View Full Version : Michael Clarke: How good is he/will he be?
I thought this guy had played out of his skin in ODI's compared to a solid but modest record. But what a breath of fresh air he has been.
Great ton, hopefully he can go on with it.
Bentleigh
20 Nov 2004, 12:12
Captain Australia.
play 15 years of tests
average 55 +
be a handy bowler
as good as ponting in the feild
m.diddy
20 Nov 2004, 14:46
awesome player!!!!!!! NO McGrath though his batting is the best in the australian side ;)
as good as ponting in the feild
Has a bit or work to do. ;)
Bentleigh
20 Nov 2004, 15:53
Has a bit or work to do. ;)
He is a abosutly gun feilder atm. :)
dr nick
20 Nov 2004, 16:17
clarke is far from a gun fielder at the moment - i get nervous when i see the ball in the air heading towards 2nd slip - but that runout was one of the best ive seen.
I think he'll go on to captain the side when Ponting retires.. thats my call.
Bentleigh
20 Nov 2004, 16:18
clarke is far from a gun fielder at the moment - i get nervous when i see the ball in the air heading towards 2nd slip - but that runout was one of the best ive seen.
I think he'll go on to captain the side when Ponting retires.. thats my call.
Hes a very good feildsman. Gully or Mid on he is great while he has a very safe pair of hands.
The drops vs India will be good for him in the long run.
Will be an average player for maybe a year but won't hold his place in the team. Flavour of the month material if u ask me, should have never been picked in the test team.
m.diddy
20 Nov 2004, 18:34
Will be an average player for maybe a year but won't hold his place in the team. Flavour of the month material if u ask me, should have never been picked in the test team.
are you a joke??? No one asked you by the way
Sylvia Saint
20 Nov 2004, 18:48
Will be an average player for maybe a year but won't hold his place in the team. Flavour of the month material if u ask me, should have never been picked in the test team.
Average players generally don't average 70 with the bat and 2 with the ball after 5 tests.
Or do they?
eddiesmith
20 Nov 2004, 18:49
Hamish Marshall averages 107
Though you gotta question the quality of opposition Australia has played when G.McGrath is making runs with the bat
dr nick
20 Nov 2004, 18:51
are you a joke??? No one asked you by the wayHis location is Melbourne, what do you expect... shame they bring down the name of other melbournians like you with them
silky-smooth
20 Nov 2004, 19:50
hirthy = no idea :)
silky = best idea :)
What does Clarkes gf look like? Anyone got a pic?.
eddiesmith
20 Nov 2004, 19:56
I think you mean b/f
At least someone agrees with me, he is fair dinkum batting for the other team if u know what i mean, the little po0fster.
He hasn't really been challenged yet and when he acutually was slightly challenged in the 3rd test in India, played a stupid shot and cost the aussies the game.
There is absolutely no way he will captain Australia in the future, he's just a huge media beat up who will fail in the longrun.
p.s. i'm not actually Hodgey using a nickname
Well some morons will try to take a guy down no matter what. But Clarke is clearly the real deal.
He's a 23 year old who has all the shots and the arrogance to go with it. Just what the doctor order for this ageing batting line up.
I wish Australia had a few more like him.
Bentleigh
20 Nov 2004, 23:34
Well some morons will try to take a guy down no matter what. But Clarke is clearly the real deal.
He's a 23 year old who has all the shots and the arrogance to go with it. Just what the doctor order for this ageing batting line up.
I wish Australia had a few more like him.
Spot on.
1 is enough. Can you imagion if he was English? They'd build shrines to him.
btw - i dont reckon he is a po0f. Just one of those metrosexual types.
He's got a long way to go.
He could still turn out like Lee have a great first year and then just lose it.
What does Clarkes gf look like? Anyone got a pic?.
Can she bat? :eek:
He is a abosutly gun feilder atm. :)
You said "as good as ponting in the feild"
As well as Clarke has done (and he spilt some dollies in India) he is not in Ponting's class as a fielder.
Unwritten_Law
21 Nov 2004, 07:43
Ponting with a splash of Slater.
The splash of Slater to determine how long he stays on the scene.
dr nick
21 Nov 2004, 10:41
Ponting with a splash of Slater.
The splash of Slater to determine how long he stays on the scene.
Interesting to think back to when Chappelli used to get stuck right into slater for playing irrational shots, and now hearing him say that he hopes no-one tries to change Clarkes free spirited appoach to batting.
Perhaps he wasnt used to test cricketers scoring at 5-6 runs an over back then but since has realised the change.
looks like he is going to be a really good player. I would like to see him work a bit on the defensive side of his game. Like Gilchrist, Clarke seems to have only one gear
just as people sy hes a good fielder he drops a pie
luckily for him Warne can catch
Bentleigh
21 Nov 2004, 23:33
You said "as good as ponting in the feild"
As well as Clarke has done (and he spilt some dollies in India) he is not in Ponting's class as a fielder.
No, hes not as good as Punter.
No one is.
However he is champ in the feild (i know he dropped another one...). He will be one of the best in the feild in both forms of the game.
Bentleigh
21 Nov 2004, 23:35
looks like he is going to be a really good player. I would like to see him work a bit on the defensive side of his game. Like Gilchrist, Clarke seems to have only one gear
Dont think so. For the test side he looks like he has only that Gilly like ger but he has a great technique and defence. Im sure he has the abilty to build an inniges if its required.
Well some morons will try to take a guy down no matter what. But Clarke is clearly the real deal.
He's a 23 year old who has all the shots and the arrogance to go with it. Just what the doctor order for this ageing batting line up.
I wish Australia had a few more like him.
That is a huge call and i cant agree with it. When ponting came into the side, I immediate felt, as did many others im sure, that he was going to captain Australia. Dont forget that punter lost some form and got dropped once.
Clarke seems a bit more quiet and hes a bit of a softie because he wont drink beer. Hes only good in the field because hes still young and has natural abilities, but theres no way he can match ponting the run out king.
Great exciting batsman and I think he'll be in the Aussie team for a long long time.
Some harsh comments coming from narrow-minded Victorians, particularly blaming him for the 3rd test loss, calling him gay, and saying he hasn't played against any quality....
I seriously think playing against Singh and Kumble in India and making so many runs says a bit about his quality and the shameful crap being sprouted by disgruntled Victorians who have inferiority complexes bigger than Bill Lawry's nose.
Riddler
22 Nov 2004, 10:10
Michael Clarke: How good is he/will he be?
Why don't you ask him! I'm sure he'll be able to tell you.
nicho_magic
22 Nov 2004, 12:30
big call but maybe close to bradman
Vics Back to Back
22 Nov 2004, 12:38
Dont go comparing that little ******** to our greatest ever batsman
corporal
22 Nov 2004, 12:56
He hasn't really been challenged yet and when he acutually was slightly challenged in the 3rd test in India, played a stupid shot and cost the aussies the game.
There is absolutely no way he will captain Australia in the future, he's just a huge media beat up who will fail in the longrun.
Actually some would say scoring huge runs in India is a bit of a challenge, many have failed including Pointing.
I love Hodge but realistically he isn't remotely in Clarkes class, judging from his first four tests Clarke is going to be a superstar in the mould of Tendulkar and will certainly captain Australia.
As with Martyn pre Indian tour, I will certainly eat my words as I wanted Hodge in the test side before Clarke whom I thought still had to prove himself at F/C level, I was certainly wrong.
Michael Clarke: How good is he/will he be?
Why don't you ask him! I'm sure he'll be able to tell you.
If you're suggesting he has a touch of arrogance so what.
If he averages 60 at the highest level he can bring out a hit single for all I care.
That is a huge call and i cant agree with it. When ponting came into the side, I immediate felt, as did many others im sure, that he was going to captain Australia. Dont forget that punter lost some form and got dropped once.
Why the comparison to Ponting? I wasn't comparing Clarke to Ponting.
In fact I think the comparisons are a bit overblown. Ponting was scoring shield centuries at 18 years of age. Clarke took a bit longer to find his feet at state level. Ponting now has over 6000 Test runs at an average of 53.5. That makes him one of Australia's all time greats. I don't expect Clarke to live up to that.
I do however think, and have said this for a while now, that Clarke is the best batsman in the country for his age. Ponting & Katich are 29. The rest of our current batsmen are into their 30s. At 23, Clarke is a clear stand-out, I don't see anyone else being close.
I didn't say Clarke would necessarily become captain later on either. But given that he is a stand-out for his age, and that he has captained Australia Under-19s in the past, he must be a contender.
Clarke seems a bit more quiet and hes a bit of a softie because he wont drink beer.
This is a rather gratuitous criticism. (Admittedly not as bad as the "he's gay" jibes made by some of the children in this thread.)
So he might not drink. Since when is that a negative for a sportsman?
Yes the Aussies tend to come together with a few beers off the field. But I see no sign that he's failing to fit into the side on the field.
Hes only good in the field because hes still young and has natural abilities
Well duh. He didn't get picked because he's old and talentless.
In any case it's great to see that sort of energy in the Australian field again.
but theres no way he can match ponting the run out king.
Again, where did I compare Clarke's fielding to Ponting's? You must be reading things I haven't written.
Next you'll be criticising him because his left arm spinners aren't as good as Bishan Bedi.
Great exciting batsman and I think he'll be in the Aussie team for a long long time.
Which is all I was saying in the first place.
I am a bit more cautious than most I guess. I dont think he is or will ever be as bad as some suggest( stupid Victorians) but I wont compare him to Bradman either. Yes at this point in time his average is better but so was Gillys..and honestly where do we rate Gilly now?
M Clarke will have ups and downs but if I was a selector I would unless form dictates keep him in the side for the next 2 years.
Simon Katich is my choice as next Australian captain..then M Clarke
This thread is hilarious! Why is it exclusively victorian posters who vainly try to tear down what has been a real major positive of Aussie cricket over the last 5 tests??
What I like about Michael Clarke is that aside from his natural talent he clearly plays with a bravado that makes him the sort of play you want to watch. The 4 off the last ball before lunch was evidence of that. It's that sort of fearlessness and backing of one's abilities that makes sport great.
big call but maybe close to bradman
I see we have idiocy at both extremes in this thread.
Thunderstruck
22 Nov 2004, 14:12
A deadset gun. Will make 10,000 runs @ about 55-57, captain Australia after Ponting and take 75 wickets :) as well as being a top fielder.
eddiesmith
22 Nov 2004, 19:48
Katich will retire around the same time as Ponting so he wont be next captain. Clarke needs to grow up before he becomes captain and needs to cement a spot. Remember, anything can happen and there is no guarantee that Clarke will still be around when Ponting retires so its no point christening him as next captain when that is atleast 4-5 years away and probably longer.
Clarke has done well so far but people are getting a bit far ahead of themselves Those putting him down are no worse than those saying he will be the greatest ever. Bring back the discussion in 12 months. But comparing him top Bradman? He would probably average about 200 v Australias opposition bowlers these days.
I am sure there are many batsman out there (some still playing state cricket) that wish they could bat against the bowlers out there today instead of the greats of recent times like Akram, Ambrose, Walsh, Hadlee, etc
It is nearly impossible to compare different eras so no point and its also to early to predict how well someone will go especially one who has yet to even dominate domestic cricket
sinepari
22 Nov 2004, 20:56
K
Clarke has done well so far but people are getting a bit far ahead of themselves Those putting him down are no worse than those saying he will be the greatest ever. Bring back the discussion in 12 months. But comparing him top Bradman? He would probably average about 200 v Australias opposition bowlers these days.
I am sure there are many batsman out there (some still playing state cricket) that wish they could bat against the bowlers out there today instead of the greats of recent times like Akram, Ambrose, Walsh, Hadlee, etc
It is nearly impossible to compare different eras so no point and its also to early to predict how well someone will go especially one who has yet to even dominate domestic cricket
umm slighty contradictorary considering u talked about bradman averaging 200 in addition to the references to akram and ambrose etc then went on to state that its nearly impossible to compare different eras. Well u seemed to manage. Does this mean u are a genious or just confused with ur own thoughts
eddiesmith
22 Nov 2004, 21:03
I was saying that bowlers in previous eras were of far better quality so you cant compare performances when the quality is so different.
I am sorta comparing eras BUT thats because it is an obvious one, no bowler currently playing for other countries would rate in a top bowlers of all time list. (maybe chucker) So its no use praising Clarkes performances as he hasnt been tested against quality bowlers and probably wont be except in domestic cricket.
SO what im saying is you cant compare different eras of batsman as the quality of bowlers if so different
dr nick
22 Nov 2004, 22:01
hmmm... so only one person in the era of professionalism comes close to bowlers back then?
Talk when you've actually watched videos of some of these bowlers
Bentleigh
22 Nov 2004, 22:22
big call but maybe close to bradman
Too big a call.
Bentleigh
22 Nov 2004, 22:24
A deadset gun. Will make 10,000 runs @ about 55-57, captain Australia after Ponting and take 75 wickets :) as well as being a top fielder.
My feelings exacly.
Will be a gun; mixture of the likes of S Waugh / Lara / Tendulkar
:)
Vics Back to Back
22 Nov 2004, 22:29
What current bowlers outside Australia would be in the top 10 bowlers of all time? or even come close?
Bentleigh
22 Nov 2004, 23:14
What current bowlers outside Australia would be in the top 10 bowlers of all time? or even come close?
Murli.
corporal
23 Nov 2004, 06:45
Murli.
I think the question was "what BOWLERS"
Snickers
23 Nov 2004, 06:49
Murli.
not "chuckers"
Snickers
23 Nov 2004, 06:51
michael clarke is an absolute gun. the shots that he plays, and i believe the professionalism he displays is amazing. there was an interview with him and he said "i know im not going to make big scores all the time, i kow i will make ducks, im just going to keep working hard."
that shows a guy who understands cricket, and understands what he needs to do.
Well Done Clarkey, mate!!!!!
Why the comparison to Ponting? I wasn't comparing Clarke to Ponting.
In fact I think the comparisons are a bit overblown. Ponting was scoring shield centuries at 18 years of age. Clarke took a bit longer to find his feet at state level. Ponting now has over 6000 Test runs at an average of 53.5. That makes him one of Australia's all time greats. I don't expect Clarke to live up to that.
I do however think, and have said this for a while now, that Clarke is the best batsman in the country for his age. Ponting & Katich are 29. The rest of our current batsmen are into their 30s. At 23, Clarke is a clear stand-out, I don't see anyone else being close.
I didn't say Clarke would necessarily become captain later on either. But given that he is a stand-out for his age, and that he has captained Australia Under-19s in the past, he must be a contender.
This is a rather gratuitous criticism. (Admittedly not as bad as the "he's gay" jibes made by some of the children in this thread.)
So he might not drink. Since when is that a negative for a sportsman?
Yes the Aussies tend to come together with a few beers off the field. But I see no sign that he's failing to fit into the side on the field.
Well duh. He didn't get picked because he's old and talentless.
In any case it's great to see that sort of energy in the Australian field again.
Again, where did I compare Clarke's fielding to Ponting's? You must be reading things I haven't written.
Next you'll be criticising him because his left arm spinners aren't as good as Bishan Bedi.
Which is all I was saying in the first place.
First of all, you need to calm down a bit. I pressed the quote button on the wrong message. I was meant to reply to someone who said clarke wasnt good enough. I apologise.
blackcat
23 Nov 2004, 08:10
Clarke has done nothing at state level, though that needs to be qualified, because his last season in the national one-day team no doubt compromised opportunities and (a poor justification) consistency in the longer form of the game.
It might be interesting to compare that to Hodge's 1st full season where he dominated (not the partial season). I have an inkling his second full season was just as imperious (though my other intuition is he failed in his sophomore season).
Compare that to Clarke.
Ok, his one-day form and his Indian tour was brilliant so I am not questioning his ability.
Curious contradiction.
blackcat
23 Nov 2004, 08:38
What current bowlers outside Australia would be in the top 10 bowlers of all time? or even come close?
good point,
Without Bond the Kiwis are cannon fodder, Clarke can get his 60 series average by playing only at a reasonable standard. Vettori is a good stock bowler, not a strike bowler.
the depth in international cricket is at its lowest point ever, a combination of professional sport cannibalising potential players (Carribean US Pro sports, UK soccer) and the introduction of Kenya Bangladesh and Zimbabwe. It is not arguable that those have maintained or broadened the catchment of players, especially considering the outflow of players to AFL, US Pro, and EPL careers (whether or not they make it is another matter entirely).
I made a post about a year ago stating that our domestic bowling lineups have the potency of Test nations. I stand by that although there was mostl;y disagreement (I do not see much cricket apart from domestically I must qualify).
IMHO I really do not respect my opinion
Bentleigh
23 Nov 2004, 11:00
I think the question was "what BOWLERS"
I know he is a chucker but it seems non-Australians think other wise.
Anyway - Mulri easy top 10 bowlers/chuckers.
Bentleigh
23 Nov 2004, 11:02
Australia is the best team ever because of how good we are. Not becasue our opposition is crap.
Clarkly can only play against who bowls at him. Its abit harsh thinking less of what he has done due to the standard of who he is playing against.
Clarke = gun.
DOG GOD
23 Nov 2004, 11:33
Clarke is in the team because he is LIKED by the selectors.
Hodge is NOT. Neither was Jamie Cox and the likes.
I remember when Cox was in blistering form and Mark Waugh was struggling, that the media made it sound like Cox was a chance for the Aussie team. HE WAS NEVER A CHANCE.
Clarke is marketable. It's as simple as that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Clarke is in the team because he is LIKED by the selectors.
Hodge is NOT. Neither was Jamie Cox and the likes.
I remember when Cox was in blistering form and Mark Waugh was struggling, that the media made it sound like Cox was a chance for the Aussie team. HE WAS NEVER A CHANCE.
Clarke is marketable. It's as simple as that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Care to back up your conspiracy theory there funny man?
DOG GOD
23 Nov 2004, 14:37
Care to back up your conspiracy theory there funny man?
There's nothing funny about my opinion!!!!
There will be players (no matter what they do), that will never play for Australia. Jamie Cox was one. It took Martin Love forever to get picked while Mark Waugh was failing for tests on end.
Clarke is marketable. More so than Katich.
I don't like either, but why was Katich dropped for Lehman to come back in, when Clarke took Lehmans place.
There have been times before that whoever was brought in for the injured, got dropped the next test no matter what they did.
The Australian selectors have double standards when it comes to certain players.
Question: If Hodge had come in for Lehman, would Katich have been playing in the first test???
YOU BET HE WOULD!!!!!!!!!!
I made a post about a year ago stating that our domestic bowling lineups have the potency of Test nations. I stand by that although there was mostl;y disagreement (I do not see much cricket apart from domestically I must qualify).
IMHO I really do not respect my opinion
Do you ever feel like there are two of you in your body :confused: