David Warner

[Tigerssaints]

I understand Clarke did not get picked up for TV media 7 or fox
unfortunately we only hear from old NSW players cause , thats where the media HQ r
Junior certainly had a conflict of interest with him being selector , and heavily involved with NSW coaching and the media jobs
Tubby was as well

 

[big_e]

What I find interesting is that we have a really good example of a team that is playing good cricket, in the right way with the right attitude in front of us (almost the antithesis of the Australian Mens Cricket Team) in the Australian Womens Team. It was a pure delight to watch over the last couple of weeks of what a team to be proud of and respected looks like.

In this context, "playing like a bunch of girls" should be a compliment.

 

[Financialpanther]

In this context, "playing like a bunch of girls" should be a compliment.

Something aspirational one would suggest.

 

[kidgorgeous]

Warner plays regardless of past moronic activities. Would be interested in the Test selection however for next year's Ashes if our batsmen make plenty of runs in a winning series? Smith automatically comes in. A few headaches coming up for the selection panel.

 

[peternorth]

The things I found most interesting were:

1. Clarke chose to use this absolutely stupid tactic of attacking Whately’s credentials. For starters, you don’t have to be a test cricketer to understand sportsmanship or indeed cricket. Secondly, where is Clarke’s f***ing media degree? Doesn’t exist? Well get off my f***ing television.

2. They still don’t get it. He and Hayden in particular who has also come out at a speaking engagement and had a verbal thrashwank about ‘the aggression and the Australian way.’
No one is saying don’t be aggressive, don’t play hard. People are saying that being aggressive and hard doesn’t have to involve an endless stream of verbal abuse and tough guy bullshit. Brian Lara was as hard as nails - hardly said a word. The most intimidating cricketer in history - IVA Richards - never had to open his mouth to put the fear of god into his opposition. They keep saying ‘Australia got to the top on the 1990s on the back of the all out attack mantra.’ They got on top because their skills were out of this world and no one scared them. It had nothing to do with their backward point standing there saying ‘you’re a f***en shit c***.’

90s-00s bowlers like warne and mcgrath would bowl us to victory. Batsmen (they were once called that) like s waugh etc would pile on the runs giving the bowlers plenty to bowl with. They did sledge too, easy to do when you're winning. But by and large, the biolded bit is spot on

 

[peternorth]

Has anyone checked on the health of m slater?

 

[frankrizzo]

Warner will walk right back into the one day side and if he has a good world cup the push to bring him back in for the ashes will be strong, if the openers do well without him and he has an average wc I could see him being left out for at least the ashes.

 

[frankrizzo]

As for Clarke, this seems more in your face than his normal way of going about things, I guess he figures the best way to stay relevant is be an aggressive contrarian as the media seem to love that rubbish and it might lead to some work in some form.

 

[windyhill]

clarke, continues to NOT get it. Always worry about a bloke who knocks back a night on the piss with the boys to go and suck up Packers arse.

 

[Xtreme]

Personally, I would never pick Warner again for Australia.

If he does it would show that Cricket Australia have learned nothing and this whole PR exercise to clean up their image was for nothing.
I'd also extend the same for Bancroft and Smith as well

#keepthecheatsout

 

[the_interloper]

As for Clarke, this seems more in your face than his normal way of going about things, I guess he figures the best way to stay relevant is be an aggressive contrarian as the media seem to love that rubbish and it might lead to some work in some form.

Yeah I agree, thought it was a strange move from him, but I guess he loves the attention, good or bad.

 

[Plugger35]

As for Clarke, this seems more in your face than his normal way of going about things, I guess he figures the best way to stay relevant is be an aggressive contrarian as the media seem to love that rubbish and it might lead to some work in some form.

In fairness to Clarke he would know more about test cricket, having played it, than Gerard Whateley who would've been one of those library nerds at school.

 

[big_e]

In fairness to Clarke he would know more about test cricket, having played it, than Gerard Whateley who would've been one of those library nerds at school.

The "you never played so what would you know" argument is the dumbest ****ing excuse in the world.

 

[Plugger35]

The "you never played so what would you know" argument is the dumbest ******* excuse in the world.

What would Whateley know about what it's like in the heat of battle in a test match? Tempers get frayed, easy for him to criticise from behind his library desk.

Don't get me wrong, cheating is not on, but I don't see the harm in a few verbals being thrown around as long as it doesn't get too personal or nasty.

 

[PhatBoy]

What would Whateley know about what it's like in the heat of battle in a test match? Tempers get frayed, easy for him to criticise from behind his library desk.

Don't get me wrong, cheating is not on, but I don't see the harm in a few verbals being thrown around as long as it doesn't get too personal or nasty.

Literally all you have to do to understand the issue, is have the knowledge that the majority of test cricketers in the history of the sport HAVENT felt the need to be abusive.

If you can comprehend that, you can comment on the need or lack of need to do it.

I don’t need to be a scientist to tell you that helium is lighter than air.

If you’ve played competitive sport at any level you understand that things get intense. I haven’t played for Australia but I know what it’s like to be gutted over losing a big game of cricket. I know what it’s like to have someone question my ability, my family’s ability in the sack, my courage etc.


Are we going to get to the stage where the only people who can comment on politics are ex members of parliament? The only people who can review movies or albums are directors or guitarists?

Seriously, it’s the most f***ed argument in the world.

 

[JimDocker]

I have said it before and I will say it again, Whately is a pompous, pious, self righteous prig. When he decides to get on his high horse, there is no person more annoying in the Australian sports media.

I liked Clarke as a player and captain. His record was fantastic. He took over a team that had behavioral problems for at least a generation before but Whately goes after him because he is a soft target. The public don't like him, so not going to be so many people to defend him. Whately did it with Ross Lyon with his pathetic personal attack on him as he is not the most popular guy around in footy circles and now Clarke. He picks his targets for maximum affect.

I find Clarke really annoying since he went into the media. His statements about being respected more than liked are probably ill timed but not totally unreasonable. Playing cricket hard but fair is such a difficult thing to qualify or quantify.

Pretty much just 2 unlikeable people arguing in public with Whately having the nouse to know how to play the media game way better than Clarke. His arguments of you never played, so you don't know are weak, but he should not have to defend himself against a very personal and false attack from Whately.

 

[Kram]

If you’ve played competitive sport at any level you understand that things get intense. I haven’t played for Australia but I know what it’s like to be gutted over losing a big game of cricket.

So this would obviously rule out Twateley.

 

[big_e]

What would Whateley know about what it's like in the heat of battle in a test match? Tempers get frayed, easy for him to criticise from behind his library desk.

Don't get me wrong, cheating is not on, but I don't see the harm in a few verbals being thrown around as long as it doesn't get too personal or nasty.

No harm in a few verbals?

What would you know? You've never even played test cricket!

 

[western royboy]

The things I found most interesting were:

1. Clarke chose to use this absolutely stupid tactic of attacking Whately’s credentials. For starters, you don’t have to be a test cricketer to understand sportsmanship or indeed cricket. Secondly, where is Clarke’s f***ing media degree? Doesn’t exist? Well get off my f***ing television.

2. They still don’t get it. He and Hayden in particular who has also come out at a speaking engagement and had a verbal thrashwank about ‘the aggression and the Australian way.’
No one is saying don’t be aggressive, don’t play hard. People are saying that being aggressive and hard doesn’t have to involve an endless stream of verbal abuse and tough guy bullshit. Brian Lara was as hard as nails - hardly said a word. The most intimidating cricketer in history - IVA Richards - never had to open his mouth to put the fear of god into his opposition. They keep saying ‘Australia got to the top on the 1990s on the back of the all out attack mantra.’ They got on top because their skills were out of this world and no one scared them. It had nothing to do with their backward point standing there saying ‘you’re a f***en shit c***.’

Let me just state at the outset, I rate M Clarke as a batsman and as a tactician, but as a person and leader deal me out, that's not a new vantage point.

Neither he or Whately are in the right here and it's really just fruit for the sightboard.

What Clarke needs to realise is that he was so disliked and hated by his playing group that they had to bring back a player (Haddin) to shore up his leadership because he had lost the players. Because of what happened and was happening a player has now lost his place in the Australian team twice (Wade) because of a need to provide some stability to the Captain. Clarke has always been about No.1 first and foremost, the most common comment offered by people who know him is "great player - ordinary bloke" - it would appear his future is taking over the mantle of Neil Harvey as dialaquote for the bitter and twisted.

It's an embarrassing situation that we have effectively had to resort to a Mike Brearley situation in order to steady the ship (and I rate Brearley as the finest Captain of all time - but he was never a test level player - and his book is essential reading if you want to captain a side). I totally endorse Tim Paine as being Test Captain but if we were picking our best 11 (excluding the banned) he's not in it IMO, he's there because we have a leadership vacuum and that reflects poorly on CA and the States and their "pathway" system, there is not one player standing out as our next Test Captain and i'll give you the tip it better not be Mitchell Marsh. It may be Travis Head? But how the hell id Alex Carey ODI Vice Captain? What is going on???

So for all the stupid and wasted reviews and reports have CA asked the right questions?

 

[Gough]

Clarke's naturally trying to defend his legacy, perhaps the unusual thing about this is the relatively short distance from retirement from which he's been required to do this.

 

[Ducky Tie]

Let me just state at the outset, I rate M Clarke as a batsman and as a tactician, but as a person and leader deal me out, that's not a new vantage point.

Neither he or Whately are in the right here and it's really just fruit for the sightboard.

What Clarke needs to realise is that he was so disliked and hated by his playing group that they had to bring back a player (Haddin) to shore up his leadership because he had lost the players. Because of what happened and was happening a player has now lost his place in the Australian team twice (Wade) because of a need to provide some stability to the Captain. Clarke has always been about No.1 first and foremost, the most common comment offered by people who know him is "great player - ordinary bloke" - it would appear his future is taking over the mantle of

It's an embarrassing situation that we have effectively had to resort to a Mike Brearley situation in order to steady the ship (and I rate Brearley as the finest Captain of all time - but he was never a test level player - and his book is essential reading if you want to captain a side). I totally endorse Tim Paine as being Test Captain but if we were picking our best 11 (excluding the banned) he's not in it IMO, he's there because we have a leadership vacuum and that reflects poorly on CA and the States and their "pathway" system, there is not one player standing out as our next Test Captain and i'll give you the tip it better not be Mitchell Marsh. It may be Travis Head? But how the hell id Alex Carey ODI Vice Captain? What is going on???

So for all the stupid and wasted reviews and reports have CA asked the right questions?

Who would you have as keeper in our best 11?

 

[western royboy]

Who would you have as keeper in our best 11?

I think it's probably Carey

 

[JimDocker]

Maybe England could lend you a keeper. We had 3 in the third test against Sri Lanka.

 

[Plugger35]

Literally all you have to do to understand the issue, is have the knowledge that the majority of test cricketers in the history of the sport HAVENT felt the need to be abusive.

If you can comprehend that, you can comment on the need or lack of need to do it.

I don’t need to be a scientist to tell you that helium is lighter than air.

If you’ve played competitive sport at any level you understand that things get intense. I haven’t played for Australia but I know what it’s like to be gutted over losing a big game of cricket. I know what it’s like to have someone question my ability, my family’s ability in the sack, my courage etc.


Are we going to get to the stage where the only people who can comment on politics are ex members of parliament? The only people who can review movies or albums are directors or guitarists?

Seriously, it’s the most f***ed argument in the world.

I don't have a problem with people in the media commenting on the behaviour of the Australian cricket team but with someone like Whateley he tends to take a sanctimonious, holier than thou attitude with his comments which grates on people when he hasn't had the experience of playing competitive sport at a professional level.

It's all very well for people like Whatelely to say test cricketers shouldn't sledge each other or get abusive but in a highly competitive and tense environment like test cricket that sort of stuff is going to happen from time to time. As long as it doesn't get out of hand I don't think it's such a bad thing as it adds some spice and drama to the contest.

Clarke's naturally trying to defend his legacy, perhaps the unusual thing about this is the relatively short distance from retirement from which he's been required to do this.

I think Clarke took offence to the insinuation that his leadership laid the groundwork for the ball tampering scandal in South Africa. Even though people could question his leadership for a variety of reasons I doubt he would have allowed that sort of thing to happen under his watch, he would've been a strong enough leader to tell Warner to knock it off when he found out what he was up to with Bancroft rather than just turning a blind eye to it the way that Smith did.

 

[Ducky Tie]

I think it's probably Carey

I don't really see it with Carey just yet, at least not to warrant selection ahead of Paine, if we're looking at form.
Admittedly, Paine was picked on feeling rather than on a weight of runs, but he has done a good job with the bat and gloves since his return. I doubt he'll maintain his current average but 38 is very good. We're not going to get hundreds out of him but he's made several valuable knocks. Also does a good job with the gloves. He seems to be one of those players that steps up to the national level with his technique.