Michael Clarke barks up the wrong tree

A classic example of the idiom 'barking up the wrong tree' is when Michael Clarke (bowling record against India, in India - tests: avg. 2.16, strike rate 7.3; odis: avg. 18.8, strike rate 21) consults Shane Warne (bowling record against India, in India - tests: avg. 43.11, strike rate 81; odis: avg. 52.85, strike rate 66) on how to bowl to Indian batsmen in India.

Jamie Pandaram makes the whole thing even more laughable when he starts his report on Clarke taking tips from Warne with the words 'Shane Warne may yet come back to haunt India next month'!

PS: There's no reason to believe that the title of the post is a snide reference to Michael Clarke's canine-referencing nickname! It just rhymed nicely, and fitted the context.

Labels: australia, clarke, india, warne

Thus spake Jagadish @ 12:18 am | Sledge/Read 2 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

"I know he's bowled, but is he out?"

There's this apocryphal story of BS Chandrasekhar getting frustrated with the umpiring on a tour (there're many accounts of this tale, with the umpire nationality varying from Australian to English to Kiwi). He had 4-5 plumb lbws turned down. Then he clean bowled the batsman and appealed "Howzzaaaat?" The umpire was surprised and told him the batsman was bowled. Chandra apparently replied "I know he's bowled, but is he out?"

Seeing the umpiring standards at the Sydney test, I'm fairly sure bowlers will start asking similar questions. Ricky Ponting was first wrongly given not out (caught down the legside). Then he was wrongly given out lbw (inside edge). Andrew Symonds was wrongly given not out (caught behind off a thick outside edge). Some time later, he again benefitted by the third umpire getting a stumping decision wrong. After he was well past 100, Steve Bucknor didn't even refer a stumping appeal to the third umpire, despite there being considerable doubt on if he did have his foot grounded behind the line.

I don't recall any shocker during India's first innings, but today, Hussey was not given out caught when he'd obviously edged the ball down legside. But what took the biscuit was Michael Clarke's reaction after he'd so obviously edged Kumble to Dravid at slip. Clarke was, in Hayden's words, waiting for the umpire's finger to go up.

To me, this is as damning an indictment of the quality of umpiring in this test as it can get. A batsman lingers around at the crease after edging to first slip, because he hopes that the umpire will get another decision wrong. Chances are he'd hope for a favourable decision even if he'd hit one to mid-wicket or got bowled.

I won't blame Clarke for it at all. He is well within his rights to stand his ground since it is the bowling team's right/duty to appeal and the umpire's duty to give the decision.

More technology is possibly one solution. Better umpires is usually a better solution. The third umpire, with the TV replays at his disposal, got Symonds' stumping wrong. So technology clearly wouldn't have helped.

Umpiring standards has been a pet theme in this blog. As pointed out earlier here, Steve Bucknor has been poor for a while now and Mark Benson didn't even know that a ball which hit the fielding team helmet placed on the ground was not a dead ball!

Bucknor isn't quite done with this series though! He's scheduled to follow both teams to Perth.

I can think of two extreme ways to register a protest against poor umpiring:

• Don't even appeal: For anything. Not for bloody obvious bowleds, catches, stumpings, run outs etc.
  
• Appeal for everything: For bowleds, skied catches, stumpings/run outs with the batsman half-way down the pitch, etc.

Labels: australia, benson, bucknor, chandra, clarke, ind v aus 2008, india, sydney 2008, umpires, walking

Thus spake Jagadish @ 1:56 am | Sledge/Read 6 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Puberty for 'Pup'

Two years ago, Michael Clarke won the Allan Border medal on the back of a string of splendid performances, including becoming the first Australian to score a test century on debut (in India) and at home. He then went through a form slump, got a fair bit of advice and was dropped for a couple of series.

Today, he made his third test century, one that has more or less ensured that the Adelaide test is heading towards a draw. England are 97 runs ahead and have 9 wickets in hand. Unless they score something like 200 runs in the first session, I can't see them declaring, given Australia have the batting ability to score at 4 runs an over over two sessions and since England've not shown the bowling ability to take wickets at a rapid rate.

That said, the first two innings were far too similar to that freak game. Both teams making 500+ totals, two contrasting players (one making 200, other making a huge 100) from the opposition making Australia's leg-spinner look like a club bowler. But the difference has been in the scoring rate. In 2003/04, Australia scored at 4.38 and 3.5 runs an over while India scored at 3.3 and 3.2 runs an over. In the on-going game, the scoring rates are markedly slower - England 3.28 while Australia scored at 3.11!

The pitches so far have been very strange though - very easy for batting. It's almost as though the curators are ensuring that Australia don't get into trouble if England's bowlers (Harmison avg. 273, Anderson 140, Giles avg. 108, Flintoff avg. 38 and Hoggard avg. 28) get it right. But if that is indeed the tactic, it does nothing to help Australia's bowlers (Lee avg. 100, Warne avg. 67, McGrath avg. 32 and Clark avg. 16)

NB: The title is purely to avoid the clichéd references to 'coming of age' and thus grab your attention.

Labels: ashes, ashes 2006, australia, clarke, england

Thus spake Jagadish @ 6:55 pm | Sledge/Read 3 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Mark Waugh's advice for Michael Clarke

Michael Clarke, who had a splendid debut last October, has not scored runs for a while now. Waugh feels that Clarke is probably not being selective enough in his shot-making and not respecting the bowlers enough.

Labels: clarke

Thus spake Jagadish @ 2:16 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Michael Clarke gets the Allan Border medal

"Pup" Michael Clarke was voted as Australia's cricketer of the year and won the Allan Border medal in a glittering and glamourous ceremony yesterday. I dont quite understand on what grounds he doesnt figure in the test and one-day player of the year awards. Surely if he has been Australia's best cricketer in the last year, he should have won one of those two awards! Damien Martyn won the test award while the currently beleagured Symonds won the one-day award. Andy Bichel, who was the previous owner of Australia's 12th man crown, before Brett Lee took his place, won the player of the year award for domestic cricket. You can see some photos from the awards ceremony, thanks to the BBC.

Labels: clarke

Thus spake Jagadish @ 10:52 am | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Roebuck backs Clarke

Peter Roebuck makes a case for Michael Clarke to get an extended run as an opener after his exploits in the first two VB Series games.

Labels: clarke

Thus spake Ganesh @ 4:46 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Michael Clarke tries to be as humble as possible in this interview which has been published almost after one-and-a-half months.

Labels: clarke

Thus spake Ganesh @ 9:45 am | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

New Zealand showed what they are made up of at Brisbane when they let McGrath score his first Test half-century and then folded up for a mighty seventy six. Big mouths Hayden & Lehmann were the only Aussies with zero contribution for the win.

Labels: clarke

Thus spake Ganesh @ 10:37 am | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

India's consolation win at Bombay, on the back of some superb spin bowling by Murali Kartik and Harbhajan Singh, means that Australia have won the Border Gavaskar Trophy 2-1. On an engrossing third day at the Wankhede, effectively just the second day since there was hardly any play on day one, Australia dismissed India for 205, setting themselves a fairly measly target of 107 to win. Michael Clarke, who seems to be unable to do anything wrong this tour, took 6/9 in 6.2 overs, cleaning up the lower middle order and tail after Tendulkar and Laxman had forged a wonderful 91 run partnership.

Australia's chase got off to a bad start with Langer gone in the second ball of the innings. Wickets fell at regular intervals with Murali Kartik in particular bowling superbly. Australia were 58/7 with just the tail left. However Hauritz and Gillespie put on a 20 run stand and Gillespie, who has been a total pain in the butt this series with his batting, put on 15 runs with Kasprowicz edging Australia closer. Harbhajan cleaned up the last two wickets sealing the victory.

It certainly makes Indian cricket fans wonder about what might have been, had day five at Madras not been rained out. 2-2 anyone? 3-1 India? Perhaps ... perhaps not.

People have every right to crib about the nature of the wicket. But they werent complaining when Australia won at Bangalore on what was described by coach Buchanan as being terrible. Different rules when you lose, eh? I wonder who Peter Roebuck is talking about when he writes "It is a mistake, of course, to rattle on about pitches because it reveals a fragile state of mind" in the same piece where he blasts the Bombay wicket.

In fact if Ponting has a modicum of consistent thinking, he would not complain about the pitch, just as he didnt subscribe to others' views on the Darwin wicket four months ago.

So much so for the dead rubber syndrome, eh? Oh, and credits here for anyone who points out the last Aussie captain who lost a game inside three days.

Labels: aus v ind 2004, clarke, pitch

Thus spake Jagadish @ 5:50 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Apologies for the lack of an update yesterday, but if you are an Indian cricket follower, you would have known by now that Australia absolutely stamped their authority on the game yesterday thanks to Michael Clarke, Adam Gilchrist and Glenn McGrath. Clarke made a century on debut, the first for Australia since Blewett against England in 1994/5 and in fact the first Australian to achieve the feat abroad since 1981. Gilchrist made amends for his average plummetting [if that is the right word] from 60 to 52 in the space of a year. McGrath cocked a snoop at all his detractors who said he was getting long in the tooth and this could be his last series if he didnt perform.

Labels: aus v ind 2004, clarke

Thus spake Jagadish @ 11:22 am | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

It is confirmed that Ponting will miss the first Test in India. This very likely means that Michael Clarke will make his debut - unless Australia decide to play 5 bowlers (3 quicks and 2 spinners). Brad Hodge has been named his replacement in the squad.

Labels: aus v ind 2004, clarke

Thus spake Jagadish @ 11:38 am | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]