View Full Version : Stuart Clark or Shaun Tait?
davey_magik
5 Nov 2006, 16:54
Who would you rather in the Test team? And no this poll isn't about the fact that Johnson will probably be ahead of both of them, but who would you rather?
PS The poll is on here because for some reason I can't put a poll on the cricket board.
Stuart Clark. Tait has a shocking action in which he falls over too much in his bowling, it loses pace and control. At least Clark is able to keep a line and length, Tait sprays it too much.
Disagree? Have a look at the ashes, bowled everywhere, every once in a while he'd bowl a good ball, every other time, fodder.
Once he goes back and works on his action a la Watson and refines it and makes it more compact and flowing, then he has a chance, until then, no.
Plus, we already have a speedster in Lee, we don't need two.
I'd have McGrath, Lee, Warne as definites and a combination of Watson, Bracken, Clark and Gillespie, ATM I favour Watson and Bracken.
McGill has to play in Sydney.
Il give you three reason for tait then:
young, quick, wicket taker.
holds all the domestic records, and is still young, is scary quick, should be bled into the ODI side, then the test side.
Brett Lee is 30 odd, our bowling stocks arnt getting any younger.
You cant count Tait's one game in the Ashes, where he bowled on a road? Every aussie bowler got carted on that tour besides Warne, Lee was the biggest disgrace ever, continually put it on a platter for Flintoff and Pieterson to Hook.
Thommo had a shocking action, but was effective, the same with Tait, if it works who cares what it looks like.
Howard Littlejohn
5 Nov 2006, 18:01
Tait will most likely always be prone to poor form due to his action, but can produce devastating spells as well. Clark is just a poor bowler.
Coughlan
5 Nov 2006, 18:03
Tait- reason, he actually has some ability, Clark is just a complete dud, pay no attention to how he did in SA, the pitch was an absolute minefield, you could get anybody from grade cricket and they would have wickets. Look at Clarks domestic record, he is an out and out dud and if he plays the poms will be licking their licks
Coin_Toss
5 Nov 2006, 20:25
I don't rate Clark, he's not international material, in my opinion, he never was.
raikkonen
5 Nov 2006, 20:36
I don't rate Clark, he's not international material, in my opinion, he never was.
Stuart Clark can get f****d. Anyone could play as long as it aint him, doent have to be an SA boy.
I could have taken ten wickets on that Safrican pitch ;)
Clark is a boring bowler.
Tait is electric.
I know who I'd prefer to watch.
However, for line and length and control, Clark gets the honours.
Personally, I'd pick Tait, give him a chance.
Babe Ruth
6 Nov 2006, 11:10
I thought Clarke summed it up when he said that Tait was bowling a billion miles an hour, ********** it Tait is a sh1tload better to watch jst play the man.
Warne of Mcgrath will take 5 each if he cant get a wicket anyway.
Il give you three reason for tait then:
young, quick, wicket taker.
holds all the domestic records, and is still young, is scary quick, should be bled into the ODI side, then the test side.
Brett Lee is 30 odd, our bowling stocks arnt getting any younger.
You cant count Tait's one game in the Ashes, where he bowled on a road? Every aussie bowler got carted on that tour besides Warne, Lee was the biggest disgrace ever, continually put it on a platter for Flintoff and Pieterson to Hook.
Thommo had a shocking action, but was effective, the same with Tait, if it works who cares what it looks like.
It doesn't matter if he is quick, if he is quick and s*** he shouldn't be picked. And as for Tait being a wicket taker, in pura cup maybe, but not against the poms.
We don't need to take risks. The batting is the thing that wil win or lose us the ashes. Last year our bowling stocks performed well. McGrath bowled well as did Warne, Lee battled manfully as the stock-bowler he isn't. The players who lost us the ashes were players like Hayden, Martyn and Katich, who batted terribly.
Our bowling is fine, the ashes is not the time to take risks and Tait is a liability. You said that Lee got smshed around, that will happen with Tait as his action is bad and he is inaccurate and inexpierienced.
As for Thompson, Thompson's action was much, MUCH better, he didn't fall away as much and was more accurate, Tait sprats the ball way too much.
Clark has the runs on the board against SA. He has proved that he can get out top order batsmen. Tait can't. He has two deliveries, the yorker and the out-swinger. His inswinger isn't good enough. Tait needs to go back and work on his action, then he can play, until then, sorry.
We don't need another tearaway fast bowler in the team, we have Lee.
apollo_creed
6 Nov 2006, 12:19
We don't need another tearaway fast bowler in the team, we have Lee.
Yeah but Australia needs a non-gay tearaway fast bowler.
Something Lee isn't.
SWANNIES RULE
6 Nov 2006, 12:53
Tait is better, and is younger which means he has alot more ahead of him.
thebigboy
6 Nov 2006, 14:18
If McGrath was out, then id pick clark because of the similarites. However, id pick tait, he can devestate a batting line up.
SWANNIES RULE
7 Nov 2006, 18:37
Johnson>>>>>>Clark and Tait
Picador
16 Nov 2006, 17:40
Tait - Everyone loves to see batsman jumping around and stumps all over the ground.
RoosterLad
16 Nov 2006, 17:45
Stuart Clark. Tait has a shocking action in which he falls over too much in his bowling, it loses pace and control. At least Clark is able to keep a line and length, Tait sprays it too much.
Disagree? Have a look at the ashes, bowled everywhere, every once in a while he'd bowl a good ball, every other time, fodder.
Once he goes back and works on his action a la Watson and refines it and makes it more compact and flowing, then he has a chance, until then, no.
Plus, we already have a speedster in Lee, we don't need two.
I'd have McGrath, Lee, Warne as definites and a combination of Watson, Bracken, Clark and Gillespie, ATM I favour Watson and Bracken.
McGill has to play in Sydney.
He loses pace?? One of the quickest bowlers in the world if you dont mind
Shocking action? Jeff Thompson. That is all.
Proof is in the last Ashes? that was his debut series, england had their tails up, it was a tough situation to be in and he is only young... because he didnt dominate his brief appearances in the ashes he should never play for australia again?
Richo83
16 Nov 2006, 18:47
He loses pace?? One of the quickest bowlers in the world if you dont mind
Could be alot faster, alot of his height and pace is wasted in his bad action.
Shocking action? Jeff Thompson. That is all.
Thompson's action >>>> Tait's action
Proof is in the last Ashes? that was his debut series, england had their tails up, it was a tough situation to be in and he is only young... because he didnt dominate his brief appearances in the ashes he should never play for australia again?
So Tait's played against england, and failed, yet Clark's played against SA, and has performed well.
Coughlan
16 Nov 2006, 20:33
Could be alot faster, alot of his height and pace is wasted in his bad action.
Tait couldnt ball much faster with an improved action, has Lee covered for pace and is consitantly 150km+
So Tait's played against england, and failed, yet Clark's played against SA, and has performed well.
As has been mentioned planty of times Clarks perfoemance in SA shouldnt have any bearing at all, that was a long time ago on pitches that anybody could get wickets on, he is a dud and this is proof in his very very average FC record. I would probably prefer Bracken then Clark
Pav for AA
17 Nov 2006, 01:14
Why is this even being discussed?
Bowlers:
Warne
Ooh Ahh Glenn
Johnson
Lee
Watson.
Those two will be 12 and 13th man. :thumbsu:
For those of you not in the know, Id say Johnson is scary quick :thumbsu:
||-GOB-||
17 Nov 2006, 01:17
Why is this even being discussed?
Bowlers:
Warne
Ooh Ahh Glenn
Johnson
Lee
Watson.
Those two will be 12 and 13th man. :thumbsu:
For those of you not in the know, Id say Johnson is scary quick :thumbsu:
He's nowhere as fast as he used to be, Lee and Tait are faster than him these days.
Pav for AA
17 Nov 2006, 01:39
He's nowhere as fast as he used to be, Lee and Tait are faster than him these days.
I think you will find he is lightning, Lee is the right-handed version, and as has been mentioned, Tait is simply too Raw to make it in an international test match series.
One-day trials are the way to go. He has alot to learn.
||-GOB-||
17 Nov 2006, 02:06
I think you will find he is lightning, Lee is the right-handed version, and as has been mentioned, Tait is simply too Raw to make it in an international test match series.
One-day trials are the way to go. He has alot to learn.
Have you even seen him bowl? He's not in the same speed class as Lee and Tait. He had the potential to be as fast as Thommo but a bunch of serious back injuries meant that he had to cut back on the speed and remake his bowling action.
He is still a bloody magnificant prospect for Australia but he isn't as fast as you seem to think.
Cassius_Clay
17 Nov 2006, 07:38
Brett Lee is 30 od.
He isnt even 30 yet.
Anyway, who the hell voted for Clark?
Cassius_Clay
17 Nov 2006, 07:39
I think you will find he is lightning, Lee is the right-handed version, and as has been mentioned, Tait is simply too Raw to make it in an international test match series.
One-day trials are the way to go. He has alot to learn.
You know nothing about football and now I know you are clueless about cricket aswell :thumbsu:
Johnson is just as raw as Tait who is much better value than Clark. If the Aussies play Watson (130-140 kph) it gives them the option of playing 2 bowlers who push 150 kph (Lee & either Tait/Johnson) and 2 bowlers around 130-140 kph (McGrath, Watson) + Warne.
Tait has the ability to reverse swing the ball pretty well and has shown he can dismiss the Poms already (Prime Ministers XI, bowled Flintoff with one he didn't pick up at all, didn't even move his feet to one that cannoned half-way up his off/middle stumps). Tait is the way to go IMO :thumbsu: :thumbsu:
Johnson is just as raw as Tait who is much better value than Clark. If the Aussies play Watson (130-140 kph) it gives them the option of playing 2 bowlers who push 150 kph (Lee & either Tait/Johnson) and 2 bowlers around 130-140 kph (McGrath, Watson) + Warne.
I think I'm being quite generous to Glenn here as well ...:)
Richo83
17 Nov 2006, 10:28
Johnson is just as raw as Tait who is much better value than Clark. If the Aussies play Watson (130-140 kph) it gives them the option of playing 2 bowlers who push 150 kph (Lee & either Tait/Johnson) and 2 bowlers around 130-140 kph (McGrath, Watson) + Warne.
Tait has the ability to reverse swing the ball pretty well and has shown he can dismiss the Poms already (Prime Ministers XI, bowled Flintoff with one he didn't pick up at all, didn't even move his feet to one that cannoned half-way up his off/middle stumps). Tait is the way to go IMO :thumbsu: :thumbsu:
- Johnson is not 150
- McGrath is not 130-140, more like low 130s, high 120s at times.
CC I voted for Clark, if it's such a stupid decision, prove it, since it's so "stupid" this should be easy.
Richo83
17 Nov 2006, 10:31
Tait couldnt ball much faster with an improved action, has Lee covered for pace and is consitantly 150km+
Well his action is flawed, he loses pace by leaning to the side too much and falling over in his delivery stride.
As has been mentioned planty of times Clarks perfoemance in SA shouldnt have any bearing at all, that was a long time ago on pitches that anybody could get wickets on, he is a dud and this is proof in his very very average FC record. I would probably prefer Bracken then Clark
Strange, Bracken isn't in the squad for Brisbane, yet Clark is. Clark has thr runs on the board, fact. FC mean nothing, some of our greatest cricketers have poor FC records while some great FC players have failed at test level. If we were going on FC stats, Elliot and Lehman would be playing.
- Johnson is not 150
- McGrath is not 130-140, more like low 130s, high 120s at times.
CC I voted for Clark, if it's such a stupid decision, prove it, since it's so "stupid" this should be easy.
That is why I said I'm being generous to McGrath, if you were smart, you would've worked that out ... :rolleyes:
I never said Johnson bowled 150 either. I said he and Tait push it. Meaning, occasionally get close to it.
I see you're an expert on bowling actions now. Interesting that someone who bowls with a flawed action took 65 state wickets in 04/05. Can't be too flawed with results like that, can it?
Anyway, what address should I send my bowling video to for your expert analysis? If you could shape my action into that of a champion bowler ... say Stuart Clark ... I'd be forever indebted to you, oh wise bowling expert ... :thumbsd:
OneEyedHawk
17 Nov 2006, 10:54
A tough one, and some good arguments mounted for both bowlers.
Tait is a risk in such an important series, could pay off big time, or could get spanked. The bowling line-up looks set, if an injury to McGrath occurs, then I'd go Clark...otherwise Tait all the way.
Coughlan
17 Nov 2006, 10:58
Strange, Bracken isn't in the squad for Brisbane, yet Clark is. Clark has thr runs on the board, fact. FC mean nothing, some of our greatest cricketers have poor FC records while some great FC players have failed at test level. If we were going on FC stats, Elliot and Lehman would be playing.
We all know this, but these cricketers with poor first class records were picked to play for Australia when they were young on potential alone ie: Warne. This is totally different for a player like Stuart Clark he was selected when he was 30 years old, so his first class record has everything to do with it, its only an average record of about 30, nothing special. He should not have been in the Australian team in the first place.
So saying that FC stats are irrelevant for a 30 year olds selection is irrelevant because some of the greatest players have poor FC records is stupid, they demand to be picked for Australia because they are proven over a long period of time in international cricket, where as Clark has just been a good performer for NSW for an extended period without being special and definatly did not demand or deserve to be selected for Australia over other bowlers. If he was a younger player that would be a different story but his not so all we can judge him on is FC records.
And there is nothing wrong with Taits action, he got hurt with his old action which has since been modified with the help of specialist bowling coaches such as D.K Lillee;) I suspect he may have a better idea about effective bowling actions then you.
kimirocks
17 Nov 2006, 12:06
T, TA, TAI, TAIT TAIT TAIT. There is no other sane solution. It is Tait, or nothing. Clark does not come into the equation.
It's going to be a seamers wicket by the sounds of things so my money would be on Clark getting the call up (Based upon what Tait does in the current tour match of course).
Smokey_22
17 Nov 2006, 19:09
I wouldnt mind either of them.
The selectors will pick Clark though, 96% sure.
Despite what some biased observers here think, Clarks bowled better than tait lately.
Il Naso De Gastev
17 Nov 2006, 20:33
It doesn't matter if he is quick, if he is quick and s*** he shouldn't be picked. And as for Tait being a wicket taker, in pura cup maybe, but not against the poms.
We don't need to take risks. The batting is the thing that wil win or lose us the ashes. Last year our bowling stocks performed well. McGrath bowled well as did Warne, Lee battled manfully as the stock-bowler he isn't. The players who lost us the ashes were players like Hayden, Martyn and Katich, who batted terribly.
Our bowling is fine, the ashes is not the time to take risks and Tait is a liability. You said that Lee got smshed around, that will happen with Tait as his action is bad and he is inaccurate and inexpierienced.
As for Thompson, Thompson's action was much, MUCH better, he didn't fall away as much and was more accurate, Tait sprats the ball way too much.
Clark has the runs on the board against SA. He has proved that he can get out top order batsmen. Tait can't. He has two deliveries, the yorker and the out-swinger. His inswinger isn't good enough. Tait needs to go back and work on his action, then he can play, until then, sorry.
Who the f*** do you think you are, Trevor Hohns??
Clark is not international standard. Pedestrian.
Bracken bowls half rat power, leg stump half volleys.
Johnson is the next cab off the rank.
Tait, exciting. I get the feeling he doesn't quite know where the ball is going... therefore what chance does the batsman have??
King Elvis
17 Nov 2006, 20:40
I wouldnt mind either of them.
The selectors will pick Clark though, 96% sure.
Despite what some biased observers here think, Clarks bowled better than tait lately.
Clark is alright, but I'd go Tait.
We want to scare the ******** out of the Poms, Tait will do it.
And if he doesn't take wickets, he'll hurt people.
Either way, I'll be happy.
Richo83
20 Nov 2006, 14:19
Who the f*** do you think you are, Trevor Hohns??
Clark is not international standard. Pedestrian.
Bracken bowls half rat power, leg stump half volleys.
Johnson is the next cab off the rank.
Tait, exciting. I get the feeling he doesn't quite know where the ball is going... therefore what chance does the batsman have??
I don't think I'm anyone, but I stopped reading when you said Clark was not international standard, which is a lie.
And Coughlan, juts because Lillee has worked with Tait, doesn't mean his action is perfect. Its better than what it used to be, but still could improve. As for FC and international level, I say this because FC and international level are two different scenarios. It's quite possible for Clark to bowl pies in FC cricket, yet bowl well against the poms.
Anway, this is irrelevant, because with Watson's injury, I'd put in both. I concur that Tait is better than I give him credit for, I watched him against the poms on tv and he was good, so he's definetly ahead of Johnson. Clarke would be a poor choice IMO.
Blacky31
27 Nov 2006, 01:28
Anyone care to change their mind about Clark, has bowled exceptionally well IMO! Great line and length.
Fielding could do with some inprovement:D
KUNG FU
27 Nov 2006, 01:38
I think poll should be changed: Tait or Lee??? ;)
Well done Clark, I didn't vote for you, but thats cos I'm a biased SA kid. I still love your work.
Redlegs14
27 Nov 2006, 08:30
Yeah, Stuart Clark has bowled exceptionally well, and to be honest, has been the pick of the bowlers, even though McGrath picked up 6 wickets.
It would have been interesting to see Tait bowl on this pitch with the size of the cracks, but it seems the selectors made the right decision.
SWANNIES RULE
27 Nov 2006, 15:47
Before the test I preferred Tait but now I prefer Clark. His accuracy is extraordinary and it will trouble any batsman he bowls to.
Richo83
27 Nov 2006, 17:52
To all you posters who abused me for suggesting Clark should be picked, hows 7/93 sound? :D Tait would never get those figures, ditto Johnson.
So I was right. Hmm.
Redlegs14
27 Nov 2006, 17:54
To all you posters who abused me for suggesting Clark should be picked, hows 7/93 sound? :D Tait would never get those figures, ditto Johnson.
So I was right. Hmm.Gee, you're my hero.
SWANNIES RULE
27 Nov 2006, 17:56
On his day, Tait can get better than 7/93.
raikkonen
27 Nov 2006, 18:02
On his day, Tait can get better than 7/93.
Yep 8/43 in 10 overs was lethal. Saw it first hand at the ground, and he has Strauss out for 2 ducks on this tour so far I think (Pm XI game, SA game).
Taity is younger, quicker, better, and needed to earn his baggy green by playing for a team other than NSW.
Richo83
28 Nov 2006, 10:46
On his day, Tait can get better than 7/93.
On his day. :rolleyes: And what if it isn't his day? On his day when Clark isn't first change behind 50 runs per wicket Lee, he could have a ten-for. Fact is, Clark played better than Tait ever could. Tait could never bowl with the accuracy and line that Clark bowled. McGrath and Clark's figures, compared to Lee's figures show that Australia's more likely to bowl England out with precise, accurate consistent bowling, instead of fast but inaccurate bowling.
I look forward to seeing Clark taking his spot in the team for the next four years. Which he deserves. After that, it's Tait and Johnson's turn.
MarkJohnson#1
29 Nov 2006, 11:25
Although I voted Tait a few days/weeks back Stuart Clark has begun to prove me maliciously wrong. Having seen on the cricket show his strong work ethic and then his performances in the first test I am strongly thinking twice, and am now back to undecided
Moss Rocket
29 Nov 2006, 12:08
Fair enough that most voted before the 1st test, but seriously now how can anyone not want Clark in the side. His career figures speak for themselves. Until he stops performing, we just have to keep playing him. He deserves it.