he's my first choice batsman. There's no doubt in my mind at all.

'I will tear you limb from limb ****'

 

[BoyBrumby]

If I were selecting a World XI, I'd baulk at a middle order of Younis, Kallis & Chanders, undeniably great as they are. They're all essentially accumulators (with at least another in Cook opening) and, if time were of the essence, I'd have doubts about their willingness to press the accelerator.

Case to include both Clarke & de Villiers if one's picking an actual team rather than just the best #3-#5 currently, IMHO.

 

[akilana]

EDIT: Whilst ABdV and Prince did bat South Africa out of a dangerous position, they then put South Africa back in a dangerous position by gifting their wickets at a terrible time with truly dismal dismissals, precipitating one of the most inexplicable collapses I have ever seen in Test cricket. So that's not the best example.

rubbish.

It's like saying Clarke played wonderfuly to rescue Australia in the first innings but he flopped in the second innings which put them back in dangerous position; therefore it's a bad example to bring this(1st innings hundred) up as one of his rescue-acts.

 

[akilana]

On the rescuing point, aside from that one innings from Clarke, he hasn't exactly done that a lot of times. Neither has AB, mind you, but don't make it out as if Clarke has him "comfortably covered". If you want an example of AB batting us out of trouble, I'd say look at the second Test in the New Zealand tour. We were rocking at 88/6 and in danger of giving them a reasonable lead from which they could try and apply pressure on us. AB comes out and plays a calm and composed 80, which gives us a fairly sizable lead from where we go on and win the match. I also remember a recent innings against AUS where him and Ashwell Prince batted South Africa out of a dangerous position. I can't see how you can say Clarke is far ahead of AB in this regard.

Also, I'd argue AB's ramming home an advantage skills are far superior to Clarke's. Clarke isn't a particularly fast scorer (which is why he isn't much of a T20 player) and doesn't have the sort of gears that AB does. When AB decides to, he can score at up to a SR of 200 and completely decimate an attack.

In my opinion, over the last five years or so, AB has shown himself to be a complete batsman for all situations. I don't mean to disparage Clarke, I actually think he is a very fine batsman and I love watching him bat when is in form. I just don't think he is ahead of de Villiers.

AB has played many rescue acts but no wonder they are easilly forgotten.
Remember him guiding his team to safety in his first series with a 50 which allowed them to stay alive in the series.(?)
and a couple of more samples
1st Test: South Africa v New Zealand at Centurion, Apr 15-19, 2006 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo
2nd Test: Sri Lanka v South Africa at Colombo (PSS), Aug 4-8, 2006 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo
2nd Test: England v South Africa at Leeds, Jul 18-21, 2008 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo
1st Test: South Africa v Australia at Johannesburg, Feb 26-Mar 2, 2009 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

Also agree with you on the whole. AB > Clarke for me.

 

[Uppercut]

Yeah I think I'd take AB. Close though. It'll be interesting to see how he goes this summer, it's been a while since he's faced as good an attack as England's.

 

[Jarquis]

Unfortunately Bell's dodgy run has happened to come more recently

Again, though, I'm not going on averages. The sample size is sufficiently small that you're much better off with going by the "eye metric".

In alien conditions against an attack really well suited to such conditions..

 

[Cricketismylife]

If you read her post properly you'd see that she was basing that team entirely on averages over the last 12 months. That's not her side; it's a short-term statistically based side.

Ye sorry that's my fault. I must admit I'm anti Hafeez the batsman, so I jumped on it when I saw his name there.

I still disagree with him being a respectable pick though. He wouldnt come close to the side for me, I'd much rather get a quality number 3 or even 4 who cant make the middle order of the World 11, eg Trott/Amla to open than have Hafeez.

 

[Cricketismylife]

If I were selecting a World XI, I'd baulk at a middle order of Younis, Kallis & Chanders, undeniably great as they are. They're all essentially accumulators (with at least another in Cook opening) and, if time were of the essence, I'd have doubts about their willingness to press the accelerator.

Case to include both Clarke & de Villiers if one's picking an actual team rather than just the best #3-#5 currently, IMHO.

Kallis has stepped up his scoring rate recently, and I think Younis and Clarke score at a similar rate anyway, so I don't think its that much of an issue.

 

[Cricketismylife]

Out of those three you listed, only Sangakkara comes close to Clarke as a batsman at the moment. But it's not surprising you have listed the other two, because you place importance on different things to me when rating batsmen. It's why you rate Kallis better than Ponting... somehow.

Clarke is not a soulless accumulator. He brings his team mates into the game more. There's more to his batting than scoring runs, it's how he does it and how he works with his batting partner. Over the course of the next 6-12 months, watch him go ahead of the pack.

Disagree with this completely. Chanderpaul is definitely ahead of Clarke, both in terms of current form and career wise. It is beyond belief the number of times that he's had to come in under huge pressure with West Indies 30-3 and has repeatedly resisted the opposition bowlers. Contrary to what has been said in the media, Chanderpaul isnt a matchwinner not because he scores slowly or is selfish, but simply because the rest of the batting line up is so weak. You could replace Viv with Chanderpaul and it wouldnt make a difference to West Indies fortunes. One player can only have so much of an influence on a batting line up. He was far and away the best batsman in the recent Windies Aus series, but I don't know what he can do when his top 3 of Barath, Braithwaite and Powell, and his number 6 and 7 of Deonarine and Baugh make very few runs.

Clarke is a fine player no doubt, but he hasnt scored as heavily or against as challenging attacks, or in as many pressure situations as Chanderpaul has recently or in terms of his overall career. His innings against SA was amazing though.

 

[Jono]

Surely the point is whoever you choose, be it Clarke or AB, there is not that much difference between them?

Anyone saying Clarke is miles ahead of AB clearly is either anti-South African, or more likely, anti AB's pop singing:

 

[NUFAN]

Really, he had a good series against India but so have loads have other people and he's played a special innings against SA but on the whole he's averaged 31 against WI ,42 against SA and 41 against SL. No doubt he's turned his form around since the Ashes but best batsman in the world, not for me.

Australia has been involved in many low scoring games recently which needs to be considered when just looking at those averages. I guess you could say the games were low scoring due to poor batting and it could be true to some extent but its very noticeable that we've played on pitches that offered a fair bit of help to the bowlers. Not to say other countries haven't.

I don't like Clarke's amazing performance against India to be completely ignored either. He came in to bat at difficult situations on a good number of innings and was often the catalyst in changing the game in Australia's favour. Ponting and Hussey were both great during the series, but its clear that they played supporting roles to Clarke.

Pup's batting in WI was a bit of a let down but he still had a good series, given his wickets, catching and good captaincy.

 

[zaremba]

Newsflash: Broad's bowling average has now dipped below 30 for the first time.

 

[Cabinet96]

Went below 30 for a while earlier today actually.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Shame in a way the SA series doesn't have a test at Trent Bridge, imagine Anderson, Broad, Steyn and Philanderer having fun there. Be awesome to watch.

 

[Jacknife]

Shame in a way the SA series doesn't have a test at Trent Bridge, imagine Anderson, Broad, Steyn and Philanderer having fun there. Be awesome to watch.

Not if it's as flat as it's been today.