The Roar
The Roar

Advertisement

It's now a question of 'how great' for Michael Clarke

Michael Clarke. (AFP PHOTO / LUIGI BENNETT)
Roar Guru
9th March, 2014
32
1488 Reads

I wrote before the now completed South Africa series that the pressure was on Michael Clarke to consolidate on the games of the home summer.

Arguably, the series against South Africa was more important in the grand scheme than the Ashes.

If you’ll recall, or given how few people read my articles, I will remind you: Clarke was in a form slump, questions were being asked about the English team and the quality of the opposition beaten by Australia, there were legitimate questions about Australia’s top order and they were facing the number one ranked side.

A loss to South Africa threatened to undo a very prosperous and productive summer.

Yet here we all sit, a victorious series later, Clarke back in form, Australia rising up the rankings, and, once again, all feels good in the world of cricket.

Make no mistake, the series win in South Africa is bigger than the Ashes win. Monstrously bigger.

To put into perspective the achievement of the Australians, South Africa have not lost at home since, well, since we beat them, way back in 2009.

That’s a stretch up there with the great West Indian side of the 80s and the Australians of the late 90s, early 2000s.

Advertisement

And the victory was overseas. Recent followers of cricket will know that overseas Test series wins, particularly by Australia, are rarities.

So what do we make of Clarke? Two thumping match wins, one thumping loss, an otherwise barren series, but one captaincy-defining unbeaten century.

Was it a series of immense feast in otherwise famine, or was it a series of simply the result and the runs?

Truth be told, there are no longer any question marks over Clarke the batsman, Clarke the cricketer, Clarke the captain.

The century he scored in that final Test is his best. There’s no argument. It was tough, it was at times brutal, but this was the innings Clarke needed to play.

It was the score that the likes of Ricky Ponting, Steve Waugh, Mark Taylor, Allan Border and every successful Australian captain before him had scored.

In terms of the actual series margin, the blow out scorelines are ultimately deceptive.

Advertisement

I often refer to England’s 2005 Ashes win as the series they won by two runs. If Michael Kasprowicz and Brett Lee pull off the miracle at Edgbasten, I doubt people would unrelentingly refer to it as ‘the greatest series ever played’.

Well, if I’m consistent, the 2014 series in South Africa will be the series Australia won by 27 balls.

The caveat that Steyn was injured for the last Test is irrelevant. Ryan Harris played on a broken leg and bowled Australia to victory.

So the individual game margins were blow outs, but the series was 27 balls away from a draw.

In that light, it was a close series. It was a series that could have gone any way. So Clarke, driven by results, made the right calls.

And in hindsight, it is hard to question Clarke’s captaincy. He made the right calls, while he had the team that followed the calls, and Clarke provided the innings that his team needed at the singular moment they very much needed it the most.

While I would also question how ‘great’ a team is that was always seeking to ‘not be beaten’, rather than always seeking to ‘win’, as South Africa keep doing, it is always hard to ultimately beat a team that has forgotten how to lose.

Advertisement

So while the records and time will legitimately say South Africa were a great team, it took a perhaps greater team to finally seal a victory over them at home.

Australia still remain 12 gaping points behind South Africa in the Test rankings. That is nothing to be sneezed at.

Of course, ranking systems can be deceptive. South Africa have now only won three of their last seven Test matches. Australia have won seven of their last eight.

So South Africa are still the number one team over the last four years, but who is the best at the moment is at least open to debate.

For the moment, this is almost a great Australian side. A top order opener who destroys, a frontline bowler who genuinely strikes fear into retiring batsmen, and so many players with untapped potential.

That also fails to take into consideration the players on the outskirts: Starc, Cummins, Hughes, Marsh. It is no longer the case of who to put in, but who to leave out, and these are the problems you want with a strong side.

It is indeed exciting times for Australian cricket, such a far and distant cry from the shambles and shame that existed twelve months ago.

Advertisement

Michael Clarke returned home a proud, content and accomplished man.

Rightly so.

The pup has grown up. The pup has been replaced by the prize breed, a genuine blue ribbon cattle dog, as was so abundantly evident on that final day as he refused to take a backward step in those dying moments.

It is interesting that so much has been made of his run-in with Steyn.

Apparently Steyn can carry on like a clown with every wicket he takes, but nobody is allowed to throw it back at him. Notably, Steyn was not exactly a wilting wallflower in the confrontation with Clarke.

Further, I would argue that Clarke warning Anderson about impending broken arms, and asking Steyn to politely keep quiet and get back to his crease, have made him a better captain and a more relatable captain.

I know when I’m on a playing field, I don’t give a flying ducky how profane my captain is, I just want to know that he’s playing for me and he has my back and he’s leading from the front.

Advertisement

Michael Clarke has finally and categorically proven that he is that captain on every front.

So the questions about Clarke have not disappeared, but they have been replaced.

It’s no longer a case of ‘what type of captain will Clarke be?’, but rather ‘how good a captain can Clarke be?’.

No longer should we ask ‘does Clarke score runs when we need them?’, but ‘how many runs will Clarke score when we need them?’.

Clarke has three, maybe four, hopefully five years left wearing the baggy green. That time is now his to not necessarily define his legacy.

No, these final years are his to cement his legacy.

close