What do these facts mean?
The two best writers on cricket, Gideon Haigh and Peter Roebuck, praised Ricky Ponting’s performance at the press conference yesterday when he announced his resignation from the captaincy of the Australian Test and ODI sides.
There was, one of them noted, none of the crankiness of a testy Allan Border, or the tears of a maudlin Kim Hughes.
Ponting made his case for remaining in the side as forthrightly as he has batted for Australia. And it needs to be remembered, again as the two writers pointed out, that Ponting is the greatest Australian batsman since Don Bradman.
He has scored 39 Test and 30 ODI centuries. And this was done batting in the driver’ seat of number 3. His runs were scored at a brisk rate: 59 runs per 100 balls in Tests and 80 per 100 balls in ODI.
As a captain he won 62 per cent of his Tests and 72 per cent of his ODIs as captain.
Ponting is a giant of Australian cricket. This needs to be remembered in the messy business that has surrounded his last couple seasons as captain. Future generations will revere him, as batsman, the way we do now for the other greats of the past.
But this is for future generations. Right now the issue is how he manages the rest of what should be only a couple more years in the Australian colours.
His time has been up as skipper for several years. He was reluctant to give away the captaincy (understandable given his pride in his achievements and the undoubted monetary rewards that come from holding down the job).
No matter what he says, he must have known that whether he liked it or not, his days as the skipper were over when India scored the winning runs to put Australia out of the World Cup tournament last week.
Clarke seemed to suggest at today’s press conference that Ponting will remain at number 3 in the batting order. If this is what he wants, then this is his first mistake as the new leader.
A new number 3 has to be found. In Australian teams, this is the pivotal position. Ponting’s powers are waning. A new champion needs to be given his chance. Ponting will be of best value to Australian sides, either in Tests or ODI, batting down the order, probably at number 5.
Although Clarke brings a fine batting record to his new job as Australian captain with a Test average of 46, he was in poor form during the last Ashes series. Has he passed his prime? He will have to score runs to justify his position. For the tried and proven Australian way is only select captains who are first choice players in the team.
The English concept of the captain-batsman in the Mike Brearley mode has never had much play in Australian cricket, and rightly so. It is actually a hangover from the days in county and Test cricket in England when only amateurs could be captain. Few of these amateur captains, especially in county cricket, were worth their place in their teams as players.
There is another aspect of the Clarke succession that has its problems. Has there been too much of a sense of entitlement in his promotion? The one sour note in Ponting’s press conference yesterday was when he talked about Clarke being the obvious choice as his successor. Then he went on to say how he’d sit in his corner being ready to help out with ideas and so on if the new leadership wanted to pick his brains over some matter.
These observations, to me at least, gave the impression that it was going to be a Clarke-Ponting new order after the old order of Ponting-Clarke. In other words, has there actually been a real change in the leadership?
Richie Benaud has endorsed Clarke (“he’s done well at the times he’s been captain”) as the new leader. He then went on to make this very interesting other point: “I’m interested in Watson because he’s a fine cricketer, a good thinking cricketer, but I think he’s got enough on his plate at the moment.”
Taking my cue from the great man of world cricket, I’d argue that the least the selectors could have done is made Watson the captain of the national ODI and Twenty20 sides.
Or if the selectors had really, really bold and far-sighted, they would have appointed Watson as captain of the Test and ODI sides.
The rationale behind this assertion is that the Ponting era is coming to an end. The Clarke-Ponting power nexus should really reflect this by being moved aside for the next generation of players to take Australian cricket through to the next cycle of Ashes series and World Cup tournaments.
The obvious leader for the next generation of Australian cricket is Watson, a player who is undoubtedly a first choice for Australia in all forms of the game.
And there is an historical precedent for this sort of shift of power and leadership to the the next generation to lift the status of Australian cricket sides in all forms of the game.
Let’s go back to 1958/59. The captaincy of Ian Craig was over and a new captain was needed. The candidates were (the obvious) Neil Harvey, a brilliant batsman coming to the end of his career and (the less obvious) Richie Benaud, a gifted all-rounder who had not quite fulfilled his promise but was showing signs of becoming a fine player.
It is history now that the selectors of the day picked Benaud. Benaud went on to become one of the great captains of Australia.
Watson has the potential to be a Benaud-like captain. But he needs to be promoted to captain of the national ODI side as soon as possible to find out whether he has what it takes to be the inspiring leader the new generation Australian cricket teams needs so urgently right now.
Ben
Guest
Clarke is lucky to be in the side let alone captaining it. Everyone keeps saying he has a great cricket brain. The aptitude to be a great captain. Well this is a game i was at and he was captaining. http://www.cricwaves.com/cricket/800/Match-Full-Scorecard/Scorecard.html Anyone remember this? Clarke is is what we call at our CC a tin man. Remember this? http://cricket.com.au/news-display/Clarke-falls-off-last-ball/23059 No captain should go out in this suituation. you could almost say this was the biggest contributing wicket to england retaining the ashes. Going out to a part time spinner on the last ball of the day. Here is continuing proof that he should not be captain. A break down of Clarkes batting on the big stage over the last few major tournaments. Ashes 2010/11: 9 innings, 193 runs and a total 21.44 as an average World Cup 2011: 6 innings, 233 runs and a total of 77.66 as an average (would like to point out that he scored 58* against zimbarbwe, 93 against kenya and 16* against canada. Against the test playing nations he had 3 innings, for 66 runs facing 104 balls. Anyone who has watched a one dayer in the last 10 years would know that this is just unacceptable if you want to regularly win odi's.) ICC 20/20 world cup 2007: 2 innings, 3 runs and a total of 1.5 as an average. ICC 20/20 world cup 2009: 2 innings: 13 runs and a total of 6.5 as an average ICC 20/20 world cup 2010: 7 innings, 92 runs and a total of 15.33 as an average Border Gavaskar Trophy 2010: 5 innings, 35 runs and a total of 8.75 as an average As you can see he does not have the heart in the big games to stand up against pressure. He is more there for sponsorship and cause vodafone put him on there adds. eing able to take this pressure is what made the last 4 captains great and a massive part of why australia has conqueured the game. He has only had one tournament in the last few years of any size that he has actually done his job. which was the ashes in England 2009. If you ask me Selectors, Ponting, Hilditch and Clarke have to go and I will only feel sorry to see one of them go.Thanks for the memories Ricky.
fisher price
Guest
Roll on the next annointed one - Tim Paine.
Hoy
Roar Guru
Here are my thoughts: Will Ponting be remembered as a great cricketer but poor captain? Until we all die I say yes. Then the next generation will only have his figures and will see he was obviously good. But truth is, I would say he hasn't been a good captain at all. When he was winning, I could have been captain and won with those players. When he lost those players, the truth surfaced. He was tactically poor. Plus I don't know of another captain to lose three ashes series. There could be one. I don't know. That says enough for me. So was he really that good for Australian Cricket? He hung on far too long, obviously against the benefit of the team. Katich was a better choice, several years ago. Too late now though. If Ponting thought about the good of Australian cricket rather than the good of Ponting, he would have withdrawn from captaincy long ago. Clarke has been annointed captain for so long now, that they had no option but to make him captain. If they didn't annoint him so bloody early, someone else might have shown some natural leadership and flair. It makes me a little sick to start "annointing" people years out. It leaves others with the skills out in the cold. Truth be told, Clarke should probably not even make the team. So at the moment, we have a heap of players in the team that are old, or out of form. The selecters need their heads on plates for this. For too long we have just cruised. It is upsetting, the more I think about our rapid drop from the unbeatable team we used to be, to the rabble we are now, the more pissed off I get.
Bayman
Guest
and correct, again, Sheek. On a happier note, I've got a long lunch today but I'm available to lead the team from tomorrow. Wanna be vice-captain?
Bayman
Guest
Sheek, Correct, we've only got ourselves to blame.
Bayman
Guest
jameswm, That's cruel. Amusing, but cruel.
Bayman
Guest
kick, Clarke will be 30 tomorrow (April 2nd, 2011). Watson will be 30 in June. Benaud had only recently turned 28 when he became captain in 1958. It doesn't sound like much but two years is a fair difference. In fact, apart from "fill-in" captains, I'd suggest Clarke will probably be one of the oldest players to be appointed as the Board's nominated skipper.
Bayman
Guest
Rhys, I fully agree with you on both points, the team selection and Lee's stated ambition. Unfortunately, it is now clear the selectors have confirmed what we always knew - they have no clue. Presumably Hastings is in the team because somebody thinks he can bat a bit. It is also true that comments like Lee's now seem to be the normal in cricket. Ponting wants to chase Tendulkar (good luck there, Ricky), Lee wants 400 ODI wickets. Apparently the selectors job is to rubber stamp personal ambition. When are these modern players going to realise the team hasn't been created just so they can indulge themselves in personal glory - or the chase for same. Typical of the modern "I'm entitled" generation. Cameron White's selection can only be an abheration. Perhaps the selectors are just picking him until he actually does something useful so they can claim they knew what they were doing all along. After all, he's bound to do something soon....isn't he? As for the vice-captaincy, Watson is an interesting choice but maybe the only choice. After all, he is probably the only player in Australia right now who may be confidently tipped to play all forms of the game. If he is being considered the next in line it is strange that he was not made captain of the T20 team, at least. White's appointment may only be recent but, when it was made, Ponting was still captain for the future. And White certainly has not done enough as a player to justify his position in any Australian team as a certainty. Optionally, perhaps CA has gone back to the good old days of the '80s when vice-captains were appointed every five minutes and were the first players dropped. Even Hilditch was once a vice-captain.
Bayman
Guest
Jason, They may have fixed it but it's symptomatic of the cricketing nous at CA. Let's face it, those three players shifted state at least two seasons ago. Mind you, it took a year for CA to update their "cap numbers" tag on the CA website. Some time ago they published a programme/brochure which discussed the 1948 tour. In the famous 4th Test in which Australia made 3/404 to win the match the CA article credited Bradman (correct) and Barnes (not so correct) as the chief scorers. Arthur Morris' 182 was given to Barnes - and Barnes did not even play in that game. Given the iconic nature of that match it's a little difficult to imagine how CA could actually screw that up - but they did. We shouldn't expect any actual cricketing knowledge from CA. That's clearly not their strength.
Damien
Guest
To be honest, I don't think Ponting needed to resign. The problem with Australian cricket is staring us right in the face. The selectors.
sheek
Guest
This is getting quite ridiculous. It's all very well to argue Clarke shouldn't be captain, but then who is the obvious alternative????? Not Watson (selfish), not Haddin (keeper), not Katich (too old), not Hussey (too old), not Johnson (flaky). Unfortunately, sometimes, the pantry is bare..........
sheek
Guest
Basically, I would summarise supporters' fears by suggesting we've ended up with the team(s) we deserve, be it test, 50 overs or T20. CA has taken its eye off the ball so to speak, & consequently, the game, & standard of players, has plummeted..........
sheek
Guest
James, Except Greg Chappell. He was anointed to the selectors panel just recently. It's almost certain he wasn't able to influence events sufficiently in the time in which he returned.
sheek
Guest
James, You would probably argue, if pressed, for Katich as skipper, & either Hussey or Haddin as vc. But........... Katich & Hussey are less than a year shy of Ponting in age. Haddin has enough on his plate as keeper. Watson is a terribly selfish & self-absorbed cricketer. The stocks are bare..... so do we have any reasonable alternatives.....???
sheek
Guest
FOS, You're an ex-breakaway, what would you know.....(smiley face)...........
Lolly
Guest
You mean the next one against Sri Lanka? That will be huge of course as they hardly ever play the Shrees and they have a very fine record at home. It will really test the Aussies.
BarnabusXI
Guest
I know, that is very strange. To me John Hastings is just a poor man's James Hopes. So why not get the real deal in?
jameswm
Guest
Another good reason to make Clarke captain of our 50-over side only!
jameswm
Guest
No There is a one-day tour coming up, so appoint Clarke as capatin for that tour, and say a final decision as to a permanent test and one-day captain will be made in due course. In fact better yet - I don't care so much about the one-dayers, so just appoint Clarke as captain for the one-dayers and be done with it. If anyone asks about the test captaincy, just say that will be announced when we pick our next test squad. There - simple.
Pffft
Guest
Will they even keep playing the 50 over cricket much longer?