I always admired Michael Clarke as a batsman, captain and person. My admiration for him has shot up in the last few days as a warm and caring human being during the Phillip Hughes tragedy.
And on the first two days of the Adelaide Test I salute him as a batsman of the highest class. Despite his physical handicaps (bad back, hamstring problem) he batted superbly.
>>FOLLOW THE LIVE SCORES OF THE AUSTRALIA VS INDIA TEST MATCH
A heroic performance and a captain’s innings for sure.
However, in my opinion he erred in not declaring Australia’s innings an hour before stumps on Day Two.
How relieved the Indian batsmen were to escape facing a few ferocious deliveries from Mitchell Johnson, Peter Siddle and Ryan Harris in fading light.
I could almost lip-read India’s captain Virat Kohli praying that Clarke would not declare an hour or so before stumps on Wednesday. So preoccupied he was that he once dropped a catch in the slip he would normally have taken easily.
Rather than Australia batting on and on to reach 7/517 from 120 overs before the umpires stopped play, Clarke should have declared when the total reached 6/450 after 108 overs.
Those 10 overs were vital for Australia to grab a wicket or three as the Indians were exhausted doing the leather hunt provided by magnificent centurions from David Warner, Steven Smith and Clarke.
Usually Clarke is a daring skipper, always looking at victories rather than personal landmarks, like scoring most centuries (seven) in Tests in Adelaide.
My mind goes back to the run-rich January 2012 Sydney Test when he had declared the innings closed despite many more personal milestones awaiting him.
His unbeaten 329 off 468 balls was the only Test triple hundred on the SCG and the third highest score on the ground after Don Bradman’s 452 not out (for NSW versus Queensland in 1929-30) and 340 not out (for NSW versus Victoria in 1928-29).
In that majestic innings, man of the match Clarke had struck 39 fours and a six in his masterclass, which lasted ten hours and nine minutes.
He could have gone on to become the highest scorer for Australia in Tests, going past Matthew Hayden’s 380 against Zimbabwe at Perth in 2003-04.
So fluently was ‘Pup’ Clarke batting that even Brian Lara’s Test record of 400 not out (for West Indies versus England at St John’s in 2003-04) did not appear beyond him.
But Clarke had put the interests of his team over personal milestones by declaring at 4/659.
Australia went on to win that Test by an innings and 68 runs. Had he gone on for records, who knows, India could have saved the Test.
The Adelaide Test is still very much in Australia’s favour and they could win by a big margin to lead 1-0 in the Border-Gavaskar Trophy.
But in my opinion Clarke has thrown a life line to the Indians by delaying the declaration.
Dalgety Carrington
Roar Guru
Definitely heard the commentators on Ch9 say that the declaration would be difficult in that light if they were to bowl the quicks.
Davico
Guest
Nice Kersi, Flat wicket let's let the Indians get set and try to spin us out! Next time I am in India I will make sure I declare just like all those indian captains have done at home. Turn it up -- Comment from The Roar's iPhone app.
Shortfineleg
Guest
An extra hour this morning, 80 free runs, and not subjecting bowlers to 7 hours in the field would have been a good idea. It is early in the season.
Peter
Roar Rookie
I'm not sure 500+ gives you 'immunity to defeat' at Adelaide. It's not incomprehensible that a team can match that score or do better in the 1st innings, and score those runs quickly. Which can then result in a tight final 2 innings.
Ronan O'Connell
Expert
Absolutely India will be regretting it, I thought they should have played five bowlers and had Ashwin at seven. Lyon is getting turn and variable bounce from these footmarks but Karn Sharma won't be able to use those same areas of the pitch much, whereas Ashwin could have.
jammel
Guest
Yep, Clarke did the right thing. You need 500+ on this wicket - if there'd been less rain, Clarke might have got in the high 500s. It was only day 2. In my view, the fact that you can make 550 in the 1st dig and still lose, means that you should err on the side of caution and only declare with a greater number of runs.
Kersi Meher-Homji
Guest
I see your point Ronan. My view is that Australia did not need Johnson to bowl 4 to 5 over last evening. Even Watson, M Marsh, Lyon could have taken a vital wicket or two to bring India in a panic mode. What's the harm in trying? The way Lyon is turning the ball on day-3, India must regret not including Ashwin in their team. He would have been a handful on the final day.
Ronan O'Connell
Expert
"Also scoring 500+ runs in the first innings of an Adelaide Test gives the team no immunity to defeat." Isn't that a strong reason then to bat on then and get the score up to 517 rather than declaring at 440 (which is what they were on an hour's play before stumps)? On some pitches you feel you have batted your opposition out of the game by making 440 but not at Adelaide.
Worlds Biggest
Guest
Have to agree with you Kersi, I would have put India in with an hour to go. Michael Clarkes knock was one of the great tons IMO, what courage and guts. It was very Steve Waugh like determination.
Kersi Meher-Homji
Guest
It's all very speculative and iffy and no one shall know for sure. But in my opinion India would not have started so confidently as they did today had they been asked to bat in poor light yesterday. They were dog tired last evening. Good night's sleep and brighter light helped them today. Always better to be 0/0 than to be 2/10 at the start of a day. Also scoring 500+ runs in the first innings of an Adelaide Test gives the team no immunity to defeat. For example: Australia scored 556 in the first innings of the December 2003 Adelaide Test and lost to India by 4 wickets. England amassed 6/551 in the first innings of the December 2006 Adelaide Test and lost to Australia by 6 wickets. But as I said before we will never know in the current Test.
Ronan O'Connell
Expert
Hi Kersi, I figured at the time Clarke was worried that once they declared and Johnson got the Indian batsmen hopping around all over the place that play would probably end pretty quickly. With the Aussies out there smacking around some tame bowling light didn't appear an issue but if India's batsmen were battling against 150kmh bowling you could easily imagine it would have fast tracked the umpires' decision to call it off.
Con
Guest
Strange comments by the writer. Australia effectively faced only 4 sessions of batting and scored 517! They were moving the game along very quickly and if the weather wasn't bad then they would have declared midway through session 2 or half an hour before tea with well over 550. Weather necessitated the need to bat on.
sheek
Roar Guru
Hi Kersi, I figure the problem Clarke had in declaring is that this appears to be a feather-bed pitch. You would think if Australia can get past 500, then India should get past 400. Perhaps Clarke, being aware of this, doesn't want to spend any more time fielding than is absolutely necessary, barring rain interruptions.
Monday's Expert
Guest
Hmm, I heard the Ch9 blowhards say exactly that - the umpires will take them off for badlight if Johnson was bowling.
Ken
Guest
'If anything they might send India into the field again this morning just for 20-30 minutes, get them chasing leather for a little bit and then send them in only giving them the 10 minute changeover.' Well that's just the way it goes isn't it, even if he's already decided to declare he's not going to let them know until 10 mins before start of play anyway!
Ken
Guest
Yep that was the concern. On a nice day I have no doubt Clarke would have been aggressive and sent them in. Yesterday though India may have been immediately offered the light, or forced him to open with the spinners - far more productive to keep them in the field adding to the total.
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
I agree with some of the other comments here. If he could have guaranteed those overs would have been bowled then he may have considered it, but in a situation where they could just as easily have gone off at any point, you may as well just keep batting. At that point he could have just as easily declared, come out to bowl and after one or two overs it gets called, or worse, they declare and in the break the umpires decide that they shouldn't go back out. As we all know, iffy conditions that they might keep playing through while they stay out there can often still be enough to make the umpires think twice about a resumption. If anything they might send India into the field again this morning just for 20-30 minutes, get them chasing leather for a little bit and then send them in only giving them the 10 minute changeover.
Shortfineleg
Guest
Rossco - you are wrong. I was forced to listen to Ch 9. They had hairy-chestedly been calling for a declaration from 350 onwards. In the final session, the Ch 9 commentators were saying have 10 overs at them , 1 wicket would be worth 50 runs etc. They belatedly said that Clarke himself may not declare that day - and they certainly never backed his decision to bat on. And they didn't make the MJ comment. Facts, deal with them.
Bob Sims
Guest
Disagree. Clarke did the right thing. Recent scores of 500+ by both visitors and Australia at Adelaide would, justifiably, have been uppermost in his mind. Three days to go and India really have the job in front of them.
Aransan
Guest
I'll bet there were having two bob each way and then they couldn't lose.