50 reasons why Michael Clarke is a knob

[PowerBug]

The title says it all. People have been saying that he is a knob for a while now, so here is a chance to give reasons.

1. Reason 1
(Just the first dismissal)

[Cicjose]

he only scores runs when the top order fails making him look better than he is

[ossie85]

he only scores runs when the top order fails making him look better than he is

?? What does that mean? Surely if he scores when nobody else does, that is a good thing?

Not a huge Clarke fan myself, but has done VERY well since getting the captaincy (batting wise anyway)

[Usman]

everyone hates on Clarke, im not really sure why? is it becuase he is not the 'traditional cricketer' or is it that hes girlfriend is hotter than yours? whatever it is it doesnt matter because he is a classy player that averages 47 woth the bat, is great in the field (except that sitter he dropped against NZ) and looks to be a very switched on, confident captain.

he only scores runs when the top order fails making him look better than he is

This is not a very intelligent comment, ill let it slide cic cause your posts are usually ok, but seriously what are you on about?

[bomberboy0618]

he only scores runs when the top order fails making him look better than he is

Typical. Exactly what I expect from you.
If a guy is scoring 100 when we score 400, does that make him worse than a guy who scores 100 when we score 250? Because if you think that does, Im sorry, you are wrong. A score of 250 indicates the bowling was better than a score of 400, thus making the 100 score of a higher quality.

[Cicjose]

im not saying he is a bad player i just think that he rarely gets a big score when we do well and scores well when we have sucked....

this makes him look like a better player than he is

[ossie85]

im not saying he is a bad player i just think that he rarely gets a big score when we do well and scores well when we have sucked....

this makes him look like a better player than he is

Strongly disagree. Really don't follow your logic sorry :(

[valkorum]

He was groomed for the role and didnt earn the role like every other captain.

[TheMailman]

Grooming for roles is pretty common

Australia was just planning ahead. it's a bit similar to the Royal Familiy and everybody loves them

Old prince Harry  ;D

[Cicjose]

im not saying he is a bad player i just think that he rarely gets a big score when we do well and scores well when we have sucked....

this makes him look like a better player than he is

Strongly disagree. Really don't follow your logic sorry :(

http://www.foxsports.com.au/cricket/australia/michael-clarke-answers-his-critics-announces-his-arrival-as-captain-with-the-greatest-of-his-16-test-centuries/story-fn2mcu3x-1226191019851

Clarke's Test hundreds and Australia's score when he came to the crease

1) 151 v India, 2004: 4-149
2) 141 v New Zealand, 2004: 4-128
3) 124 v England, 2006: 4-257
4) 135* v England, 2006: 3-206
5) 145* v Sri Lanka, 2007: 3-216
6) 118 v India, 2008: 3-241
7) 110 v West Indies, 2008: 3-199
8) 112 v India, 2008: 3-284
9) 110 v New Zealand, 2008: 3-158
10) 138 v South Africa, 2009: 3-109
11) 136 v England, 2009: 3-78
12) 103* v England, 2009: 3-137
13) 166 v Pakistan, 2010: 3-71
14) 168 v New Zealand, 2010: 3-115
15) 112 v Sri Lanka, 2011: 3-188
16) 107* v South Africa, 2011: 3-40

[Maca24]

Cic thats a very silly comment...

I'd rather someone who stands up when the team is down against a big nation than a spud who scores well when we play a crap nation.

[TheMailman]

I'm sorry I don't really follow that scoreline logic either  :P

They all seem like pretty standard scores for someone like Clarke to be entering

[bomberboy0618]

im not saying he is a bad player i just think that he rarely gets a big score when we do well and scores well when we have sucked....

this makes him look like a better player than he is

Strongly disagree. Really don't follow your logic sorry :(

http://www.foxsports.com.au/cricket/australia/michael-clarke-answers-his-critics-announces-his-arrival-as-captain-with-the-greatest-of-his-16-test-centuries/story-fn2mcu3x-1226191019851

Clarke's Test hundreds and Australia's score when he came to the crease

1) 151 v India, 2004: 4-149
2) 141 v New Zealand, 2004: 4-128
3) 124 v England, 2006: 4-257
4) 135* v England, 2006: 3-206
5) 145* v Sri Lanka, 2007: 3-216
6) 118 v India, 2008: 3-241
7) 110 v West Indies, 2008: 3-199
8) 112 v India, 2008: 3-284
9) 110 v New Zealand, 2008: 3-158
10) 138 v South Africa, 2009: 3-109
11) 136 v England, 2009: 3-78
12) 103* v England, 2009: 3-137
13) 166 v Pakistan, 2010: 3-71
14) 168 v New Zealand, 2010: 3-115
15) 112 v Sri Lanka, 2011: 3-188
16) 107* v South Africa, 2011: 3-40

Cic the average wickets and runs for when he comes in to score a century is 3.1875/161.

[TheMailman]

I'm going to leave now  :-X

[pyronerd]

he only scores runs when the top order fails making him look better than he is

?? What does that mean? Surely if he scores when nobody else does, that is a good thing?

Not a huge Clarke fan myself, but has done VERY well since getting the captaincy (batting wise anyway)

I agree, as much as I call him a knob yadda yadda, as a test player he is a good batsmen, it's just when he has a strike rate of 50 in a T20 that he annoys me :P