Michael Clarke vs the World

[peternorth]

he didnt turn up to my sons milo cricket day when he was supposed to. advertisements, flyers and emails were sent to all parents of kids involved. he was the face of it. didnt turn up. later that day we found out he was out with bingle at the time.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

he didnt turn up to my sons milo cricket day when he was supposed to.

OK. You convinced me.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

We're on a public forum. For me to give you specifics would breach confidences which you well know I, and others, won't do.

Me: What's the deal with Clarke?
Recently retired high profile cricketer/identity (whose opinion I respect): He's a self obsessed campaigner.
Me: Then why is he captain?
RRHPC/I: Because CA painted themselves into a corner they couldn't get out of.
Me: So what can they do?
RRHPC/I: They can only wait for him to retire. Everyone's just sucking it up until then. Wait for the books though when he does.

 

[peternorth]

OK. You convinced me.

i generally dont talk specifics when it comes to family, but thats what happened. i didnt actually think anyone needs to provide "specifics" to you or anyone. but enough is enough. you ask posters for events, but in reality nothing will satisfy you

 

[Sweet Jesus]

We're on a public forum. For me to give you specifics would breach confidences which you well know I, and others, won't do.

Actually I don't know anything about your confidences. Why would I?

Besides, you previously said there were no specifics and it was just 'a vibe'. That's no longer the case?

Me: What's the deal with Clarke?
Recently retired high profile cricketer/identity (whose opinion I respect): He's a self obsessed campaigner.
Me: Then why is he captain?
RRHPC/I: Because CA painted themselves into a corner they couldn't get out of.
Me: So what can they do?
RRHPC/I: They can only wait for him to retire. Everyone's just sucking it up until then. Wait for the books though when he does.

Blah blah blah.

This is just the same vague, unsubstantiated bullshit that you blokes have been hiding behind the entire thread.

What has he done or said to warrant the extreme venom directed at him?

You don't need to 'breach confidences' to answer that.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

you ask posters for events, but in reality nothing will satisfy you

That's not the case.

 

[Noobz0r]

If said books come out with specifics, this thread will turn even more delicious.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

If said books come out with specifics, this thread will turn even more delicious.

Well, apparently Whitewash To Whitewash was meant to damn Clarke.

Still waiting to hear back on that one.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

You want specifics?

I have reason to believe he orchestrated special treatment for his wife at international matches that would not be available to other players' partners causing difficulties for his team mates.

I have reason to believe his wife leaked information to a gossip columnist which could only have come from him which was very damaging to the reputation of one of the players' wives.

I have reason to believe that "homeworkgate" was set up by him to catch a couple of targets out.

I have reason to believe he is using Shane Warne as a mouthpiece to fire shots across the bows of the selectors.

I don't believe that, bar one or two isolated exceptions, his performances on the field justify the adulation he seems to get from his supporters as an "on field" leader.

And no, I am not furnishing you with proof. You know that I cannot. And I don't have to, this is my opinion on a forum.

 

[peternorth]

That's not the case.

ok. then it is incumbent on you to provide exactly what you need in order to accept that others have different opinions based on differing emotions.

 

[Bucking Beads]

You want specifics?

I have reason to believe he orchestrated special treatment for his wife at international matches that would not be available to other players' partners causing difficulties for his team mates.

I have reason to believe his wife leaked information to a gossip columnist which could only have come from him which was very damaging to the reputation of one of the players' wives.

I have reason to believe that "homeworkgate" was set up by him to catch a couple of targets out.

I have reason to believe he is using Shane Warne as a mouthpiece to fire shots across the bows of the selectors.

I don't believe that, bar one or two isolated exceptions, his performances on the field justify the adulation he seems to get from his supporters as an "on field" leader.

And no, I am not furnishing you with proof. You know that I cannot. And I don't have to, this is my opinion on a forum.

I have reason to believe that you are full of s**t...

 

[The_Reaper]

I don't think there is a specific incident.

With Clarke I think there is a series of small incidents (many where he may actually have a point) where his response or how he dealt with it has rubbed everyone else the wrong way.

There is more than enough going around about how he is a dickhead to suggest that there are plenty of people in Australian cricket who don't like him. It's also fairly obvious that the articles just before the world cup about the captaincy were deliberately planted by CA.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

I have reason to believe that you are full of s**t...

Well that's ok. You can hold that view. I guess, like half of Australia, I just hate blokes with blond hair and crook backs.

 

[QAFL_Fan]

There are plenty of real grounds for criticising Tony Abbott. He has said and done plenty of things that have served as grounds for reasoned, rational criticism.

Please provide specific examples supported by actual facts.

Thanks

 

[QAFL_Fan]

Well that's ok. You can hold that view. I guess, like half of Australia, I just hate blokes with blond hair and crook backs.

So both Watto and Clarke then?

How do you feel about Mark Occiluppo?

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

So both Watto and Clarke then?

How do you feel about Mark Occiluppo?

Actually I quite like Watto. I don't think he's the world's most intelligent cat but as a cricketer, he's played roles, often to the detriment of his own game, for the greater good. And for reasons known only to those in power, he appears to be expected to meet a higher standard than others with easier jobs.

 

[Father Jack]

Really? Asking for a specific reason they hate Michael Clarke, based on something he has said or done? That's too high a burden? Are you serious?

If that's the case, maybe their views aren't sensible in the first place.

I mean, imagine you were talking to your mate in the pub and he says: 'Look at that guy over there – I hate him.'

And you ask: 'Really? Why's that?'

His reply: 'Dunno. Just a vibe. Just look at him. I hate him.'

Would you consider that a reasonable exchange?

Your vibe is that all of these incidents are either beat-ups or false. That's fine, you are allowed to believe that, but your sooking about other people having their own opinion is getting beyond tedious.

I don't think forums are for you, to be honest. That's my vibe.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

ok. then it is incumbent on you to provide exactly what you need in order to accept that others have different opinions based on differing emotions.

Actual reasons based on things that have actually happened. Crazy, huh?

I mean, the fact that you mention 'differing emotions' is a bit of a red flag.

Feeling that Michael Clarke is a terrible person isn't a reason.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

I don't give a stuff if he's a terrible person. I just don't think he is fit to be captain.

I have given my reasons.

 

[04 Durif]

I've heard Michael Clarke talk about Michael Clarke in the 3rd person.
All the evidence I need

 

[peternorth]

Actual reasons based on things that have actually happened. Crazy, huh?

I mean, the fact that you mention 'differing emotions' is a bit of a red flag.

Feeling that Michael Clarke is a terrible person isn't a reason.

so you're saying people can only dislike others if something has actually happened? are there people in the world you dislike?

 

[Sweet Jesus]

Please provide specific examples supported by actual facts.

Thanks

What are you hoping to do here?

I'm not going to get drawn into cataloguing all the complaints against Abbott just to demonstrate that it's more than 'a vibe'.

However, one example would be Abbott promising "no new taxes" before trying to introduce a GP co-payment. Another criticism from some quarters is that Abbott has distanced himself from the scientific consensus on climate change, exemplified by his decision to shut down the climate commission and omit a science minister from his cabinet.

It's almost like you think it's impossible for someone to build an argument based on more than feelings, so asking me to do it is some fiendishly clever tactic.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

Your vibe is that all of these incidents are either beat-ups or false.

It's certainly my view that, in total, they don't justify the venom directed at Clarke.

That's fine, you are allowed to believe that, but your sooking about other people having their own opinion is getting beyond tedious.

People can have whatever opinion they want. I just question whether they're based on anything.

 

[happy_eagle]

 

[Sweet Jesus]

I have reason to believe he orchestrated special treatment for his wife at international matches that would not be available to other players' partners causing difficulties for his team mates.

I have reason to believe his wife leaked information to a gossip columnist which could only have come from him which was very damaging to the reputation of one of the players' wives.

Worthy of gossip columns.

Seriously, is this what you're pedddling?

And don't give me this 'reason to believe' bullshit. Are you saying it happened or aren't you?

I have reason to believe that "homeworkgate" was set up by him to catch a couple of targets out.

Well, can you substantiate that at all?

Because the account published in Whitewash To Whitewash tells a completely different story.

Who should we believe?

I have reason to believe he is using Shane Warne as a mouthpiece to fire shots across the bows of the selectors.

More rubbish.

Shane Warne is his own man, albeit an avowed supporter of Clarke.

And how is this even a criticism of Clarke? Is he not allowed to have high-profile supporters?

There are apparently people in CA who think it's fair game to leak to journalists against Clarke so what's the problem with Warne defending him?

I don't believe that, bar one or two isolated exceptions, his performances on the field justify the adulation he seems to get from his supporters as an "on field" leader.

How does this justify the venom directed at him?

You reckon he's a bit over-rated as an on-field tactician. OK. You might be right. So what?

And no, I am not furnishing you with proof.

Yeah, exactly.