West Indies tour of Australia, November-December 2009

[aussie1st]

The selectors don't seem to rate Clark on the flat pitches like the Adelaide oval. His record for Australia over there is something like 2 wickets at an average of 50. But Nielsen said Bollinger is certain to play else they would have called up Clark.

 

[sifter132]

The selectors don't seem to rate Clark on the flat pitches like the Adelaide oval. His record for Australia over there is something like 2 wickets at an average of 50. But Nielsen said Bollinger is certain to play else they would have called up Clark.

Ah yes, but Nielsen isn't a selector. He's speculating here. The fact the SELECTORS picked McKay might mean Nielsen needs to be careful with what he says and how it reflects on Clark's status and McKay's potential. I mean it's possible they really would pick Stuart Clark and they are just checking out McKay, but I personally think Nielsen's kinda wrong - well I hope he is I don't think the selectors would turn back to Stuart Clark when they know this isn't a particularly important Test match. It would be a good time to try someone new in the XI, not go back to old horses.

And thinking differently, this is almost the 'personality test' phase for McKay. We've heard how Chris Rogers mightn't get any more chances because he doesn't fit in well with the other squad members, so whatever you do Clint - don't rub the Aussie boys the wrong way :laugh

Geez Clark would be feeling unlucky, his style of bowling suits Adelaide, even though he doesnt have a bag of wickets in the tests he's played there. Bollinger would be a starter you'd figure, though McKay's style has been successful in the past few matches at Adelaide so you never know.

Here's my problem with Stuart Clark for anyone interested. He had 2 great series' when he first made the side against SA and England, but there was a big factor in those: There were 2 guys named McGrath and Warne in the attack! (no McGrath in that SA series, but he had beautiful seaming wickets..) The Saffers and Poms saw Stuart Clark as the targetable 4th bowler in those 2 series. But he wasn't, he schooled them and ripped out:
46 wickets in 8 Tests at an average of 16.52.
Now SINCE THEN, he's been a shadow of that form. Still solid, but nowhere near the production of those first 2 series. You can say the elbow injury's had its effect, whatever. But since the 06/07 Ashes, old Stuey's taken:
47 wickets in 15 Tests at 29.91.

Quite the difference.

Look he's a good bowler, but he's no where NEAR as good as people make out. Given that he's 34 years old, and Clint McKay has been impressive while being only 26 years old, it's really a no-brainer.

 

[angryangy]

I'd split it differently. When Clark took on England and South Africa, yes there were Warne and McGrath around, but he was also a bowler at the peak of his powers. McGrath didn't even go to South Africa that year and wasn't at his best in any of the Tests the following summer due to that extended layoff. The following summer, Clark did a good job, but it was that final, wicketless Adelaide Test that scuppered his figures. Nevertheless, Clark went to the West Indies, where he capped off his golden age.

So he took 47 @ 17.8 in the 'Warne-McGrath Era' (1 game against Bangladesh didn't count for much);

but it was followed by 9 Tests with success off his own bat. 34 wickets @ 26.52 is more like what Stuart Clark was worth in state and county cricket.

Which leaves the last six matches to look a bit worse than just average. 13 wickets at 38.76 includes the green top at the Gabba where NZ failed to reach 200 twice and the match at Leeds where England made 365 runs for their 20 wickets. A lot of wickets fell and you'd think if Clark was bowling as well as he was in South Africa, he could have delivered enormous match winning hauls; instead he was largely matched or outplayed by his cohorts.

Injuries have seen him struggle somewhat, but at 34, he is at the age where you do have to be an exception to continue to be a fast bowler. Right now he's well off the boil, at time struggling to bowl at even 120 kph. Even if he finds more for the top level, physically, he's not what he was. I can't really see him getting a call up for anything more than Twenty20 and I can't really see him holding his contract.

 

[aussie1st]

I agree it's unlikely Clark will make it back now, the selectors haven't got the same faith in him as they showed through the Ashes and with relatively easy opponents, they won't feel the need to bring him back.

 

[Dare]

Undeserving abuse for West Indies | Cricket Features | Australia v West Indies 2009/10 | Cricinfo.com

Th captain of Australia during that dismal period was Kim Hughes.In his 28 Tests at the helm, Australia lost 13 Tests, against four victories. He resigned in 1984 after his team had been beaten for the fifth successive time by the West Indies, ironically at the same Gabba.

He cut a forlorn figure as he openly wept in front of the assembled media, pleading: "The constant criticism, speculation and innuendo by former players over the past four or five years have finally taken their toll". Given such a background, he might have been expected to keep his thoughts about the present situation to himself. Instead, he weighed in.

Great article by Tony Cozier, put some of these hypocrites back where they belong.

 

[TumTum]

Since when is that called Abuse?

Cry babies :laugh

 

[Howsie]

Yeah I read that article today to, great peice really.

 

[Bluebagger]

A good comparison between Kim Hughes and Michael Clarke was made on ABC radio and how captaincy ruined potentialy one of our greatest batsman and whether or not the same would happen to Clarke, they also mentioned how the West Indies have no real drive to become any better and that is why they are so poor, I can't ever see them getting them back into being a consistant strong team in test cricket again, maybe next time they come out we'll have to schedule two tests up in Darwin and Cairns, I miss the epic 5 test series we used to have with them.

 

[sifter132]

Yeah that Cosier piece was gold. I personally think the cricket journos here in Australia aren't much to write about haha :doh They're always looking for the sensationalist storylines and rarely have much insight or even decent analysis.

He's right, the media spin about how this series is a joke is just WRONG. I actually thought the West Indies played pretty decently. Well...at least they bowled pretty well, especially since they had no Jerome Taylor for most of the time. Australia were 5 for less than 300 on a flat pitch, and it was perhaps that lack of depth that stopped the Windies from striking with the new ball. If they'd got Haddin or North on that first night they could have been chasing less than 400.

And considering their 3 senior batsmen either failed or were injured, I think the Windies have the potential to be a decent opponent. But don't let that stop some sensationalist rubbish in the papers...

 

[TumTum]

Siddle looks to get in the swing | Cricket News | Australia v West Indies 2009/10 | Cricinfo.com

:doh

 

[rahuldravidfan]

Tony Cozier slams the Aussie media

I agree with every word said by Tony Cozier. The Aussie media really goes over the top and is much of an embarrassment to an average Aussie cricket enthusiast, whose only wish of reading unbiased news is constantly ignored .

 

[TumTum]

Can you please summarise what the Aussie media said plz? I kinda can't understand it :doh

 

[braguvaran]

Just a bit over with their cricticism... but you got to say that they only felt for test cricket and got a bit upset about windies not putting up a fight. So overall the criticism is acceptable...
Atleast not like TOI!

 

[rahuldravidfan]

Just a bit over the top with their cricticism... but you got to say that they only felt for test cricket and got a bit upset about windies not putting up a fight. So overall the criticism is acceptable...
UNlike TOI!

Corrected .

Oh btw, loved the way you spelt "cricticism"

rahuldravidfan added 6 Minutes and 13 Seconds later...

This was talked about in the WI/Aus thread.

Can you please summarise what the Aussie media said plz? I kinda can't understand it :doh

This sums up everything really- Australian media continued to wage their psychological war with West Indies, when a former national captain called for the Caribbean side to be barred from playing Test matches.

Courtesy: The Gleamer

 

[Highlander999]

Corrected .

Oh btw, loved the way you spelt "cricticism"

Why are you trying to bait him?