View Poll Results: Who should replace Steve Waugh in the Aussie lineup ?

Voters
23. You may not vote on this poll
  • Darren Lehmann

    6 26.09%
  • Michael Clarke

    12 52.17%
  • Martin Love

    4 17.39%
  • Brad Hodge

    1 4.35%
  • Michael Hussey

    0 0%
  • Shane Watson

    0 0%
  • Marcus North

    0 0%
  • other

    0 0%
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 54

Thread: Who should replace Steve Waugh ??

  1. #16
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Mr Mxyzptlk's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Trinidad and Tobago (Trinidad)
    Posts
    36,795
    Originally posted by Rik
    Actually can anyone give me a valid reason why Clarke should get picked? Especially over players like Hussey and Love and Lehmann? Not only is his record inferior, he's also totally unproven.
    Clarke is not totally unproven. He's batted beautifully in his ODI chances. Yes, he's not yet to play a Test, but no one does before they debut (to be completely obvious :P).

    I agree that he's not a guaranteed success at Test level, but he certainly deserves the chance to prove if he is.
    Sreesanth said, "Next ball he was beaten and I said, 'is this the King Charles Lara? Who is this impostor, moving around nervously? I should have kept my mouth shut for the next ball - mind you, it was a length ball - Lara just pulled it over the church beyond the boundary! He is a true legend."


  2. #17
    Rik
    Rik is offline
    Cricketer Of The Year Rik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Shropshire, England
    Posts
    8,353
    Originally posted by Mr Mxyzptlk
    Clarke is not totally unproven. He's batted beautifully in his ODI chances. Yes, he's not yet to play a Test, but no one does before they debut (to be completely obvious :P).

    I agree that he's not a guaranteed success at Test level, but he certainly deserves the chance to prove if he is.
    He is totally unproven in that on the few times when he's had pressure put on him in ODIs he's failed, and also since when did OD cricket bare any relation to Test cricket? Just look at Michael Vaughan for a lesson that England still haven't learned.

    Clarke hasn't even proven himself in domestic FC cricket, so why should he get into the Test team over people who have?
    "Age is just a stupid number"

    20...that's a rather big number :(:(:(

  3. #18
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Mr Mxyzptlk's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Trinidad and Tobago (Trinidad)
    Posts
    36,795
    Rik have you actually watched Michael Clarke bat?

    He's got superb technique and I don't see any reason why he shouldn't get a chance in Test cricket. He hasn't done anything wrong for Australia so far.

    I don't think you'll ever give Clarke credit... like Harmison.

  4. #19
    Eyes not spreadsheets marc71178's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    England
    Posts
    57,571
    Originally posted by Hero_Don
    I doubt Love will get in the team ahead of Clarke
    Why not?

    He was ahead of Clarke in the pecking order and in his Tests so far averages 46.60.

    Tell exactly what he's done wrong for Australia to relegate him below some wet behind the ears kid who doesn't seem to be repeating last season's form?
    marc71178 - President and founding member of AAAS - we don't only appreciate when he does well, but also when he's not quite so good!

    Anyone want to join the Society?

    Beware the evils of Kit-Kats - they're immoral apparently.


  5. #20
    Cricket Web Vice Administrator
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Kent, UK
    Posts
    7,190
    I agree with what Liam said, M.Hussey has to be one of the unluckest players in Australia he regularly scores hatfuls of runs each season and still about 5 players are ahead of him in the pecking order.

    Personally iam sure if Lehmann is fit he will play, like someone said his had a fantastic 2003 and it wasn't his fault he got a injury.

    However just food for thought, what's the chances of Lehmann and (Fill Name Here) both playing? Katich has had a good start to Test cricket but alot of people seem to have it in for him, if Lehmann was back they wouldn't need Katich's bowling as much as they do now and could someone knock him out of the side on his batting performances alone?


    IMO Lehmann and Katich should play.

  6. #21
    Banned Pratters's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Kolkata, India
    Posts
    20,793
    Ok I joined the forum late for being a part of this discussion in the beginnin gbut have strong views on this. Lehmann has fought for years till he has got the chance. So he will be retained if he is not injured. There is no debate on that I think, no matter how much people talk of Clarke n Love having the possibility of getting a chance ahead of him.

    Among Clarke and Love, I would go with Love. Clarke has huge talent but whatever I have seen of him (in tour game vs India and his record apart from one dayers), he throws his wicket away which separates test players from players.

    Love is a good player, nothing awesome, but he sticks on which is important. Love has fought long for his chance too an gets precedence over the likes of Hussey too(remember Australia A scores too)

    Clarke may even be below Hussey right now. Its funny how he ha garnered so much talk by even the commentators. He has talent but has not fine tuned it till now. And he is fighting with good players who could make test elevens of any other country barring maybe India and South Africa.

    Clarke will have to fight his way into the team.

    As far as Katich goes, he will be dropped IMO if he doesnt perform in the next 2-3 tests.

  7. #22
    International Coach
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    13,278
    Originally posted by Mr Mxyzptlk
    he's not yet to play a Test
    Double negative. Apparently Clarke has already played a test. :O :P
    MSN - tomhalsey123@hotmail.com

    Manchester United FC: 20 Times

    R.I.P. Sledger's Signature, 2004-2008

  8. #23
    Hall of Fame Member age_master's Avatar
    Plasmanaut on Fire Champion!
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Sydney, NSW, Australia
    Posts
    15,777
    well i think you are all WRONG :P:P:P


    i reakon we will play 5 bowlers in sri lanka, with McGrath and Warne returning to the side, if we play 4, i reakon macgill will miss out.


    as for the batsmen...

    Love - seems to have fallen out of favor for whatever reason - i would have thought if he was likley to be recalled than he would have captained Australia A

    Hodge - nah

    Lehmann - will have to play well to get onto the Sri Lanka tour - hes a good player of spin though with works to his advantage in Sir Lanka and India. he is old however and very slow in the field - and Katich bowls better than him

    Katich - hasn't really done anythingt wrong thus far (apart from a couple of catches) but is batting pretty well, bowling well and his feilding apart from those catches has been excellent

    Clarke - 22, like 6 years younger than the rest - big advantage for him, hes in pretty useful from with the bat, should have batted on vs India, they were never going to go for a slog. great fielder - that catch vs Zimbabwe was amazing - and a handy bowler. he fits into the Australian side well - it was pointed out that with the massive re arrangement of the field since ME Waughs retirement and Warnes banning, hayden and Potning have been in the slips, which means that the cover, gully and mid wicket area's are weakened, with Warne back, one of them will still be ing the slips, Clarke can fill the gap on the other side of the pitch. he is also an aggressive bat (lehmann is too) wich means that he will fit in well with the batting lineup. named as vc and skipper of Australia A and clearly in the sights of the selectors who with the aging team are no doubt looking into the future.

    as for coming in under pressure and not performing, well thats about the dumbest things ive heard you say rik:

    his lowest scores -

    1 in teh 7th ODI vs WI, the series was over, and he came in after a big partnership...

    2 - vs India in India off 2 balls, out of the 2nd last ball of the innings

    2 - vs NZ in India - again coming in after a pretty useful partnership - batting @ 7

    never really under pressure though

    and when he has been -

    on debut vs England - always pressure on debut, made a solid 39* in good time to guids Australia home

    vs NZ in India - made 70 off 80 after coming in at 3/54 chasing 258

    and ofcourse the TVS cup final where he made an average looking total into a good one with 44* of 28 balls than Got Badani and Dravid with his bowling if a final like this against india in india isn't pressure than i dont know what is
    Member of CW Green
    Kerry O'Keefe - Worlds funniest Commentator

  9. #24
    Eyes not spreadsheets marc71178's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    England
    Posts
    57,571
    Originally posted by age_master
    Clarke - 22, like 6 years younger than the rest - big advantage for him, hes in pretty useful from with the bat,
    He is? Does that explain his pretty ordinary 2003/04 season then?



    Originally posted by age_master
    should have batted on vs India
    Instead of getting out for 8 - useful form that!




    Originally posted by age_master
    and a handy bowler.
    Handy? By whose standards.

    If you really think he's in pretty useful batting form and a handy bowler, I guess you're now happy to accept mediocrity from the Aussie side.

  10. #25
    Hall of Fame Member age_master's Avatar
    Plasmanaut on Fire Champion!
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Sydney, NSW, Australia
    Posts
    15,777
    Originally posted by marc71178
    Instead of getting out for 8 - useful form that!
    umm he made 38* and 131* i have no idea what your talking about....



    prettyy handy bt Australian standards - hes only a part timer, and doesn;t really bowl in the longer form of the game.

    as for his batting form, for him its useful, ie hes not in top for for him

  11. #26
    International Debutant iamdavid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    2,112
    Originally posted by Rich2001
    I agree with what Liam said, M.Hussey has to be one of the unluckest players in Australia he regularly scores hatfuls of runs each season and still about 5 players are ahead of him in the pecking order.
    To be fair Hussey really hasnt delivered at Pura Cup level for 3 years , he's been averaging around the 35-40 mark & has scored just one hundred since 2001-02 , which for a player of his clear ability is just not good enough , his ING form has always been superb & everyone knows how well he's done in England.

    But really if you want to play test cricket for Australia then you have to make runs in the Australian FC competition , and Hussey simply hasnt done that to the best of his ability.

    There was a stage when he was pretty close to a test call up , during 2000/01 against the West Indies Hayden was hardly setting the world on fire & people everywhere were praising Hussey's maturity.

    But then Hayden made 549 runs in India & Hussey went down hill , the rest is history.

  12. #27
    International Debutant iamdavid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    2,112
    Still a long way to go , but I reckon something like this for the test squad to tour Sri Lanka.

    1.M.L.Hayden
    2.J.L.Langer
    3.R.T.Ponting
    4.D.R.Martyn
    5.S.M.Katich
    6.D.S.Lehmann
    7.A.C.Gilchrist
    8.S.K.Warne
    9.B.Lee (????)
    10.J.N.Gillespie
    11.G.D.McGrath(if fit , Williams if not)
    12.A.J.Bichel
    13.S.C.G.MacGill / G.B.Hogg
    14.M.L.Love / M.J.Clarke (slight possibility of both)
    15.N.W.Bracken

  13. #28
    Rik
    Rik is offline
    Cricketer Of The Year Rik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Shropshire, England
    Posts
    8,353
    Originally posted by Mr Mxyzptlk
    Rik have you actually watched Michael Clarke bat?

    He's got superb technique and I don't see any reason why he shouldn't get a chance in Test cricket. He hasn't done anything wrong for Australia so far.

    I don't think you'll ever give Clarke credit... like Harmison.
    I've seen him bat once, didn't look bad, didn't look amazingly attractive.

    I'm sorry but how can I give someone credit who has performed in a basically pressure-free zone and as soon as he comes in when Australia are in trouble, he gets out for 1? He's obviously still got a hell of a lot to learn, there are many players who are more experianced and, at the moment, are more likely to perform than Clarke is.

    As for Harmison, if he performed against a team not located in the bottom 2 positions in the Test Championship table, then I would give him credit. But he hasn't, so I won't. Shock horror, did I just manage to dispell all those "you'll never rate him" rumours? And the ones about "he's done well but you still don't rate him?"

    I think I just have

  14. #29
    Rik
    Rik is offline
    Cricketer Of The Year Rik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Shropshire, England
    Posts
    8,353
    Originally posted by age_master
    umm he made 38* and 131* i have no idea what your talking about....
    ummmm MJ Clarke c Taibu b Hondo 8 ring any bells?

    (Marc got the games mixed up)
    Last edited by Rik; 02-01-2004 at 07:24 PM.

  15. #30
    Hall of Fame Member age_master's Avatar
    Plasmanaut on Fire Champion!
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Sydney, NSW, Australia
    Posts
    15,777
    Originally posted by Rik
    I've seen him bat once, didn't look bad, didn't look amazingly attractive.

    I'm sorry but how can I give someone credit who has performed in a basically pressure-free zone and as soon as he comes in when Australia are in trouble, he gets out for 1? He's obviously still got a hell of a lot to learn, there are many players who are more experianced and, at the moment, are more likely to perform than Clarke is.

    yeah hes got a hell of alot to learn, but hes learning and doing well while hes learning, and hes performed under pressure a a fair bit.

    and to quote myself (just for rik)
    as for coming in under pressure and not performing, well thats about the dumbest things ive heard you say rik

    his lowest scores -

    1 in teh 7th ODI vs WI, the series was over, and he came in after a big partnership...

    2 - vs India in India off 2 balls, out of the 2nd last ball of the innings

    2 - vs NZ in India - again coming in after a pretty useful partnership - batting @ 7

    never really under pressure though

    and when he has been -

    on debut vs England - always pressure on debut, made a solid 39* in good time to guids Australia home

    vs NZ in India - made 70 off 80 after coming in at 3/54 chasing 258

    and ofcourse the TVS cup final where he made an average looking total into a good one with 44* of 28 balls than Got Badani and Dravid with his bowling if a final like this against india in india isn't pressure than i dont know what is

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •