Bucking Beads
Brownlow Medallist
Pattinson is our best cricketer because he can win matches. Clarke as you say is our best batsman, but he isn't our best cricketer.
I remember when I had my first beer.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
AFLW 2024 - Round 9 - Indigenous Round - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Pattinson is our best cricketer because he can win matches. Clarke as you say is our best batsman, but he isn't our best cricketer.
Clarke as you say is our best batsman.
I remember when I had my first beer.
You cannot be serious.
He is, correct. Knew you'd come around.
I am. Pattinson is Australia's best cricketer, he has 14 years of test cricket left with the best ahead him, Clarke has what maybe six, with maybe six months to a year left of his best cricket.
The best part about him not sending Ponting out tonight, means he'll bat at six. He'll be lucky (which he gets a lot of) to make 20.
How many years of Test cricket they have ahead of each other is completely irrelevant. Clarke is the better cricketer now. To say otherwise is completely and utterly laughable.
No it isn't. You can build great sides around opening batsmen and opening bowlers, good number 4-6's are a dime a dozen.
So Sachin Tendulkar, Brian Lara, Steve Waugh, Jacques Kallis, Allan Border, etc, are dime a dozen, are they?
Clarke is in the same class as Waugh but the others are that far ahead.
Irrelevant. The elite opening bowlers are that far ahead of Pattinson.
But Pattinson is Victorian.Irrelevant. The elite opening bowlers are that far ahead of Pattinson.
He is already Australia's best fast bowler, they're not that far ahead.
Clarke is only in the same class as Waugh if he maintains his current level to some degree now as well. In two years he likely to be back averaging mid-40's.
Why do people complain about any mention of NSW bias but you frequently make subtle digs at anything Victorian? Surely it has to work both ways.But Pattinson is Victorian.
But Pattinson is Victorian.
Why do people complain about any mention of NSW bias but you frequently make subtle digs at anything Victorian? Surely it has to work both ways.
I'm having a dig at the poster, not at the system.Why do people complain about any mention of NSW bias but you frequently make subtle digs at anything Victorian? Surely it has to work both ways.
Goose, gander. Hardly justifiable. Anyway, play on gents. Back to Clarke and his rich vein of form. Why is he such a divisive character?Because it's comparatively a drop of piss in a very large ocean?
The best part about him not sending Ponting out tonight, means he'll bat at six. He'll be lucky (which he gets a lot of) to make 20.
Woah, what? Pattinson is Australia's best fast bowler (after all of 7 Tests), but Clarke's form is a flash in a pan and he's destined to move back to the back? Bull-*******-shit.
I'm not saying Clarke is at the level of the others I mentioned. Once his career is over, we can make a judgement. But the same logic should apply, and to a MUCH greater extent, to Pattinson.
He averages 50 at #6, actually.
How does Pattinson not equate to currently being Australia's best fast bowler if Clarke is currently rated Australia's best batsman?
No shit.
I didn't say he wasn't. I said that if you're going to dismiss Clarke's form, then you should be even more willing to dismiss Pattinson's. I wouldn't dismiss either. Pattinson is our best bowler, though the sample size is small. Siddle could make a claim based on experience, but we'll go with Pattinson. Meanwhile, Clarke is the TOP RATED BATSMAN IN THE WORLD. You simply cannot compare the two. We lost Pattinson, and it sucks. If we lose Clarke, we're absolutely screwed.
Clarke is good. Get used to it.