On the face of it, all the ingredients are there for an argument that doesn’t really want to get started. A cricketer thinks he’s fit, and a selection panel aren’t too sure.
Quite easily solved, you would think, and thus avoiding all the inevitable toing and froing that the media have been lapping up in the last few days.
If Michael Clarke believes he will be alright to play in the Test at the Gabba on the back of minimal preparation then he should be given his head.
If the selectors feel that he needs a certain amount of cricket in order to be passed fit then they shouldn’t suggest he plays in a tour game or a grade encounter; they should tell him to do it.
In attempting to cover all the angles by naming Clarke in the squad, those charged with picking the team haven’t really helped themselves and the so-called spat, if it is actually that.
Without knowing anything about the dynamic between Clarke and the selectors, this issue is a tricky one to judge as it offers the impression that Clarke is effectively doing whatever he wants and doing it with two fingers raised in the direction of the men in suits.
This could well be the case, with the New South Welshman taking full advantage of his role as captain and calling their bluff, or it could be that he has been given the opportunity to prepare as he wishes with the proof of the pudding arriving when he has a fitness test in Brisbane.
Would that really be so bad?
Clarke’s history is hardly one of plain sailing when it comes to his fitness and rarely does a series go by without a bulletin about the condition of one part of his anatomy or another. But going back to an aforementioned point, if that isn’t what Rod Marsh et al want then they shouldn’t give their captain any choice.
There is a bigger picture to all of this, namely the forthcoming World Cup and a hectic Test schedule in 2015, but individuals don’t see the whole canvas when the focus is solely on the next game.
Clarke’s desire to play against India next week, and I’m not sure him being captain is really that relevant, is fully understandable and to mock him for being selfish is missing the point to a certain extent.
By definition it is selfish as it’s taken for his own ends, but a cricketer wanting to play for his country is hardly an attitude to criticise. And if his back is likely to end his career at some stage – possibly before he is ready to go – then willingly missing games won’t be particularly high on his agenda.
Looking ahead is the role of the selection panel and a touch more decisiveness wouldn’t harm their cause. They’re paid to make decisions and sitting comfortably on the fence doesn’t fit in that category.
On another matter, enough has been written about the subject already to make my opinion far from unique but I, like every other cricket follower, was shocked by the scenes from the SCG on Tuesday.
A stricken Phil Hughes was a desperate sight and I hope he can pull through.
David Lord has been remembered as an icon of Australian sports journalism following his death, aged 84. The renowned writer and broadcaster was an…
Sign the man up for a contract next season!
RCB have suffered a massive HEAD-ACHE after Travis Head smashed the fastest century by an SRH player in just 39 balls, as they amassed…
A brutal century by Travis Head has blasted Sunrisers Hyderabad back into the Indian Premier League play-off places in another match for bowlers to…
Two Aussies abroad have endured wildly different fortunes as Jake Fraser-McGurk joined the world stage with a thrilling first IPL half century, but Scott…
Test great Steve Smith is to play for Washington Freedom in the second season of Major League Cricket as the Australian influence in the…
