Michael Clarke next captin?

[spindoctor]

These rubbish excuses that poor old Clarke's average is only poor because he had a couple of bad seasons when he was younger are crap. Rogers, Hodge, Watson, D. Hussey (I think M Hussey is a dud), even Mark Cosgrove, have higher FC averages after the same amount of time. It is not a valid excuse. The fact that he only averaged 47.68 in that season is nothing special. The best Pura Cup players average well more than 50. Blewett averages more than Clarke consistently, shall we pick him again instead of the kiddie?

 

[bigbossman111]

Does anyone else think that Australian cricket will be on a bit of a downer in a couple of years?? Maybe Nasser has a point.

You will have Langer, Hayden, Martyn, Lehmann, Blewett, Gilchrist, McGrath, Warne, Kasprowicz, Elliott, Hogg, MacGill all retire within a couple of years of each other. All around 32-33

Then comes the Hodge, Hussey, Katich, Love, Maher, Ponting, Williams, Lee, Gillespie, Symonds. All between 28-30

Then Clarke, White, Tait Watson and these guys around 21-23.

I'm thinking that the 21-23 y.o. guys may get a run befor the 28-30 y.o. in the interest of the future of Australian cricket.

Just a thought ofcourse.

 

[spindoctor]

Youth?

Batsmen
Clarke
Rogers
North
Cosgrove
D Hussey
Watson
Cameron

Bowlers
Tait
White
Watson
Rofe
Cleary
Clark
Hauritz

Wicketkeepers
Ronchi
Hartley

off the top of my head

 

[dan warna]

Cameron white is a better player, mentally more sound, and a proven leader

his one problem seems that in a particular match he EITHER bats well or bowls well, and rarely gets both disciplines right in the same game.

excellent leadership skills too.

Cameron White will be a better captain than clarke.

 

[Cainozz]

No

Are you sure?

 

[ioppolo]

(I think M Hussey is a dud),

Mmm.

 

[Hellgood]

Mmm.

Wow.

 

[Cainozz]

I love digging up old posts. Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

 

[Cainozz]

Credit to OP for calling it early though

 

[workhorse]

would be too soon IMO. i don't want clarke become the riewoldt of cricket (ie big head).

one day Watson will captain the ODI side, clarke won't captain the test side for at least another 7 years.

Apart from the Watson thing this pretty spot on

 

[Dayan Warna]

Ah my old account
Michael turned out to be a good batsman
Average captain
And was almost universally disliked by his team

Quality threadnomancy

 

[Carbine Chaos]

Ah my old account
Michael turned out to be a good batsman
Average captain
And was almost universally disliked by his team

Quality threadnomancy

*great batsman
*great captain (on-field, at least)

His autobiography is a good read, snared it for Christmas.

 

[Wallaby]

just on Michael Hussey.

Who i should actually say i rate him techincally as a batsmen, but obviousbly he either doesn't have it mentally or he thrives on pounding sub standard bowlers.

Over the last 4 years:
2000/01 FC season: 553 at 30.72 (1 ton)
2001 FC season: 2055 at 79.03 (5 tons including a 329*)
2001/02 FC season: 600 at 35.29 (2 tons)
2002 FC season: 1442 at 68.66 (5 tons including a 310*)
2002/03 FC season: 348 at 34.80 (0 tons)
2003 FC season: 1697 at 89.31 (6 tons including a 331*)
2003/04 FC season: 752 at 41.77 (1 ton)
2004 FC season: 351 at 35.10 (0 tons - poor season)

so basically, his performances in the Sheffield Shield are not upto the standards required to get picked for Australia. I remember when i found that out i was very suprised.

Good on the Passenger for picking this, though. Mike Hussey WAS a bit of a dark horse when selected. Sure, he was slaughtering County attacks - but who wasn't? Law, Symonds, Love, and Lehmann (just to pick the Aussies), great poms like Key, Ramprakash, Hick, and plenty of others all regularly averaged in the 50s-70s, playing county cricket.

So when everyone says 'We should have picked Mike Hussey earlier' - well, no we shouldn't. He was a bit of a gamble, who proved to be an infinitely better Test than First-class cricketer. David Hussey has a (fractionally) better First Class record than Mike - and he never got a chance at tests.

Hey - well done the selectors - they got it right. (They also got Clarke right, and for that matter, Warner and Smith - our best batsmen of the last 10 years). All were probably picked before their selection was justified.

The closest guy to be selected in the Test team in a similar way to Mike Hussey (experienced Shield cricketer without being a star, good ODI performer) was George Bailey - and he didn't make a Test Batsman.

Everyone gives the selectors crap when they get it wrong - eg - Bailey, Cowan, Maddinson for batsmen - but that's the risk you take when trying to find blokes who can make the jump from FC to tests.

 

[Hellgood]

Good on the Passenger for picking this, though. Mike Hussey WAS a bit of a dark horse when selected. Sure, he was slaughtering County attacks - but who wasn't? Law, Symonds, Love, and Lehmann (just to pick the Aussies), great poms like Key, Ramprakash, Hick, and plenty of others all regularly averaged in the 50s-70s, playing county cricket.

So when everyone says 'We should have picked Mike Hussey earlier' - well, no we shouldn't. He was a bit of a gamble, who proved to be an infinitely better Test than First-class cricketer. David Hussey has a (fractionally) better First Class record than Mike - and he never got a chance at tests.

Hey - well done the selectors - they got it right. (They also got Clarke right, and for that matter, Warner and Smith - our best batsmen of the last 10 years). All were probably picked before their selection was justified.

The closest guy to be selected in the Test team in a similar way to Mike Hussey (experienced Shield cricketer without being a star, good ODI performer) was George Bailey - and he didn't make a Test Batsman.

Everyone gives the selectors crap when they get it wrong - eg - Bailey, Cowan, Maddinson for batsmen - but that's the risk you take when trying to find blokes who can make the jump from FC to tests.

I think Hussey was picked at the perfect time. When you look at the quality who were making up our test batting lineup it's very difficult to pinpoint a time where he should have been in earlier. I think when people complain about him having to wait too long they are just thinking of the 2005 Ashes where we had Hayden, Clarke, Martyn and Katich all well out of touch in English conditions and extrapolating.