View Full Version : Will Clark be better then S.R Waugh ?
PastyPieSausageRoll
25 Oct 2005, 16:17
Boof seems to think so, Steven Rodger took plenty of time to cement his position as a Test player, and took along time to score his maiden century. At this early stage of his career Clark is ahead of Waugh and is also batting in a higher position, at number 4 being alot tougher then batting at number 6.
Stuart Clark is a better bowler than Stephen Roger.
superstar_09
25 Oct 2005, 16:50
I rate Steve Waugh's medium pacers above Stuart Clark's rubbish.
Tazza_20
25 Oct 2005, 17:04
i think you mean clarke mate??? i could be mistaken so if i am, stuart clarke and steve are about the same in bowling, the both bowl right arm over the wicket pie
Browney
25 Oct 2005, 17:29
Idiots...
pluga_4
25 Oct 2005, 21:09
simple answer - no
m. clarke will not reach the great heights of s.waugh
10000+ runs, 30 odd test tons, and played with ticker like no ne else. also his captaincy record of 41-9-7 is second to none. s.waugh has the runs on the board and if clarke is to emulate s.waugh and average 50+ then we have a real champ on our hands. but realistically that aint gonna happen.
sinepari
25 Oct 2005, 21:20
Than People Than
dan warna
25 Oct 2005, 22:37
on current form no, but you can't tell.
Not many people picked the drunken groping punter as the mature captain of AUS.
not many people though SR waugh with his 30 batting average after 4 seasons of thrashing the pommes and SFA else would be a 10k batsman with an average of 50 plus.
who would have picked M.Hughes as being a 200 wicket fast bowler with an average of 28 runs per wicket? or S.Warne as one of the all time greatest bowlers?
seriously anything is possible.
ATM is see clarke as being a 42 to 45 average batsman with 5k to 8k career runs.
but then he could be dropped and come back as an all time legend?
20/20 hindsight is a great thing!
Tazza_20
25 Oct 2005, 23:02
no
DECIDED TO REMOVE COMMENTS
SorryIHammerChicken
26 Oct 2005, 10:25
At the moment he doesn't deserve to be in the side, but he has a great technique and has the makings of a champ. I wouldn't write him off just yet though.
He won't be as good as Waugh, Waugh started his career at 20 and had a few years to develop, and by the time he was 24 he was a gun. Clarke probably has a bit less scope for improvement than Waugh, but as I said he's got the technique, it seems he has too many shots and wants to play them all. He will end up averaging about 42 at Test level IMO.