Michael Clarke has IT.

[Tony_Clifton]

Michael Clarke the 21 year old NSW batsman has It. Ricky Ponting Has it. Damien Martyn had it when he first started out as well.
The touch of class and brash arrogance that youth and a brilliant eye, technique and attitude can bring. No fears. Keeps batting simple but plays all the shots ala ricky ponting

This guy will play test cricket for australia for many years. His rise to the australian team is likely to come when steve waugh or Darren Lehmann get the boot. Both of which should get the boot in opinion for Clarke and Lee. Thats right. Play five specialist bowlers.
Our batsmen are more than enough for the weakened, no gough, jones or flintoff,english bowling attack. The only question is whether australia can bowl england out on the batsman friendly Adelaide oval.

Maybe even play both MacGill and Warne. Or throw in Bracken for variety. Either way they would be more useful than Lehmann or waugh down the order to go along with there somewhat not so athletic status in the field.

 

[Arch#11]

Or we could just play the whole NSW state side against the poms.

'Cos that's what you want.

 

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by Tony_Clifton
Thats right. Play five specialist bowlers.

There is a reason why people like you aren't selectors.

 

[Tony_Clifton]

Hey I am not pro NSW.

I am pro WA.

And where is the logic error in playing five bowlers. At the end of day two a draw was paying 1.90 and an aussie win 2.00. I wouldn't discount the english batsmen despite the 79.

 

[bluechampion]

logic?

By that logic, this would be the perfect series to blood an all-rounder. So far, we've done spectacularly well without one, but it's good to have that level of flexibility.

See if any of our all-rounders can cut the mustard. Watson? Harvey? White?

Who knows, one of them may step up on the international stage. Look at Warnie - Average state-level figures, spectacular international figures.

 

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by Tony_Clifton

And where is the logic error in playing five bowlers.

It's all very very simple:

Australia are the top cricket nation by a mile. Forget the official rankings, we caned the South Africans 5-1 and the Pakis 3-0. We are using a formula that not only works, but it has put us well above the other test nations. Daylight in between.

Five bowlers may work, but:

a) We don't need to change the formula

b) Why take the risk?

 

[DaveW]

Re: logic?

Originally posted by bluechampion
See if any of our all-rounders can cut the mustard. Watson? Harvey? White?

Watson's the only one with reasonable first-class form, Harvey is a hack and White hasn't proven much at state level. Although normally I think Test and one-day form should be treated separately, I suspect our next Test allrounder (should there be one) will prove himself in the one-dayers first - where we really need an allrounder. If Watson can't hold his spot, I think Queensland's James Hopes is a good chance to replace him.

The big dissapointment as far as allrounders go is Andy Symonds. Hard hitter who scores quickly, capable of bowling pace and spin and a brilliant fielder, you'd think he'd be the perfect cricketer. Alas, no.

 

[hourn]

Re: Re: logic?

Originally posted by DaveW

Watson's the only one with reasonable first-class form

Shane Watson is brilliant in the long form of the game, but tends to struggle abit in the short form.

But what do the selectors do?? they pick him n the ODI team where he has done SFA because he's much more accustomed to the longer version.

he's not the quickest scorer going around although he can tee off when he wants to - but so can Steve Waugh. He likes to take his time and when he is under pressure to score quick you can see he doesn't know where to get the runs from.

He was a definate candiate for the spot that Mark Waugh left behind. How he isn't in the Australian A team is a joke. Has a FC bat average of nearly 40 and bowling ave in the low 20's.

Domestic One Day its 28 batting and 53 bowling.

It was just a complete waste of logic for me.


Back to Michael Clarke though,

he is an absolute gun. Doesn't have a great average as of yet but who can expect that when your only 21. He's nearly averaging 40 and is getting plenty of runs - its only going to go up.

I dont think he is due for a test spot just yet. I still think Martin Love is front of him, but he is the next in line after Love IMO.

The Australian A Team was a bit of a joke IMO. Marcus North shouldn't be there yet - if they wanted to go for a bolter from no where i would've rather see Michael Dighton from Tasmania there. But Brad Hodge?? were was he - he shoulda been infront of both of them. There were 5 players who were glaring omissions that i would've thought were deadset certainties to get in the team - Watson, Rofe, Hodge, Clingeleffer and Hussey.

It shoulda been IMO - Jimmy Maher, Michael Hussey, Martin Love, Brad Hodge, Michael Clarke, Shane Watson, Sean Clingeleffer, Nathan Hauritz, Ashley Noffke, Brad Williams, Paul Rofe.

In the other thread i said Greg Blewett and not Watson, but i reckon Watson has to get a run and Blewett i thought was the weakest link in the team in terms of getting anothe run for Australia.

 

[Tony_Clifton]

Never change a winning team is one of the biggest fallacies in sport. To stay at the top you need to be dynamic.

 

[bluechampion]

Exactly.

Originally posted by Tony_Clifton
Never change a winning team is one of the biggest fallacies in sport. To stay at the top you need to be dynamic.

The exact logic that saw M. Waugh turning out for the blues on the Weekend. We have to widen our options and see if the next generation is ready to take up the spots in the team that are opening up. Otherwise we'll slip down the ladder of world cricket!

And, no disrespect to the Poms, but this series is clearly the time to do it - ease someone into international cricket.

 

[DaveW]

Originally posted by Tony_Clifton
Never change a winning team is one of the biggest fallacies in sport. To stay at the top you need to be dynamic.

You also need to be smart. And dropping a batsman for that passenger Lee is nothing less than stupidity.

 

[Briedis]

While I agree with you that Clarke has talent, and I think he will definately play for Australia, I'd like to see them give himat least the rest of this season in the domestic competition so that he can gain some confidence and more experience. Perhaps selection on the Windies tour after the domestic season has concluded will be the go.

On Brett Lee, being dropped seems to be the tonic he required. He has not bowled with the same pace since his shoulder injury, but hopefully he is back now. He is a genuine strike bowler when in form.

 

[lamby29]

First of all I think you are being a bit harsh on Lehmann. He may be 32, but he hit a solid 30 and 20 not out against the Poms. I also think that Shane Watson can become the 3rd pace bowleer in our side (in a year or so), this would give Australia better batting depth. RSA have 2 specialist bowlers, but they are the 2nd best team in the world. And yes, Clarke should replace Waugh at the end of the Ashes.