Number 4

[The Governor]

I have been watching Michael Clarke's form since the 2005 test series against England and I have noticed that he scores his runs against poor to average bowling attacks and struggles against a top quality bowling attack.

Michael Clarke struggled against England in the UK in 2005 and 2009. At the minute, James Anderson and co have found his measure during this Ashes series. He has not scored any runs during the 1st two test matches at all.

He can score runs against India, South Africa, West Indies, Sri Lanka and New Zealand. But, he struggles against a top quality bowling attack who hunt in packs of 2 and dry up the runs with great line and length pressure bowling.

I am prepared to say that Michael Clarke is our worse number 4 test batsman in the history of Australian test cricket. I can say that Kim Hughes, Mark Waugh, Greg Chappell and Damien Martyn were better number 4 batsmen than Michael John Clarke. Hughes, Mark Waugh and Greg CHappell played against top quality bowling attacks (Waugh faced Ambrose, Walsh, Donald and co; Chappell and Hughes faced the brilliant WI pace quartet of the early 80s and Imran Khan). Kim Hughes scored a brilliant 100 against the West INdies at the MCG on Boxing Day in 1981 whilst Mark Waugh scored a brilliant 100 against the WEst Indies in Sydney in 1993 and the match winning ton in Jamica in 1995.

I am prepared to say that Michael Clarke should be dropped from the Australian side completely and he should never captain Australia. How can Michael Clarke captain Australia at test level when he has a bad back?

He should not have played in Brisbane. As they say, men are liars and women are schemers. He entered the Brisbane test match with a dodgy back and he should not have played at all. Hence, he played for himself and he did not put the team first.

GOV

 

[BarneyBent]

Re: Michael Clarke is our worse no 4 test batsman in the history of Australian test cricket

Yes.... because South Africa and Sri Lanka have useless bowling attacks. Right.

 

[Doodlesweaver]

Re: Michael Clarke is our worse no 4 test batsman in the history of Australian test cricket

I have been watching Michael Clarke's form since the 2005 test series against England and I have noticed that he scores his runs against poor to average bowling attacks and struggles against a top quality bowling attack.

Michael Clarke struggled against England in the UK in 2005 and 2009. At the minute, James Anderson and co have found his measure during this Ashes series. He has not scored any runs during the 1st two test matches at all.

He can score runs against India, South Africa, West Indies, Sri Lanka and New Zealand. But, he struggles against a top quality bowling attack who hunt in packs of 2 and dry up the runs with great line and length pressure bowling.

I am prepared to say that Michael Clarke is our worse number 4 test batsman in the history of Australian test cricket. I can say that Kim Hughes, Mark Waugh, Greg Chappell and Damien Martyn were better number 4 batsmen than Michael John Clarke. Hughes, Mark Waugh and Greg CHappell played against top quality bowling attacks (Waugh faced Ambrose, Walsh, Donald and co; Chappell and Hughes faced the brilliant WI pace quartet of the early 80s and Imran Khan). Kim Hughes scored a brilliant 100 against the West INdies at the MCG on Boxing Day in 1981 whilst Mark Waugh scored a brilliant 100 against the WEst Indies in Sydney in 1993 and the match winning ton in Jamica in 1995.

I am prepared to say that Michael Clarke should be dropped from the Australian side completely and he should never captain Australia. How can Michael Clarke captain Australia at test level when he has a bad back?

He should not have played in Brisbane. As they say, men are liars and women are schemers. He entered the Brisbane test match with a dodgy back and he should not have played at all. Hence, he played for himself and he did not put the team first.

GOV

He was our best batsman in 2009 in England. I know that's not saying much, but you can't really hold him to account for that Ashes loss over others.

 

[frankrizzo]

Re: Michael Clarke is our worse no 4 test batsman in the history of Australian test cricket

Can' stand the bloke but up until the last few tests he was holding the middle order together by himself for about 2 years.

Have to agree on the back issue though, no matter how much neilsen and ponting bullshit the press it's clear clarke isn't fit and wasn't even close to match fit at the gabba.

 

[Doodlesweaver]

Re: Michael Clarke is our worse no 4 test batsman in the history of Australian test cricket

Can' stand the bloke but up until the last few tests he was holding the middle order together by himself for about 2 years.

Have to agree on the back issue though, no matter how much neilsen and ponting bullshit the press it's clear clarke isn't fit and wasn't even close to match fit at the gabba.

Makes you wonder what is going on inside the wee masterminds in the squad doesn't it?

Letting people declare themselves fit over good sense. Choosing people on the hope that their spin bowling will be handy. Letting batsmen generally pick themselves unless they are under 26.

 

[damochandler]

Re: Michael Clarke is our worse no 4 test batsman in the history of Australian test cricket

I have been watching Michael Clarke's form since the 2005 test series against England and I have noticed that he scores his runs against poor to average bowling attacks and struggles against a top quality bowling attack.

Michael Clarke struggled against England in the UK in 2005 and 2009. At the minute, James Anderson and co have found his measure during this Ashes series. He has not scored any runs during the 1st two test matches at all.

He can score runs against India, South Africa, West Indies, Sri Lanka and New Zealand. But, he struggles against a top quality bowling attack who hunt in packs of 2 and dry up the runs with great line and length pressure bowling.

I am prepared to say that Michael Clarke is our worse number 4 test batsman in the history of Australian test cricket. I can say that Kim Hughes, Mark Waugh, Greg Chappell and Damien Martyn were better number 4 batsmen than Michael John Clarke. Hughes, Mark Waugh and Greg CHappell played against top quality bowling attacks (Waugh faced Ambrose, Walsh, Donald and co; Chappell and Hughes faced the brilliant WI pace quartet of the early 80s and Imran Khan). Kim Hughes scored a brilliant 100 against the West INdies at the MCG on Boxing Day in 1981 whilst Mark Waugh scored a brilliant 100 against the WEst Indies in Sydney in 1993 and the match winning ton in Jamica in 1995.

I am prepared to say that Michael Clarke should be dropped from the Australian side completely and he should never captain Australia. How can Michael Clarke captain Australia at test level when he has a bad back?

He should not have played in Brisbane. As they say, men are liars and women are schemers. He entered the Brisbane test match with a dodgy back and he should not have played at all. Hence, he played for himself and he did not put the team first.

GOV

see you aren't too bright by the looks of it. he was our best batsman in england last year and last time i looked south africa have the best bowling attack in test cricket.

 

[Port85]

Re: Michael Clarke is our worse no 4 test batsman in the history of Australian test cricket

Terrible OP.

He shouldn't be playing because of his back other than that you are wrong.

South Africa and India are great sides and according to you he makes runs.

Not being as good a number 4 as M.Waugh, G.Chappell and D.Martyn isn't a bad thing. They were all good players. Hughes meh.

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

Re: Michael Clarke is our worse no 4 test batsman in the history of Australian test cricket

Clarke ... worst No.4 in Australia Test HISTORY? Just look at some of the No.4 batsmen in the World Series cricket days .... Gary Cosier, Craig Serjeant, Peter Toohey .... Clarke is better than all three combined.

I will admit that he's dreadfully out of form though. As anothe poster said, I doubt he's anywhere near fit.

 

[Dixie Flatline]

Re: Michael Clarke is our worse no 4 test batsman in the history of Australian test cricket

Last 12 months, Clarke has averaged 43.35, scoring 867 runs in 13 Tests. Highest score was 168 against New Zealand. Clarke's career average is 48.00.

Last 11 innings (going from today backwards to the first innings of the first Test at Lord's against Pakistan):

2, DNB, 9, 3, 14, 4, 14, 77, 3, 12, 47

 

[DeadlyAkkuret]

Re: Michael Clarke is our worse no 4 test batsman in the history of Australian test cricket

Injured and terribly out of form, yes.

Worst number 4? **** no.

It wasn't too long ago that he was basically holding out batting line-up together and was ranked the #2 batsman in the world. He was in superb form for about 2 years straight, give the guy a break already.

It seems you need to have a trophy for winning a belching contest and thick hair spurting from your shirt collar to be liked by any of the bogans on this site. He has been and still is one of our most important players, that's all that matters.

 

[Underdog]

Re: Michael Clarke is our worse no 4 test batsman in the history of Australian test cricket

Don't agree with the OP but as mentioned, he shouldn't be playing with his dodgy back.

 

[r dub 19]

Re: Michael Clarke is our worse no 4 test batsman in the history of Australian test cricket

Don't like "pupp" but a silly OP.

 

[alfy!]

Re: Michael Clarke is our worse no 4 test batsman in the history of Australian test cricket

this is a troll right?

 

[dan warna]

Re: Michael Clarke is our worse no 4 test batsman in the history of Australian test cricket

M.Waugh was a flat track bully who was stylish but inconsistent and unreliable when needed.

Amazing to think that greg matthews batting average against some of the greatest attacks in the modern era, was almost the same as M. Waugh.

Matthews treasured his wicket and ground runs against oppressive attacks often in oppressive conditions , M.Waugh, flowing, skillful, elegant and stylish as he was, was probably one of the weakest links when under pressure for australia during most of his career.

Pup maybe in a form slump but he is an adequate lower middle order international class batsman, who is averaging in the mid to high 40s and should be batting one above the all rounder and/or keeper.

given we are carrying North, he's batting way to high in the order at 4, preferably at 5 or 6 even.

Also people keep building him up as a great and future captain, he's a good ordinary international class batsman and quality fielder.

Also concur if he's injured, then he should be playing, carrying clarke and north in a brittle line up is ridonkulous.

 

[Cooldude]

Re: Michael Clarke is our worse no 4 test batsman in the history of Australian test cricket

He isn't playing fit, which is selfish of him, coz he is clearly short of match fitnesses at least in the Gabba display when he looked extremely laboured when batting.

My gripe so far is that he refuses to just knucle down and tough it out even with an injury. Half the time this series he's been beaten outside off, what does he do? Oh I'll keep playing more shots, surely I'll hit it eventually. You bloody well right, Clarkie, you nick it behind.

He was scoring runs when he could knuckle down and prepare to score slower while putting some shots away. This series, he's just been getting out playing crap shots. Needs to toughen up again in a series that matters most

 

[DeadlyAkkuret]

Re: Michael Clarke is our worse no 4 test batsman in the history of Australian test cricket

Also people keep building him up as a great and future captain, he's a good ordinary international class batsman and quality fielder.

Damn you are full of shit.

If a guy who averages close to 50, has 14 hundreds and a highest ever world ranking of #2, is just a good ordinary player then cricket must be in better shape than I thought.

 

[KennyHuntersBlues]

Re: Michael Clarke is our worse no 4 test batsman in the history of Australian test cricket

M.Waugh was a flat track bully who was stylish but inconsistent and unreliable when needed..

you have got to be kidding, mark waugh scored a hundred against South Africa in South Africa in a deciding test against a strong attack [ including Donald ] to guide Australia to a series win and was the first to a hundred in the deciding test of the 95 series in the west indies to win back the sir frank worrell trophy after so long. if the windies keeper had caught a regulation catch off steve waugh when he was on 30 in that innings that he made 200 then it would be mark waughs chanceless 130 that would be the legendary innings that beat the windies. that is just 2 examples and i am sure there is more of him standing up. he also faced some of the best bowlers in history, ambrose, walsh,donald,akram,waquar etc.

 

[djrossie16]

Re: Michael Clarke is our worse no 4 test batsman in the history of Australian test cricket

The fact that he plays while back injured thus affecting the overall performance of the team is even more contemptible. Not sure if this guy is captain material. How on earth can you declare yourself fit and look so out of sorts. It is a team game afterall for goodness sakes put your hand up so we can get a replacement. We have enough weak spots in this team as it is.

 

[damochandler]

Re: Michael Clarke is our worse no 4 test batsman in the history of Australian test cricket

M.Waugh was a flat track bully who was stylish but inconsistent and unreliable when needed.

Amazing to think that greg matthews batting average against some of the greatest attacks in the modern era, was almost the same as M. Waugh.

Matthews treasured his wicket and ground runs against oppressive attacks often in oppressive conditions , M.Waugh, flowing, skillful, elegant and stylish as he was, was probably one of the weakest links when under pressure for australia during most of his career.

Pup maybe in a form slump but he is an adequate lower middle order international class batsman, who is averaging in the mid to high 40s and should be batting one above the all rounder and/or keeper.

given we are carrying North, he's batting way to high in the order at 4, preferably at 5 or 6 even.

Also people keep building him up as a great and future captain, he's a good ordinary international class batsman and quality fielder.

Also concur if he's injured, then he should be playing, carrying clarke and north in a brittle line up is ridonkulous.

by the looks of it you didn't see much of mark waugh play

 

[Belnakor]

Re: Michael Clarke is our worse no 4 test batsman in the history of Australian test cricket

the biggest problem with M.Waugh was he didn't make big hundreds

 

[damochandler]

Re: Michael Clarke is our worse no 4 test batsman in the history of Australian test cricket

[YOUTUBE]gyGkWtlIu9s[/YOUTUBE]

on an up and down pitch that was pretty dodgy from day 1


[YOUTUBE]N5mJ8KOu4IQ[/YOUTUBE]

this is probably his best test 100

 

[eddiesmith]

Re: Michael Clarke is our worse no 4 test batsman in the history of Australian test cricket

Umm just to those defending Michael Clarke, there is no point using his form of 12 months ago, this is about his efforts at no4, since moving there this year, 185 runs @ 18.5, which also mirrors his career stats at no4 from back in the early days

Yes he was a fine batsman at no5, but he cant bat higher and it isnt just bad form

 

[legend166]

Re: Michael Clarke is our worse no 4 test batsman in the history of Australian test cricket

Just to cement how woefully wrong The Governer is, Michael Clarke's 2009 Ashes:

448 runs at 64 with 2 hundreds.

He's had a bad year and is in crappy form, but you'd drop North before him. A side can afford to carry one out of form batsman (not for too long obviously), but you get in trouble when you've got more than that.

I agree he shouldn't be batting at number four.

 

[damochandler]

Re: Michael Clarke is our worse no 4 test batsman in the history of Australian test cricket

Umm just to those defending Michael Clarke, there is no point using his form of 12 months ago, this is about his efforts at no4, since moving there this year, 185 runs @ 18.5, which also mirrors his career stats at no4 from back in the early days

Yes he was a fine batsman at no5, but he cant bat higher and it isnt just bad form

he was the first one to bring up last years ashes. he is better at 5 and too be honest he shouldn't be playing while he is so unfit

 

[SebastianVettel]

Re: Michael Clarke is our worse no 4 test batsman in the history of Australian test cricket

Injured or not, seems he's reverted to the player he was before he got dropped in the WI series. Wafting at all sorts of rubbish outside off stump, no application.

Which is a shame, as he'd turned himself into a damn good batsman over the last 2 years.

If he's not fit, then he needs to stop being a selfish prick and give his back a rest. If he's not injured, then he needs to pull his finger out and knuckle down and actually play a test match innings with some degree of concentration and application.