About time idiot selectors.....

[King Elvis]

I don’t think he struggled in their conditions. He was in poor form while there; don’t think the conditions had much to do with it at all.

He actually bowled extremely well in individual spells in 05 but he was shockingly inconsistent.

The Ashes (Australia in England), 2001
5 10 120.5 18 496 9 2/37 2/60 AVE 55.11 4.10 80.5 0 0 5 Jul 2001 Australia

The Ashes (Australia in England), 2005
5 10 191.1 25 822 20 4/82 5/105 41.10 4.29 57.3 0 0 21 Jul 2005 England

10 Tests; averaging 48.

Conditions don't suit him, the pitches don't suit him and he has struggled there massively.

 

[ManWithNoName]

I don’t think he struggled in their conditions. He was in poor form while there; don’t think the conditions had much to do with it at all.

He actually bowled extremely well in individual spells in 05 but he was shockingly inconsistent.

Further to the above, he's played 16 ODIs in England for 28 wickets an eco rate of >5. Clearly he struggles with the English ball and conditions.

 

[frankrizzo]

In his 10 tests in England I can only recall a few spells that were high quality.

Mostly it was just the more he got smashed the shorter wider and faster he bowled.

Trescothick in particular took him apart on both tours; luckily warne stepped in to cut tresco off most of the times he got away to a flying start off lee.

 

[weevil]

The Ashes (Australia in England), 2001
5 10 120.5 18 496 9 2/37 2/60 AVE 55.11 4.10 80.5 0 0 5 Jul 2001 Australia

The Ashes (Australia in England), 2005
5 10 191.1 25 822 20 4/82 5/105 41.10 4.29 57.3 0 0 21 Jul 2005 England

10 Tests; averaging 48.

Conditions don't suit him, the pitches don't suit him and he has struggled there massively.

Mate they are just the raw stats, they say nothing about how the conditions affected him.

He had big problems with rhythm on that tour. He bowled some awesome blistering spells and then not long after noting but pies.

It’s like if 4 years from now you looked at MJs current tour stats and said that he could not handle the English conditions. In both cases it was lack of form that was the issue.

 

[Blue Dimension]

If Clark doesn't play the last Test the selectors are making a big mistake.

It's no coincidence that the only test we won was because Clark was playing. He came on and was able to keep the pressure on and constrict the English batsman in the first innings which in turn contributed to the major collapse. In previous tests it's been Siddle and Johnson coming in and leaking boundaries allowing England to get on top.

Australia need Clark. Forget about the second innings, Swann and Broad couldn't give a stuff and were just going the tonk. Clark is majorly important to the lineup.

 

[weevil]

In his 10 tests in England I can only recall a few spells that were high quality.

Mostly it was just the more he got smashed the shorter wider and faster he bowled.

Trescothick in particular took him apart on both tours; luckily warne stepped in to cut tresco off most of the times he got away to a flying start off lee.

Nah, everyone remembers KP stuff like taking him to the cleaners in the 3rd innings of the last test in 05, but forgets the spell before lunch when he bowled extremely well and nearly decapitated KP a number of times.

His average for the tour was around 30 going into the last test. He was going for a few but was taking plenty of wickets.

 

[King Elvis]

Mate they are just the raw stats, they say nothing about how the conditions affected him.

He had big problems with rhythm on that tour. He bowled some awesome blistering spells and then not long after noting but pies.

It’s like if 4 years from now you looked at MJs current tour stats and said that he could not handle the English conditions. In both cases it was lack of form that was the issue.

They show that he struggles over there.

He's had 2 Tours, 4 years apart, and has been mediocre, AT BEST, in both of them.

 

[Pevers-Legend]

They show that he struggles over there.

He's had 2 Tours, 4 years apart, and has been mediocre, AT BEST, in both of them.

More importanlty he had two great bowlers applying heaps of pressure in those two test series and failed. The only thing I'll give him is that he batted ok in 05.

Lee has to be the luckiest player in the history of the game. Who wouldn't be successful when you have McGrath, Dizzy and Warney choking the batsmen. On comes Mr Lee bowling fast crap - hey presto wickets.

If Clark does not get selected - the selctors have to be dumbest bunch of...... I'll stop there.

Only 4 Australians seem to have an issue with Clark. Pity they ahve the say on the team. It is a sad day when the general consensus of the public is right and the so called experts have NFI.

 

[weevil]

They show that he struggles over there.

He's had 2 Tours, 4 years apart, and has been mediocre, AT BEST, in both of them.

Mate you can pick a million different places he has struggled at. Yes he is inconsistent. And he has stats all over the world that can demonstrate this.

He bowled extremely well in the first tour match this tour. He has bowled well in spells in previous tours, and complete crap in other spells. If somehow the conditions magically prevented him form bowling well he would not have been able to do this.

 

[nobbyiscool]

If Clark doesn't play the last Test the selectors are making a big mistake.

It's no coincidence that the only test we won was because Clark was playing. He came on and was able to keep the pressure on and constrict the English batsman in the first innings which in turn contributed to the major collapse. In previous tests it's been Siddle and Johnson coming in and leaking boundaries allowing England to get on top.

Australia need Clark. Forget about the second innings, Swann and Broad couldn't give a stuff and were just going the tonk. Clark is majorly important to the lineup.

there is not a word in this post that i don't agree with.

it's no coincidence that siddle bowled like a trojan in the first innings.

it's no coincidence that johnson looked freer than he has for the whole series to date.


it just defies belief for me that when glen mcgrath and shane warne spent 10 years talking about bowling in partnerships; hell, merv hughes own career took off when he learned the importance of bowling in partnerships in 1993 - but the selectors are ignoring the significance of the pressure that clark was able to build for whoever was bowling at the end.

johnson and siddle stood taller with the extra bit of freedom. and i can't help but think whether hilfenhaus could've delivered even more if he'd been given a chance to bowl with clarke at the other end. for me, that's a dream new ball combo in england.

hilfenhaus has a brutal bouncer - so far we've only really seen him bowl the pie variety. we've also seen hilfenhaus bowl spells of outswinger after outswinger, bowling just outside off stump, just trying to build some 'faux pressure' because he's getting nothing from the other end.

for me, you go with the team that brought you to the dance. if the pitch is a massive turner, make sure you've got m clarke, north and katich doing plenty of time in the nets. it's not like stu clarke and johnson haven't torn parts aside on crumbling pitches before either.

 

[King Elvis]

Mate you can pick a million different places he has struggled at. Yes he is inconsistent. And he has stats all over the world that can demonstrate this.

He bowled extremely well in the first tour match this tour. He has bowled well in spells in previous tours, and complete crap in other spells. If somehow the conditions magically prevented him form bowling well he would not have been able to do this.

I'm not quite sure what you're basing your argument on.

He's shit in England.

Sure, he may have bowled a few good spells, but over 10 Test Matches, he has consistently sucked. 10 Tests with a terrible average, where he's had the benefit of Warne/McGrath/Dizzy in the side, surely that holds more credence than a few good spells here and there?

He bowled extremely well in that Tour Match; no doubt, but he's rightly last in line out of the current quicks.


EDIT - Nobby, spot on mate.

Bowling in partnerships was both the catchcry and the cornerstone of our success.

The inclusion of Clark allows you to pair Clark/Hilf with either of Mitchy/Siddle; giving you one guy who gets a bit of movement, but bowls with fantastic control and accuracy, and allows Sid/Mitchy to attack from the other end and capitalise on that pressure.

 

[weevil]

I'm not quite sure what you're basing your argument on.

He's shit in England.

Sure, he may have bowled a few good spells, but over 10 Test Matches, he has consistently sucked. 10 Tests with a terrible average, where he's had the benefit of Warne/McGrath/Dizzy in the side, surely that holds more credence than a few good spells here and there?

He bowled extremely well in that Tour Match; no doubt, but he's rightly last in line out of the current quicks.

Mate don't get your knickers in a twist. You kept on insisting that it was simply the conditions that were responsible for his record. All I did was point out that it was his own inconsistency that was much more of the problem.

 

[Sigh RolleyEyes]

It's not looking good.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25938251-5001505,00.html

STUART Clark continues to be ignored by Australia's hierarchy despite his devastating match-changing spell on the opening day of the fourth Test at Headingley.

[snip]

Is this a situation where the selectors are too close to the problem? Can they 'step back' and have a look at who is most likely to get a 4/50 type of bag and who's more likely to get pounded for a 1/150?

From the lay perspective Clark's inclusion is a no brainer. Wtf are we missing?

 

[King Elvis]

The rumours of a rift between the Coach/Selectors and Clark seem more believable when you read things like that.

 

[Ill Chicken]

Basically if we drop Clark, it is a negative for Australia and positive for England. It would almost seem that by doing so Australia don't believe there is a chance of a result in the last test and are happy to settle for a drawn series, which wouldn't be a bad result for England considering everyone expected Australia to give them a hiding.

 

[Belnakor]

Brett Lee i wish he would just shut up, i'm sure he'll on sunrise tomorrow telling everyone how he is "raring to go" - i mean, he couldn't possibly be picked, surely - but he seems to think its a good chane - argh.

 

[Sealz]

Nielson was on the radio this morning talking Lee up as “The best bowler of reverse swing in world cricket…………..when he is in form”

I sure hope he is not softening us up for the killer blow….surely not…

S.Clark must play.

 

[King Elvis]

Nielson was on the radio this morning talking Lee up as “The best bowler of reverse swing in world cricket…………..when he is in form”

I sure hope he is not softening us up for the killer blow….surely not…

S.Clark must play.

Nielsen comes across as a complete moron.

 

[Belnakor]

I've never seen Brett Lee get anything other than slight swing in an international match. Mcgrath swung the ball more than Lee.

 

[Belnakor]

Nielsen comes across as a complete moron.

yup he does indeed