• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Who's going to consolidate their place first

Matt79

Global Moderator
It occurs to me that both England and Australia have a young batsmen who have almost equal numbers convinced that they're future captains and champions, or that they're simply not good enough - Ian Bell and Michael Clarke.

Do people see both these players coming good as consistent top-drawer players, and if so, who's more likely to get there first - say maybe in time for the coming Ashes series?
 

adharcric

International Coach
Ian Bell will consolidate his place in the English side first because English batsmen won't offer him as much competition, but Michael Clarke will consolidate his place in world cricket first because he's a better batsmen. Actually, I'm not so sure.
 

oz_fan

International Regular
I doubt Michael Clarke will have cemented his spot by the Ashes. Once Martyn is gone he'll have a better chance but there are a couple of players coming through like Cosgrove or even Jaques if they move him down the order who could take the number 4 if Clarke doesn't return to his best.
 

archie mac

International Coach
I really think Clarke needs to work on his game. He seems to have little idea how to play on a spinning low bouncing pitch. His idea of stepping away and hitting through the off-side seems schoolboyish:@
 

FaaipDeOiad

Hall of Fame Member
adharcric said:
Ian Bell will consolidate his place in the English side first because English batsmen won't offer him as much competition, but Michael Clarke will consolidate his place in world cricket first because he's a better batsmen. Actually, I'm not so sure.
Agreed on both counts.

One thing that is worth remembering for Clarke is that he is already a top class batsmen in ODIs. Having played plenty of games, he averages almost 45. They are similarly advanced in test cricket, but the fact that Clarke is already a sure pick and probably a contender for a world XI in one form of the game obviously impacts on his reputation, and how he has "consolidated his place in world cricket".
 

FaaipDeOiad

Hall of Fame Member
archie mac said:
I really think Clarke needs to work on his game. He seems to have little idea how to play on a spinning low bouncing pitch. His idea of stepping away and hitting through the off-side seems schoolboyish:@
Obviously it was a bit cavalier, but how often is Clarke going to run into a pitch that bounces that low? It's not exactly a common occurance for an Australian player, he just has to learn that when the ball is keeping low he has to play forward. When a pitch is turning but has true bounce, his ability to go back and play aggressive shots against anything that drops short is an advantage over most players.
 

archie mac

International Coach
FaaipDeOiad said:
Obviously it was a bit cavalier, but how often is Clarke going to run into a pitch that bounces that low? It's not exactly a common occurance for an Australian player, he just has to learn that when the ball is keeping low he has to play forward. When a pitch is turning but has true bounce, his ability to go back and play aggressive shots against anything that drops short is an advantage over most players.
I agree, it will not happen often, it is just that he was dismissed in India on a similiar pitch in the very same manner. Which to me equates to him not having learned anything, which is a worry for a batsman of his class.

As well on both occasions Aust. were in trouble and needed him to lend support to the 'in' batsman.
 

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
archie mac said:
I agree, it will not happen often, it is just that he was dismissed in India on a similiar pitch in the very same manner. Which to me equates to him not having learned anything, which is a worry for a batsman of his class.

As well on both occasions Aust. were in trouble and needed him to lend support to the 'in' batsman.
Hes still needs to work on his shot selection..
 

archie mac

International Coach
aussie said:
Hes still needs to work on his shot selection..
Was that not the main reason (and not scoring runs) he was dropped in the first place?

He is one of those frustrating players of whom you think if only I had his talent I could be one of the greats of the game.
 

BoyBrumby

Englishman
Speaking as an England fan I'll be pleased to see Clarke in the Oz middle-order come next (English) winter. Looks to be the more naturally gifted of the two players, but always seems as tho he could throw his wicket away with a daft shot. He's young, but not that young now.

Against that, if I were an Australian fan (ooh, I feel queasy at the thought! :D) I'd be equally chuffed to see Bell in our middle order (particularly with Messers Pietersen & Collingwood for company) as he seems a bit light mentally and has real issues with spin. Unfortunately we don't have the surfeit of alternatives Oz seem to. One option would be Cook to open & Tres or (more likely) Strauss to drop down, another is Shah who looks more prepared to stand up to a bit of the verbals but who was pretty rank in the ODIs.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
And how does Shah's being rank in the ODIs matter in the slightest? He played well in the Test, as I hoped he might. He should never be anywhere near the ODI side.
Of course, so Bell on debut played well, too.
Bell has still to convince me, but unlike some I don't feel there's any issues with his temperament (the comparisons to Ramprakash are ridiculous) and nor do I feel he's got massive problems with spin - any more than, say, Strauss or Flintoff.
 

howardj

International Coach
I fear for Clarkie if he fails in this current Test Match. For batsmen, the general rule is that if you're dropped twice, that is all.
 

dontcloseyoureyes

BARNES OUT
howardj said:
I fear for Clarkie if he fails in this current Test Match. For batsmen, the general rule is that if you're dropped twice, that is all.
Martyn? But yeah, it's true.

I think it's one of his problems lies in the fact that when he was dropped, he wasn't dropped dropped. As in, he was still playing ODI's and being pretty successful at it playing the way he has always played, which really has led him to not really learning anything from being dropped. He's gotta learn to tighten up, and for gods sake, he has to know that if he doesn't soemtime soon it could be 5 years+ before he puts on a baggy green again.
 

Craig

World Traveller
howardj said:
I fear for Clarkie if he fails in this current Test Match. For batsmen, the general rule is that if you're dropped twice, that is all.
How many times did that happen to Langer and Hayden?
 

open365

International Vice-Captain
I think Bell's already consolidated his place in the test side already, i don't see Fletch dropping him any time soon.
 

BoyBrumby

Englishman
open365 said:
I think Bell's already consolidated his place in the test side already, i don't see Fletch dropping him any time soon.
Dunno. It looked like he was gone for the first test v Pakistan until Vaughan's knee reprived him. Had a decent enough series over there, but was decidedly average v India. Colly, Cook & Shah all did rather better than him so I wouldn't be at all surprised to see him go.

If you take out the easy runs v Bangladesh his test record starts to look very ordinary indeed. No disrepect to them intended.
 

open365

International Vice-Captain
BoyBrumby said:
Dunno. It looked like he was gone for the first test v Pakistan until Vaughan's knee reprived him. Had a decent enough series over there, but was decidedly average v India. Colly, Cook & Shah all did rather better than him so I wouldn't be at all surprised to see him go.

If you take out the easy runs v Bangladesh his test record starts to look very ordinary indeed. No disrepect to them intended.
Rubbish, Cook and Shah played 3 tests between them, dropping Bell for either of those two would make me think Fletch had been drugged. As for Collingwood however..
 

BoyBrumby

Englishman
open365 said:
Rubbish, Cook and Shah played 3 tests between them, dropping Bell for either of those two would make me think Fletch had been drugged. As for Collingwood however..
In which Cook made a century on debut & Shah scored 5 runs less in his one test than Bell scored in three!

Even leaving those two aside we still have Tres & (potentially) Vaughan to come back. Bell's neck's on the chopping block for mine.
 

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
And yet again the underperformer of the middle order who played all winter is guaranteed his spot?
 

open365

International Vice-Captain
BoyBrumby said:
In which Cook made a century on debut & Shah scored 5 runs less in his one test than Bell scored in three!

Even leaving those two aside we still have Tres & (potentially) Vaughan to come back. Bell's neck's on the chopping block for mine.
Bell made 3 fifties in his first 3 innings didn't he?

Moral: Everyone has a good debut in the English side now, and you don't judge a player one one game
 

Top