The Case for Clark

N Hauritz.

Unlike any other 4th bowling option he builds pressure not releases it.

Marcus North can bowl 12 overs a day without a problem, and Katich and Clarke have hardly bowled.

Andrew McDonald is not even in England.

Australia’s only chance of winning this test is with an all seam attack.

Ponting does not see Hauritz as a strike bowler, Australia need 4 strike bowlers to take 20 wickets on a flat wicket.

The pitch will bounce, Clark is good with bounce.

If he plays Watson is far less likely to bowl.

The other 3 quicks seemed more comfortable with him around.

This might be his last tour, of anywhere.

I like to watch him bat.

Taking Hauritz is the defensive option.

I like using the phrase Glenn McGrath lite.

Who would Paul Collingwood (England’s third best batsman in the current squad) prefer to play.

Hauritz has bowled as well as I have ever seen him bowl in this series, Clark took 3 for 18 last test.

Stuart Clark dies his hair, this amuses me.

I said Australia couldn’t win a test with Hauritz in the team, so far the only test they have won was when he did not play, regardless of the pitch, I see no reason to change a winning team.

If Hauritz plays, takes 12 wickets, and spins Australia to victory I might spontaneously combust.

Tagged , , , ,

0 thoughts on “The Case for Clark

  1. Leg Break says:

    The proctologists spell on Day 1 at Headingly should be enough on its own.

    That last day doesn’t count.

    But it’s the England team that interests me more.

  2. steve says:

    Does he really dye his hair? How do you know?

    • jrod says:

      Steve, He had just a touch of grey coming in, then suddenly he was reddish, and now he has worked out the just for men range.

  3. Dustbinner says:

    I want Clark to play, but you know I love love Hauritz … but I suspect you are not the only person to note that the only test we have won is the one Hauritz did not play in!!

    It’s difficult to choose who to drop to play Hauritz, isn’t it?

    OK, don’t combust on me … although that would be interesting …

    Nathan Hauritz is still godlike in my eyes.

  4. crrrr says:

    who is england’s 2nd best batsman? im assuming first is the wing commander

  5. Red says:

    It was embarrassing to see him get smashed around like a net bowler the other night. Did you notice the speed he was bowling at? Mid 120’s. Let’s quit while we’re ahead.

  6. Gigi says:

    Good on you for trumpeting him, the most important one on that list is he made the other three more comfortable. He not only anchored that first session in Leeds with discipline but inspired most notably Mitch to tighten up his game. So Clark had a loose final day, but they were in total control from the end of that first session, in which his approach had the biggest effect. England were culpable of shit batting, yes, but even if he hadn’t have taken any wickets that morning, he had already made the bowlers as a unit so much sharper.

    Even if people think Hauritz has bowled well, there’s no way you could match the effect Clark has had on the other three. Hauritz is not a threatening bowler, or a very skilled one. He has been effective this series but that has been as much due to England’s insipid batting at times than his pressure and intelligence when bowling.

    It will go back to being much more of an even contest with Hauritz in, how Clark can be dropped after the first day of the last match I can’t understand, but if you want a tight match, then yes, get him in. I would rather see the teams playing quality cricket for the win rather than the nervous cricket that I think will happen if Hauritz is brought into the team again.

  7. batting in ned kelly's helmet says:

    In the third test Freddy Flintoff was about halfway through giving us the grandest arse-fucking since 1981 when Hauritz nabbed him from nothin’ with a ball you couldn’t have planned for. History is made of moments like these. I reckon I’d pick Hauritz.

  8. Lou says:

    Anything that makes MJ less anxious is a winner. If Clark is there, he can pretend
    1) he’s not top dog bowler in the team,
    2) that no-one expects him to win/lose the Ashes

    and that will make him bowl better.

    With Hauritz chosen over Clark, MJ knows 1 and 2 are true regardless of how Ritzy bowls. And he quakes inside and out. No Oz fan wants that as it’s not big and it’s certainly not pretty.

  9. poopsie says:

    The bit about Collingwood is spot on. You get the feeling that Hooribitz just makes the very ordinary England middle order feel a lot more comfortable at the crease

  10. damiths says:

    whats his natural color then jrod ?

  11. Chris W says:

    Maybe I’ll be proven wrong, but my money is on Clark having a mare at the Oval if he is picked. He’s not the reincarnation of Glenn McGrath, no matter how much CA wish it.

    Mitch is a different matter, I think he’s got his arse in gear now, Clark or no Clark. He’s the match-winner.

  12. Jamie64 says:

    Clarke has to play.

    His batting is more entertaining than, well… pretty much anything..

  13. jrod says:

    Damith, these days it is a light brown with grey in it.