Was Clarke's Declaration Reckless?

hawkeye

Club Cricketer
Joined
Jan 29, 2012
Realistically, only two results were possible: a draw or an England victory. On a reasonably straightforward batting surface there was no reason to think that Australia would have been able to dismiss England in the 44 overs that were available. And in this age of T20 cricket, scoring at just over five runs per over for such a relatively short period, was not that daunting a task, especially with a player like Kevin Pietersen within the ranks. As it turned out, Kevin Pietersen?s 62 from 55 deliveries lit up the afternoon and was largely responsible for bringing England within sight of a finish-line that only the intervention of darkness prevented them from crossing.
Michael Clarke's Declaration At The Oval Was Reckless

I think Clarke made an unwise decision and almost threw away a test match
 
No, he gave a chance to his bowlers to make a match out of it in my opinion. That was a very courageous and sporting decision. Yes, it was not the most logical thing to do but it reflects the confidence Clarke has on his bowlers. If I would have been in the shoes of an Australian bowler at the time, I would have charged up seeing that my skipper has the confidence in my ability.
 
Not sure it would have mattered if 0-3 or 0-4 so I can see why he wanted to do it, a miraculous win would have given the side a massive boost ahead of the return series down under.

England seemed to have the best of what luck there was, outside of the ridiculous application of the DRS. Decisions seemed to go in England's favour, the "umpire's call" seemed to be in their favour and of course the weather interrupted the two games the aussies would probably have won but for the rain.

So I suspect his declaration was born of frustration, although he seemed quite keen to scarper off the field when bad light came up and spoiled England's chase.
 
the difference for australia betwee 3-1 and 3-0 is much bigger than the difference between 3-0 and 4-0

so no, it's not reckless at all as there was more to gain than to lose. even if the chance of winning was much lower than the chance of losing.
 
It was a generous declaration on Clarke's part because England had made very little effort to play for a result.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top