The Ashes - final chapter (-worma)
Yes, the dropping of Michal Clarke seems to be the endgame of the whole Ashes aftermath drama. With Hayden having already started a revival of sorts from the Oval test, and Gilchrist suffering only his first major failure, Clarke was the only pending case. Hohns:
Now if only Clarke realised his problems and got down to sorting them out. I hope his retort to Waugh's accusations was more out of frustration than anything else.
"He is a very talented player with a very bright future and we know that he has a very long future ahead of him at Test level," he said.And Ponting:
I don't think it will be destructive but it would be a hard thing to swallow," he said.
"I have probably been dropped two or three times and it doesn't get any easier along the way, but the first time is obviously the hardest."
Now if only Clarke realised his problems and got down to sorting them out. I hope his retort to Waugh's accusations was more out of frustration than anything else.
posted by worma at
6:45 AM
5 Comments:
Gilchrist...? First major failure...
U must be kidding me..
watever happened to his single digit scores after the first test century during their 2001 India tour..??
By
Ginkgo, at 12:09
Yeah...but he had a 'matchwinning' century in one out of three matches. Doesnt matter that the next 4 scores were single digit. Its not a failed series for him....not enough to consider dropping him. Right?
Unlike here when he failed 9 times...and never clicked even once..forget winning a game. This is failure worth considering a drop, but for his reputation and form outside this series.
By
worma, at 12:37
Not the end of the world for Clarke...I think this should toughen him up.
By
ClannZú, at 15:58
yeah, thats what all around him are saying....that everyone from Border and Bradman to Waugh and POnting got dropped...and they all came back better and went on to be great.
But somehow, the argument seems to be that 'hence Clarke is also great....and will be like them'. To which I dont agree....lets wait and see if he comes back as a stronger player. Ofcoures I've seen his game, and I think he's not as bad as is made out to be(in most other teams he would still be playing) but that doesnt mean dropping him would cause improvement 'necessarily'.
By
worma, at 16:23
I don't think its a question of technique with Clarke...when he made his debut everyone was raving about his technique and all-round game. It has all to do with experience and mental toughness...the ability to grind it out. And that doesn't mean not to play shots...its above mental make-up...how positive you are and confident about your game.
The WI line-up boasts of many young talented batsmen - Gayle, Hinds, Sarwan, Samuels...but none of them average above 40 and they have been around for 4-5 years. They give glimpses of brilliance but can't maintain the consistency because mentally they are just not upto it. Ofcourse the WI cricket structure is also to blame but what I'm trying to say is that young cricketers the world over have this problem. Aus is fortunate they still have other players who can fill-in for now but who knows how long it will last.
By
ClannZú, at 19:07
Post a Comment
<< Home