Michael Clarke is set to retire from international cricket at the end of this Ashes series

[Cricket_Hacker]

From CI Australia's captain Michael Clarke is set to retire from international cricket at the end of this Ashes series. In a change of heart following the team's dismal showing in the pivotal fourth Ashes Test, Clarke is believed to have indicated he will stand down after the Oval, meaning Steve Smith will lead the side to Bangladesh. Clarke had been adamant he would keep playing for some time before this match, but another dreadful match for himself and his team has left no room for the sort of graceful home ground exit bestowed on others.

[kosingh]

Just about a 10-11 year career. Seems kind of short!

[Precambrian]

Was always hyper overrated.

[BeautifulGame]

Easily most over rated player in recent history Still a very good batsmen particularly in home conditions so Aussies will miss him . Hopefully Warne shuts up about pup the great from now on

[Scarves]

A bit of disrespect here. Great batsman, great player but they told him that there was no room for him. Great knocks with his debut, 3rd test v. South Africa in South Africa, 6 for 9 against India, winning in Sydney 2007/08 with the ball, 329* and the two doubles v. South Africa in the series.

[Gollum]

A bit of disrespect here. Great batsman, great player but they told him that there was no room for him. Great knocks with his debut, 3rd test v. South Africa in South Africa, 6 for 9 against India, winning in Sydney 2007/08 with the ball, 329* and the two doubles v. South Africa in the series.

The umps won the game and series for you guys.:winky: But yeah respect to a very good player. Will never forget his great 100 in RSA. A big cheat but also a very humble chap.

[adi B]

Good Batsman,an Aussie great perhaps but highly overrated

[diga]

Good Batsman' date='[b']an Aussie great perhaps but highly overrated

no way an Aussie great but a good batsman nonetheless.. the middle order has many more contenders

[kosingh]

Pretty damn good batsman. Similar numbers to Inzamam.

[adi B]

Pretty damn good batsman. Similar numbers to Inzamam.

Yeah but Michael clarke is a much better test bat than inzi and moyo

[Precambrian]

Yeah but Michael clarke is a much better test bat than inzi and moyo

Very much debateable. Inzy played in a period when batting was wee bit more difficult and there were more good bowlers around. At their peaks, probably I'd go for Clarke given his bowling and fielding. But from purely batting perspective I think Inzy > Clarke.

[HippoSucks]

Clarke is better than any Pakistan batsman other than Miandad and Younis (he is as good as them but not necessarily better).

[HippoSucks]

Very much debateable. Inzy played in a period when batting was wee bit more difficult and there were more good bowlers around. At their peaks, probably I'd go for Clarke given his bowling and fielding. But from purely batting perspective I think Inzy > Clarke.

Yes in the 1990s and 2000s Inzimam faced better bowling attacks but he did not do that well against them. He averages 30 against South Africa and Australia overall (not in those countries, just against them). He also didn't face his own team's bowling attack. The bowling attacks of other teams weren't significantly better than they are now.

[kosingh]

Yes in the 1990s and 2000s Inzimam faced better bowling attacks but he did not do that well against them. He averages 30 against South Africa and Australia overall (not in those countries' date=' just against them). He also didn't face his own team's bowling attack. The bowling attacks of other teams weren't significantly better than they are now.[/quote'] Except maybe for West Indies (their bowling attack was considerably better during the Inzy years). I may be wrong but Michael Clark seemed to have a dream 3-4 year period, which helped build his numbers. Inzamam seemed to have sustained his success over a 15 year span. Will have to check the numbers to confirm this

[nevada]

Finally!

[HippoSucks]

Except maybe for West Indies (their bowling attack was considerably better during the Inzy years). I may be wrong but Michael Clark seemed to have a dream 3-4 year period, which helped build his numbers. Inzamam seemed to have sustained his success over a 15 year span. Will have to check the numbers to confirm this

Yes I forgot about the West Indies. Inzimam played three series (he batted in 12 innings) against the West Indies until 2000 and faced Ambrose and Walsh. After that he faced the weaker West Indies bowling attacks. http://www.howstat.com/cricket/statistics/Players/PlayerProgressBat.asp?PlayerId=1794&CountryCode=08 Clarke did have some consistent periods in his career like 2006-2009 but not some ridiculous peak where he averaged around 75+ for a few years. http://www.howstat.com/cricket/statistics/Players/PlayerYears.asp?PlayerID=3067

[HippoSucks]

I feel that Clarke could have been a much better bowler too if he did not have this degenerative disc disease in his back. He could have easily ended up with 75+ wickets. His back issues also negatively affected his batting a lot. Despite that he was amazing at home and great away as well (averages about 43 away from memory). He did not dominate any country apart from Australia but has a very steady record almost everywhere. He has played many great innings as well. His 151 in South Africa is easily one of the best centuries I've ever seen. Most likely the best innings ever in South Africa after Atherton's 185 in Johannesburg. Great captain too being a part of 2 World Cup and 2 Ashes wins (not all under his captaincy).

[adi B]

Very much debateable. Inzy played in a period when batting was wee bit more difficult and there were more good bowlers around. At their peaks, probably I'd go for Clarke given his bowling and fielding. But from purely batting perspective I think Inzy > Clarke.

Inzamam struggled against pace and bounce and most often went missing against quality pace attack,he was a failure in aus and saf.clarke tbf to him hasn't failed anywhere ,just that his average are low in few countries(not too low like inzi)

[putrevus]

Inzi is a class apart from Clarke, who other than 3 or 4 great home series has been good but not great any time. Inzi has weak numbers in Australia and SA but his ODI stats completely dominate Clarke.

[kosingh]

Inzi is a class apart from Clarke, who other than 3 or 4 great home series has been good but not great any time. Inzi has weak numbers in Australia and SA but his ODI stats completely dominate Clarke.

In ODIs there's no doubt Inzy is better. But in tests, it's harder to pick between the two. Solid arguments can be made on both sides.