The Australian cricket team selectors have again proven that they are not up to the task of selecting the best cricket team to represent this country in the most prestigious and important cricket competition. The captain of the Australian cricket team is the most prestigious appointment in Australian sport, a fact clearly ignored by the selectors.
The appointment of Michael Clarke is a very poor decision. Coming on top of so many other poor decisions, the selectors must go.
Firstly, Michael Clarke is hopelessly out of form and has a vulnerable technique. Rather than adding to his work load, the selectors should have lightened his load in the hope that he can resurrect his batting. The team, now and in the future, needs him to score runs – more than ever now that Ricky Ponting is not playing.
Secondly, Michael Clarke’s personal priorities are not conducive to the massive leadership role required to refloat this sinking ship.
Thirdly, Michael Clarke is not of sufficient determination or character to lead the team on and off the field.
The rebuilding of the team needs to commence as soon as possible. We have learned from the Simpson and Border eras, that the captaincy is a critical appointment. The captain sets the agenda, the team culture and the psyche.
The Chappell, Taylor, Waugh eras also demonstrate the importance and the influence of the captain.
The next test match is in August 2011. This allows for a new captain to consult with the experts and formulate his plans ready for implementation after the World Cup.
For those not in favour of Michael Clarke becoming the next long term captain of the Australian Test team, perversely, the selectors’ decision is a good one.
The pressure of finding form and rebuilding the team may result in the dropping of him from the team altogether in the future.
One poor decision will result in more, harder decisions in the future.
David Roberts
Guest
I just don't see what is wrong with Clarke being a protected species, Australian Captain, Governor General or whatever. Surely a No. 4 who is averaging almost 20 in his last 16 innings against Pakistan, India and England deserves a fair go? Please also lay off Andrew Hilditch, he only earns $100,000 pa plus expenses plus free entry to the cricket, for his part time job with ACA. I am sure none of you would want to do such an awful job for such a pittance.
MrKistic
Guest
At least Ponting is going in for surgery now so won't have the option to lurk like that. It just shows the way he thinks about it all, it's his team and he's in charge, even when he's not in it. Out in the nets coaching, lurking around the rooms - mentoring?!? Either way, it shows that Clarke does have at least some cojones to make the changes he has in spite of Ponting's presence. Totally agree about Khawaja, wouldn't it have been good to have him come in to bat 6 rather than Smith? You could easily have had Clarke bowling Smith's overs and still taking none for. Haddin has failed today, he seems to be losing the patience he'd developed in the earlier tests. The poms give him some obvious run making territory and sure enough, flashing outside off. Probably not good enough when you're 4/140 odd.
LeftArmSpinner
Roar Guru
Sitting Bison, yep, as predicted, Clarke's lack of form continues. It was a poor shot. weight wrong, an easy catch, straight to fieldsman. Now that I have seen Khawaja bat, the selectors also failed by not introducing him earlier in the series. He has the technique and clarity of mind, at least at this point in his career. Again, the selectors have failed. And yes, what was Ponting doing in the dressing room during the game, all dressed up in his training gear. Sad really. A team was chosen and he wasnt in it. End of story..................
sittingbison
Guest
Clarke failed again today. Ponting lurking around dressing room. 4/100 odd, Hussey and Haddin at crease both on nothing. Sorry Brett but in this case you are wrong, he is not the best option. He has not displayed any leadership credentials and is woefully out of form. It doesn't matter what past scores, the selectors are there for a reason and that is to determine when someone is not considently performing and 'rest' them ie drop in old parlance, and promote someone more deserving. This has not been happening for almost 20 years due to generational champions in the side, but must come back into play with the current crop. BTW England should already have dropped Collingwood
sittingbison
Guest
And as someone else alluded too on this site Clarke bears major comparison to Gits, young flash next best thing in a team of champs but shown wanting when the chips are down
sittingbison
Guest
But Vinay Pieterson is universally despised and more importantly got drummed out of the captaincy because of his personality, the rest of the team couldn't stand him
sittingbison
Guest
“Michael is a natural leader, he is a person who grabs people through his own performance and the way he presents himself and drags people along with him" Sigh
Scott
Guest
If I went to work, didn't do my job to the level required, I would be spoken to, if I consistently didn't get the job done, the last thing I would expect is a promotion? Maybe this is just my work place, I don't know? Aussies need a strong leader a good performer, someone like hussey minus a few years,
Geoff Brisbane
Guest
Quick answer YES
Oracle
Guest
That is why Clarke The Koala (Protected Species) shouldn't be captain. He shouldn't even be in the side.
TammyS
Roar Rookie
Im sure every single Australian captain has had a fight or disagreement with at least one of their players at one point or another besides how do you know Katich and Clarke havent sorted it out? They had a fight over when the team song should be sung. Big deal
LeftArmSpinner
Roar Guru
and he doesnt get on with Katich, a man of unquestionable tenacity, determination and leadership. It might be personal, but then again , a smart next aust captain would have kept Katich on side 'cause he will need him in the next few series to get some of the runs.
TammyS
Roar Rookie
I think you and a lot of people here are underestimating Clarke's leadership skills http://wwos.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=8190989 Im not sure if this link will work so here are some quotes from the article " "He's got a very good cricket brain, he thinks about the game very well, I think he'll be an aggressive captain," said Mike Hussey. "He'll always be looking to take wickets out there, he'll be looking to make changes to the field, changes to the bowlers, searching for a wicket all the time and he'll always want the game going forward." Clarke's buzzing persona when leading Australia in the shorter forms of the game has left a decidedly positive impression with teammates - fast man Shane Tait regards the New South Welshman as the best captain he has played under." and this one "The way Michael handled himself, although his own form wasn't as good as he would have liked, the way he led the side and expected other guys to lead with him, I think he'll bring out the best in this side," said Mott. "There's a few young guys in there and they have a lot of respect for him especially the NSW players that have seen him at close hand. I'm sure he'll lead them really well."
LeftArmSpinner
Roar Guru
long on, exactly and so why would the selectors appoint him as skipper.................haven't they seen him bat recently? well, probably not because he hasnt been at the crease for very long. In addition to the technical weaknesses, his tactics were wrong. more recently, in adelaide, in the final few overs of the day, he got out, unnecessarily and pathetically to Pietersen, and then most recently, in the 3rd innings, he didn't attempt to survive. rather, he adopted this Michael Slater, I will hit my way out of it strategy.........wrong.
LeftArmSpinner
Roar Guru
Greg, White is a better option than Smith. neither spin their leggies, White is a better fieldsman and batsman. and he can captain, proven....... Clarke may be the best we have, but it will be the premature end of his career. Clarke is not the product of a new generation. He is a different product to the Waugh, Border and Taylor versions of Australian captains. And we need the Waugh style, not the clarke style. Determination and character are not negotiable or out of fashion or of another generation. My criticism is of the selectors in putting an out of form batsman into the firing line of saving a sinking ship. It is an abrogation of their responsibility.
LeftArmSpinner
Roar Guru
SMI, the comparisons are spot on. However, if cricket follows, Rugby, there are many more years of head in the sand before anything happens. Rugby's demise commenced on Eales retirement and was not properly addressed until the appointment of O'Neill and his appointment of Deans. then it has been another three years to turn the ship around and it is not there yet. Deans, I believe, as good a coach as he is, underestimated the size and depth of the problem. the same goes for Cricket. major changes to team leadership, psyche, competitiveness, determination, personnel and technical ability.
stillmissit
Roar Guru
Greg I normally enjoy your insights but not this one. So Clarke is the best we have and we should just shut up. By this are you are suggesting that Clarke has a better cricketing brain than a Hussey or a Haddin. He is also a better captain than White? The advantage that Clarke brings is that he has been there for a long time, that is also his disadvantage. I thought he was OK as a ODI captain but nothing spectacular. So it is back to the old argument 'We don't have any good players at the moment' Which I believe is rubbish.
TammyS
Roar Rookie
Spot on Greg. I met a footballer recently worshipped by everyone both for his on field abilities and off field "persona" but turned out to be a real sleaze in person. Its ok to judge Clarke on his on field form but you people need to seriously get a life if you're going to judge someone based on gossip mags and a few minutes of him talking at a press conference after every game. Its petty. At the end of the day we dont have a lot of options and imo Clarke is best fit for the job at the moment
Vinay Verma
Roar Guru
Lefty,I share your apprehension at the apparent diluting of our traditional values of hard work and perseverance. But we live in a changing world and I don't think our cricketers try any less. It is the direction and guidance that is lacking. I firmly believe we have the talent. it is the mixed signals comning from our administrators that see us ranked 4 or 5. There is a culture of croneyism which is holding back talent. But I see a change with Greg chappell and it is too much to expect it to change overnight. I think clarke will do a good job. Let us revisit this in a weeks time.
Long On
Guest
LAS You are correct about his technical problems, Brendan MacArdle wrote an interesting article in the Age today about David Saker, which sheds light on some of Clark’s issues. Saker has been the English bowling coach for about a year now and he has improved their bowling at both a tactical and skill level. One of Saker’s successes has been the bowling plan for Michael Clark. In the one day series in England last year Saker developed a plan for Stuart Broad to bowl short at Clark. Apparently the plan worked perfectly and formed the basis of how England has bowled to Clark in this season’s test matches. MacArdle discussed a 45 minute period early in the series where England went hard at him and Clark did not react well. Since then he has appeared anything but comfortable at the crease and his series batting average suggests he is at best just out of form. If England have revealed a flaw all other nations will try to exploit it. So apart from all of the problems confronting the Australian captain, Clarke may have major difficulties in holding his place in the team.