cricket with balls

One day you are going to be in Sydney.

And for whatever reason you are going to need a lawyer.

When you arrive you’ll notice some cricket memorabilia in the foyer; you’ll spend a couple of minutes looking at it and wish that you were a rich lawyer who could afford signed cricket stuff.

While waiting in reception there will be plenty of sporting magazines and more memorabilia.

Eventually you will meet your lawyer, a young whippersnapper eager to please.

As she is attending to your business the senior partner will walk in and shake your hand and thank you for your business.

He will look familiar to you, but you won’t be able to work out who he is.

You’ll even ask, “Do I know you from somewhere?”

He’ll just laugh it off and say he has a familiar face.

When he leaves you’ll still be racking your brain when the lawyer helping you asks if you are a cricket fan, you nod offcourse, and she says, “Mr Clark played for Australia.”

It is only then that you realised you shook the hand of a test bowler who finished with a bowling average of 23.86.

You leave the law firm knowing your business is in safe hands.  The hands of a man who only got to play test cricket for less than four years but got every last wicket out of himself.

-

If Stuart Clark ever does end up as a Lawyer with a firm of his own, I would use his services.

The man has my respect, and now that he will never ever play for Australia again, I salute him for his career.

Well played, Mr Clark.

There is quite a bit of me talking about Stuart Clark’s “nip” in my new book.

Rahul Dravid was so happy with my piece on him for cricinfo he cashed in again today.

Stuart Clark was so unhappy that i said his career was over on TWC, he has been telling everyone it isn’t since.

And in more important news, I am thinking of changing how I bowl legspin.

Oh, and while I am writing this link heavy post I might as well congratulate Tasmania’s Smooth Eddie Cowan for this double hundred today. Clearly he was inspired by Sehwag, even if he didn’t know it.

Australia have dropped Stuart Clark for the Dougie Bollinger.

Bollinger bowled very well in India, and Stuart Clark is 34 and out of fashion.

This year Clark has been selected for 2 of a possible 5 test matches.

In one of those matches he was a key figure, in the other one he struggled in the dust.

At 34 you can get dropped without too many questions being asked.

His two Ashes tests were obviously a golden handshake, and Hilditch is now shuffling Clark towards the door.

On his way out Clark has to go past where Mike Hussey’s desk is.

I wonder if Clark thinks he has more “nip” left than Hussey has runs?

They obviously aren’t fighting for the same spot, but they are the same age, and I think Clark would happily stack his record over the last 18 months up against Hussey’s, even (as people keep reminding me) if Hussey did have a great one day series against India.

Clark wasn’t allowed to even be a back up and prove he had “nip” in India.

Hussey was.

That could piss Clark off.

If I was he, I may be pointing to the fact that Hussey has a tendency to make ducks and leave balls that bowl him, and that might be the equivalent of losing your “nip” for a batsman.

Both men came to test cricket late, one had lost test form for 18 months, the other had a couple of months of injuries slowing him down, but is now fit.

It pays to be a batsman.

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.

Every Australian in the know I talked to about Stuart Clark told me he had lost his nip.

Bumble and Beefy obviously had the same information.

It was a rumour based on VERY solid information I was always told.

The perception was he was not quite quick enough to make his good line and length count anymore.

It was in quite a few papers, and it was hard to overlook.

Even his wickets in the warm up game didn’t seem to convince anyone.

Today he bowled at pretty much the pace he always had at test cricket.

And he took 3 for.

I’d say that he had his nip.

So who has been releasing the nip rumour?

I honestly don’t know whom, but my theory involves well-known names.

But more importantly, why?

Was it something that was said so that the South African tamers could be picked first, and then it got away from the person who first released it?

The rumour might have cost Australia the Ashes, and also probably didn’t help Clark’s bank balance or future career.

Perception quite quickly becomes reality.