Clarke Named Twenty20 Captain

a for effort

Active Member
Clarke Named Twenty20 Captain

Clarke named Australia's Twenty20 captain | Cricket News | Global | Cricinfo.com
Michael Clarke has been confirmed as Australia's new Twenty20 captain and Cameron White will step into the vice-captaincy following the retirement of Ricky Ponting from the format. Clarke was widely expected to take on the leadership and the decision was confirmed by Cricket Australia on Friday.

hahahahahaha

And in a somewhat poetic fashion:

Hilditch reappointed for two years | Australia Cricket News | Cricinfo.com
Cricket Australia has resisted the urge to overhaul its selection panel following the Ashes loss, reappointing Andrew Hilditch as chairman for two more years. Hilditch has been confirmed as the chairman of selectors until at least the end of the 2011 World Cup, which will take his term in charge of the panel to five years in total.

Double-whammy of gutlessness?
 
Re: Clarke Named Twenty20 Captain

Pup being made T20 captain seems logical and will prepare him if in the future he becomes test and ODI captain(which might take years to happen if Ponting plays).The question is who else if not him?

The Hilditch apppointment is one which baffles me. I have thought that his profession will and would impede his abilities.

My own views are that Cricket Australia has missed an opportunity to appoint someone new in that position. I thought that some of the Ashes selections were questionable to anyone who follows the game.
 
Re: Clarke Named Twenty20 Captain

To be honest I don't think the Hilditch re-appointment is that big a deal. I have never been a big believer that sacking selectors after a few losses is the right way to go. I think your barking up the wrong tree if you think sacking Hilditch is going to improve our performance in all formats of the game.

I distinctly remember the massive media push generated by the likes of Ben Dorries, Malcomm Conn and Robert Craddock before the start of the 5th test with all of them basically stating that if Clark didn't play there would be a riot.

The theme was that Clark had been the "crucial" part missing before the 4th test and that his return was the cornerstone of our win. Rather what was the cornerstone of our win tight bolwing on a helpful pitch in the first innings and some devastating swing bowling from Hilfenhaus and Johnson in the second innings.

Clark had some helpful assistance from the pitch but was rightly classed as lacking a bit of zip on flat wickets as age had slowly caught up on him. I have no doubt that this influenced the decision to play 4 seamers.

Now these same clowns who were pushing for Clark are still whinging about not playing Hauritz. Haurtiz would not have made a difference, the two most crucial parts of the 5th test that lost it for us are as follows.

1) Losing the toss
2) Losing 5 for nothing after a rain break.

Hauritz would not have changed any of that.

Clarke being appointed as captain was predictable, snubbing him would piss him off and the media would have a field day which would in turn disrupt the rest of the team.

People need to stop blaming selectors for losing the ashes, it really is pitiful to blame anyone when you lose. We lost, move on.
 
Re: Clarke Named Twenty20 Captain

Im not disagreeing with you Edward. But there are larger forces at work here, not electing Clarke as captain would have been seen as a massive snub to Clarke.

Heaps of theories would have been put up, the incident with Katich would have been re-examined, Clarkes ability, you name it. It would be easier just to give it to him and hope that he rises to the occasion.

But to those that say Ponting should retire from ODI cricket, I ask this. Would we have won the CT without Ponting as we did without Clarke?

No way.
 
Re: Clarke Named Twenty20 Captain

I don't think Clarke should be playing T20s, but as T20s only seem to matter on a domestic scale, it doesn't really matter.

It is a preperation for the big ones. I don't mind really.

White would have made a better choice IMO.
 
Back
Top