Michael Clarke vs the World

[sickman112]

Don't know what your view of Australia's current batting talent is, but there's not much waiting patiently in the wings anymore mate.

And to my second point, why does it even matter? Who would you have preferred to take the captaincy?

My view of the Australian batting talent is that 1 series of averaging 38 after not being offered a contract doesn't cement you in the team. Pretty simple.
Did you actually read my post at all before jumping to Smith's defence? If you had you would know that I didn't say anything about it mattering.

 

[western royboy]

The comparison of the Border and Clarke incidents is a pointless one. Even if they were similar situations, and they were not, Clarke did not have the presence, nor respect to carry such an act off without it looking contrived.

Border was as much a patriarch to australian cricket as a captain, Clarke leads by example by letting his bat do the talking, but the over the top Hughes thing aside, father figure he is not.

He makes a conscious effort to cultivate an image, and its an act that has worn thin with those around him

And don't read that as saying Australian cricket needs another border like figure as captain. Border was made captain over 30 years ago, it was a different era. The game, and the expectations of an australian captain, have moved on from that time.

Lehmann is very much in charge now - not Clarke. - that's what it boils down to.

 

[carnthemlions]

Like I said - a slow build up of things, Clarke whinging when he doesn't get his way, ducks and drakes over fitness, running different media plays to those agreed, in general not following the gospel according to Boof who when appointed came in with the mandate to run the team as he saw fit.

This has nothing to do with Watson, although as highlighted, he and Clarke are not friends in any way shape or form.

The faces have to fit.

Does anyone actually like Watto(apart from the selectors that is)?

 

[western royboy]

Does anyone actually like Watto(apart from the selectors that is)?

Apparently he is quite popular within the team, only his nemesis doesn't like him. He would
I've to see the back of Clarke for many reasons.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

In Steve Smith's case, having first been selected as a leg-spin bowler with limited batting ability, he was not a prolific scorer in the beginning of his career.

The talk about him being picked as a spinner is a little bit overblown. Sure, they wanted to see how he went with that but they were picking everyone in that period.

In the Sheffield Shield season before he made his Test debut, he made 772 runs at 72. So this myth has become entrenched that he was 'picked for his bowling' but I think it's also pretty clear that his batting was his strong suit while his bowling was speculative.

Not to detract from your broader point.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

Clarke played a massive role in the early end to Symonds career, played a similar role in the end of Katich's test and then domestic career in Australia.

What about the role Symonds played in ending his own career?

Katich was stiff but I understand why he was dropped from the Test side after the 2010-11 Ashes. Again, you can't just hang everything on Clarke.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

The comparison of the Border and Clarke incidents is a pointless one. Even if they were similar situations, and they were not, Clarke did not have the presence, nor respect to carry such an act off without it looking contrived.

Border was as much a patriarch to australian cricket as a captain, Clarke leads by example by letting his bat do the talking, but the over the top Hughes thing aside, father figure he is not.

More selective criticism.

Like I said, you can't be cool with Border giving McDermott a bollocking and then take Clarke to task for giving Smith a far gentler rebuke.

The honest thing to do would be to concede that both instances are par for the course, instead of pretending that Clarke having a few words to Smith was some kind of hanging offence. It happens. Get over it.

 

[Father Jack]

More selective criticism.

Like I said, you can't be cool with Border giving McDermott a bollocking and then take Clarke to task for giving Smith a far gentler rebuke.

The honest thing to do would be to concede that both instances are par for the course, instead of pretending that Clarke having a few words to Smith was some kind of hanging offence. It happens. Get over it.

Lulz, if you think Clarke's position in Australian cricket in any way resembles that of Border when he was captain, then you've got no idea.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

Lulz, if you think Clarke's position in Australian cricket in any way resembles that of Border when he was captain, then you've got no idea.

Well, the resemblance is that they're both captains. I'd say that qualifies.

As such, captains will sometimes have to give instructions to other players.

When Clarke says something to Smith, that's unacceptable, because it's Clarke. But when Border says something to McDermott, that's no problem, because it's Border.

That's an obviously flawed argument. How can you not recognise the inconsistency?

The reality is that both are absolutely fine but some people are desperate to get after Clarke so they have to cling to insignificant stuff like this.

 

[western royboy]

More selective criticism.

Like I said, you can't be cool with Border giving McDermott a bollocking and then take Clarke to task for giving Smith a far gentler rebuke.

The honest thing to do would be to concede that both instances are par for the course, instead of pretending that Clarke having a few words to Smith was some kind of hanging offence. It happens. Get over it.

I could not disagree more strongly, chalk and cheese incidents / no comparison in my book. You are on a different wavelength to many of us - there's no point going any further with this.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

I could not disagree more strongly, chalk and cheese incidents / no comparison in my book.

Why?

Because you like Border and don't like Clarke?

You are on a different wavelength to many of us

Agreed.

On your wavelength, everything that goes wrong is Clarke's fault and everything that goes right has nothing to do with him.

There's confirmation bias at every turn with you guys.

 

[Mancey]

More selective criticism.

Like I said, you can't be cool with Border giving McDermott a bollocking and then take Clarke to task for giving Smith a far gentler rebuke.

The honest thing to do would be to concede that both instances are par for the course, instead of pretending that Clarke having a few words to Smith was some kind of hanging offence. It happens. Get over it.

I will concede that you are a broken record. Lets move on

 

[ClokesShankedIt]

 

[drummond2fevola]

Comparisons between Border & Clarke are rather silly, as someone mentioned there is too much of a generational gap. Times have changed and with it what constitutes leadership has changed.

Not that I have a problem with any of those videos.

 

[King Elvis]

Cat out of the bag now.

Clarke played a massive role in the early end to Symonds career, played a similar role in the end of Katich's test and then domestic career in Australia.

Worst kept secret in Australia; I thought everyone knew that Roy invited Pup to have a crack, they ended up together, and Roy was subsequently cut loose by Clarke?

 

[King Elvis]

Does anyone actually like Watto(apart from the selectors that is)?

Huss, Kat, Punter, all of those guys seemed to have a lot of time for him??

Seems like he's a pretty popular figure; allegedly he was a factor in the Hussey vs Boat Party thing as well?

 

[Sweet Jesus]

Huss, Kat, Punter, all of those guys seemed to have a lot of time for him??

Seems like he's a pretty popular figure; allegedly he was a factor in the Hussey vs Boat Party thing as well?

Really?

Sounds like Watson was the one with sand in his vagina.

 

[The_Reaper]

If don't see any issue with the videos posted of Clarke or Border.

I obviously don't know how bad things are in the Australian dressing room and it's obviously a major concern if he's not on speaking terms with both the head of selectors and the coach.

The ideal situation in my mind is that he Captains the side in England and then gets retired off.

But things may have gone to the stage where that is impossible.

I would hope however that we're not jeopardising a world cup and an Ashes tour just because Clarke is a campaigner

 

[psychobrown]

While I think that Clarke is a better captain than Smith at the moment, and one of our best 6 batsmen at the moment I do agree with western royboy that he may not be the best thing for the team.
There has been lots of talk about the big incidents with Symonds, Katich etc, but it's also the little things. Below is an example of what I'm talking about from the 2nd test over in the UAE. I don't have a complaint with the message Clarke gave to Smith, but the way it was delivered speaks volumes of his leadership skills/character. In my book if you want to get the best out of a cricketer, don't tell them off in front of their opposition and fans.

Thanks, I haven't seen that before. Great illustration of the facts and what everyone's been saying.

 

[The_Reaper]

Thanks, I haven't seen that before. Great illustration of the facts and what everyone's been saying.

What is the problem with that?

 

[Steinfreo]

What is the problem with that?

Yeah nothing in that, the whole team was awful and made to look like a bunch of amateurs. That was Clarke letting off steam. Aussie chirps in that game would have been laughable for the Pakis. Smith as captain to this point speaks far more than that piece of footage. He does plenty of whinging and grumpy looks when people dont do exactly as he deems appropriate, then blames spider cam for dropping a sitter.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

What is the problem with that?

It shows that Clarke is a terrible person and despised by everyone. Apparently.

I obviously don't know how bad things are in the Australian dressing room and it's obviously a major concern if he's not on speaking terms with both the head of selectors and the coach.

The ideal situation in my mind is that he Captains the side in England and then gets retired off.

But things may have gone to the stage where that is impossible.

I would hope however that we're not jeopardising a world cup and an Ashes tour just because Clarke is a campaigner

It took me a while to find this but I think Malcolm Knox made some interesting observations in a piece that came out at the end of 2013.

Admittedly, we had just won the Ashes so the tone may be dismissed by some as unjustifiably kind, but this passage struck me:

Suffice to say that, in 2004, Clarke walked into an Australian dressing room that had political machinations of which he was innocent. He was thrilled, as any young player would be, to be taken under the wing of the greatest spin bowler of all time, little knowing that the animus that had built up towards Shane Warne would be redirected at Warne's new protege, all the more so after Warne retired. Before Clarke knew it was happening, it happened.

A faction of the team resented the role he played in standing down his mate Andrew Symonds after Symonds missed team meetings in Darwin in 2008 to go fishing. As deputy captain, Clarke put duty and team above friendship. Symonds couldn't understand this, and the friendship went. Strangely, a faction of the team held this more against Clarke than against Symonds.

Clarke is now silent on this and the other controversies that stem from his early Test career, but the criticism rankles with his supporters.

 

[Super Hans]

All I want to know is who was the third bloke ******* Bingle that night.

 

[The_Reaper]

All I want to know is who was the third bloke ******* Bingle that night.

Who was our regular at third man at the time?

 

[King Elvis]

Really?

Sounds like Watson was the one with sand in his vagina.

As was Siddle, Lyon and a few other players - because they wanted to spend the evening together with the team, celebrating the career of one of our all time greats?