2nd ODI: India v Australia at Visakhapatnam Oct 20 2010

[Twizzle]

Impossible to judge White on his test career so far when he was ridiculously chosen as a front line spinner and #8 batsman.

If he cant make runs at 8, how will he make them in the middle order.

He'd still has the same problem with his technique no matter where he bats.

 

[Cockadoodledoo]

you'd prefer we made 100 less runs ?

Or maybe White coming in 10 overs earlier and Steve Smith getting a bat as well.

 

[Cockadoodledoo]

why doesn't Hussey bat like this in test cricket ?

In one day matches teams set defensive fields, rarely use their best bowlers (look at the pedestrian Indian attack he was facing), batsmen in the middle order face second rate spinners, second rate all rounders and second rate pace bowlers, bat on roads with defensive field settings.. It is just not comparable to Test Cricket.

This is why guys like Hussey always appear to 'find form' playing one day matches when the reality is they haven't and guys like Ferguson and White are much more successful in this form of the game than First Class Cricket. They are just excelling in a format favoured for batsmen and most people fall hook, line and sinker for it.

 

[Danish]

you'd prefer we made 100 less runs ?

I'd prefer we made 20-30 more. Pushing and prodding to a 130 ball century in a one dater ain't exactly a match winner.

If not for white's cracking innings we'd have been licked inside 40 overs

 

[simmo1]

I'd prefer we made 20-30 more. Pushing and prodding to a 130 ball century in a one dater ain't exactly a match winner.

If not for white's cracking innings we'd have been licked inside 40 overs

It sure as hell isn't a match loser either.

If he got a duck, we could well have been all out inside 40 overs.

 

[Raiders_Premiers]

I'd prefer we made 20-30 more. Pushing and prodding to a 130 ball century in a one dater ain't exactly a match winner.

If not for white's cracking innings we'd have been licked inside 40 overs

I highly doubt India would have had trouble with any total we set considering our sh*t bowling attack

 

[Danish]

I highly doubt India would have had trouble with any total we set considering our sh*t bowling attack

Maybe, the point is they could afford to cruise knowing they only needed 290 and had plenty of wickets in hand.

Clarke knew we had a popgun attack, and knew we had plenty of batting down the order but chose to push around the ball in favour of a personal milestone instead of going after it like white was at the other end.

He sacrificed our run rate and ultimately a shot at victory in favour of his own glory.

He is not captain material

 

[hineyrulz]

We lost the game when we picked 2 Snails at the top of the order, 2 for 17 after about 8 overs says it all. Especially with Watson not playing :roll:

 

[Danish]

I agree out openers were woeful, but they were out with plenty of time left, and if Clarke had hurried along, over 300 was easily achievable.

A run-a-ball 80 would have been much preferable to his 130 odd ball century.

 

[hineyrulz]

Clarke is not capable of quickfire century anymore, but if he had of got out early who knows how sh*thouse a score we would of put up???

 

[Bazal]

Lol...Clarke gets a match saving hundred and still gets pillocked by morons who wanna blame him for the fact that we had the worst Australian attack ever...hilarious. One quality bowler wins us that game, simple as that. A 130 ball hundred when we're 2/16 after ten is a very good knock, simple as that really.

 

[Danish]

Clarke is not capable of quickfire century anymore, but if he had of got out early who knows how sh*thouse a score we would of put up???

What makes him not capable? He's 29 FFS, not 40.


Had he pushed on once he got to his half century, or even when he got into the 70s, we'd have had a chance.

Yes our openers were woeful, an our bowling attack terrible, but those blokes aren't going to play more than a couple dozen games. Clarke is the undisputed next Australian Test captain, do should be held to greater account despite not playing as poorly as others last night.

I'm not expecting us to be anywhere close to no.1 in the test arena for some time with him at the helm

 

[hineyrulz]

What makes him not capable? He's 29 FFS, not 40.


Had he pushed on once he got to his half century, or even when he got into the 70s, we'd have had a chance.

Yes our openers were woeful, an our bowling attack terrible, but those blokes aren't going to play more than a couple dozen games. Clarke is the undisputed next Australian Test captain, do should be held to greater account despite not playing as poorly as others last night.

I'm not expecting us to be anywhere close to no.1 in the test arena for some time with him at the helm

I still reckon you are being too harsh on him, sure it wasn't the quickest hundred ever scored but if he goes cheaply who knows how many we would have got???

 

[aussies1st]

Finding a batter averaging close to 50 for the year in ODI is dam handy to have. As far as I'm concerned he can stay if he keeps making runs. You don't need 7 guys that maybe more aggressive but less consistent.

 

[Danish]

I still reckon you are being too harsh on him, sure it wasn't the quickest hundred ever scored but if he goes cheaply who knows how many we would have got???

I don't begrudge him battening down the hatches for the first 50-60 runs of his innings. However he never changed gears until the last 2-3 overs of the match. He needed to come to life much earlier to give us a fighting chance.

White was the true hero of the innings. Smashing 70+ runs off of 20 odd balls saved us from a truly embarrassing defeat.

 

[hineyrulz]

I don't begrudge him battening down the hatches for the first 50-60 runs of his innings. However he never changed gears until the last 2-3 overs of the match. He needed to come to life much earlier to give us a fighting chance.

White was the true hero of the innings. Smashing 70+ runs off of 20 odd balls saved us from a truly embarrassing defeat.

Fair enough, Still reckon Warner had to open with Watson not playing.

 

[Cockadoodledoo]

Lol...Clarke gets a match saving hundred and still gets pillocked by morons who wanna blame him for the fact that we had the worst Australian attack ever...hilarious. One quality bowler wins us that game, simple as that. A 130 ball hundred when we're 2/16 after ten is a very good knock, simple as that really.

Hate to break the news to you but we lost.

 

[beads6]

Lol...Clarke gets a match saving hundred and still gets pillocked by morons who wanna blame him for the fact that we had the worst Australian attack ever...hilarious. One quality bowler wins us that game, simple as that. A 130 ball hundred when we're 2/16 after ten is a very good knock, simple as that really.

You are 100% right, it seems Clarke gets blamed because it is the easy option. Some people need to use some common sense FFS. :crazy:

 

[ElectricEelMan]

Had he pushed on once he got to his half century, or even when he got into the 70s, we'd have had a chance.

You do realize his last 70-80 runs were scored at just under a run a ball? Fairly good when you consider we were 2/16 after 8 overs.

Clarke did a superb job holding that innings together. Yes it was White who scored at a rapid rate late in the innings, but Clarke scored at MORE than a run a ball in the last 15 overs. What more do you want from him?

Anyone who is criticizing Clarke's knock is either a troll or a moron. Which one are you?

 

[beads6]

My money is on moron!