The Marshs

[bulldogtragic]

I don't want to hijack other threads, but I will let numbers and stats take care of themselves:

Shaun:

India: 16, 0, 66, 9, 2, 53, 4, 1 (two scores over 16 in 8 attempts - Averaging 17.6)
Australia: 63, 15

Mitch:

India: 4, 31, 0, 13 (Averaging 12)
Australia: 0, 26 (Averaging 13)
Sri Lanka: 27, 18, 53, 9


But they got selected and you can't really blame them for accepting the selectors offer. Even though neither put up serious form before re-selection. The question is, will the selectors pull their heads out of their arse? And what are they doing with Khawaja whose India Test average wasn't a great deal less and he didn't play, and only averaged 58.1 in the Australian Test Series but can't play.

[Twodogs]

Re: The Marshs

Mrs Marsh and her chalk in the drink thing hasn't had a go yet.

[ledge]

Re: The Marshs

Cricket ekers

[anfo27]

Re: The Marshs

Didn't Shaun Marsh save our arse in the 3rd test? So as soon as we look like losing a test its Shaun Marsh that gets the blame?

Why not talk about Warner who never makes a run outside Australia. If we're playing on a road Warner would be the next picked after Smith but in India he shouldn't be picked.

Agree Marsh should have done better but he has done better than Warner who everyone loves and never comes under scrutiny.?

[bulldogtragic]

Re: The Marshs

Didn't Shaun Marsh save our arse in the 3rd test? So as soon as we look like losing a test its Shaun Marsh that gets the blame?

Why not talk about Warner who never makes a run outside Australia. If we're playing on a road Warner would be the next picked after Smith but in India he shouldn't be picked.

Agree Marsh should have done better but he has done better than Warner who everyone loves and never comes under scrutiny.?

I agree 100% on Warner. The graphic ch9 showed all summer was Smith & Warner had scored 90% of all centuries over the past few years. Smith makes centuries on all pitches, Warner doesn't. So if curators on overseas pitches can make them juicy or dry enough to ensure Warner doesn't make centuries, then we are going to be limited in making really big totals. Then oppositions teams have an advantage. I'm sure some in the media might call him a flat track bully.

But at least he's got some credits in the bank. Khawaja averaged 58.1 in our test summer. After both Marshs were out of the test team after Perth, neither piled on significant form to justify selection. I'm less frustrated with the actual players, my gripe if with the selectors. If they picked me I'd deliver two golden ducks and a few dropped catches, but I wouldn't disqualify myself if picked, that'd be stupid. Recently, guys like Phil Hughes, Usman Khawaja etc were dropped to state cricket and told to dominate for an extended period before they'd get another look in. That's always been the standard, except the Marshs. Arguably we lost the second test because of carrying Mitch. Again, nothing against him, but he shouldn't have been playing especially since Smith doesn't seem to want to bowl him.

[anfo27]

Re: The Marshs

I agree 100% on Warner. The graphic ch9 showed all summer was Smith & Warner had scored 90% of all centuries over the past few years. Smith makes centuries on all pitches, Warner doesn't. So if curators on overseas pitches can make them juicy or dry enough to ensure Warner doesn't make centuries, then we are going to be limited in making really big totals. Then oppositions teams have an advantage. I'm sure some in the media might call him a flat track bully.

But at least he's got some credits in the bank. Khawaja averaged 58.1 in our test summer. After both Marshs were out of the test team after Perth, neither piled on significant form to justify selection. I'm less frustrated with the actual players, my gripe if with the selectors. If they picked me I'd deliver two golden ducks and a few dropped catches, but I wouldn't disqualify myself if picked, that'd be stupid. Recently, guys like Phil Hughes, Usman Khawaja etc were dropped to state cricket and told to dominate for an extended period before they'd get another look in. That's always been the standard, except the Marshs. Arguably we lost the second test because of carrying Mitch. Again, nothing against him, but he shouldn't have been playing especially since Smith doesn't seem to want to bowl him.

Mitch has never made a run ever so i can't understand that selection.

Shaun has always been a whipping boy. I think he deserved his chance. He replaced Khawaja in Sri Lanka then made a ton & then made 63 in the first test against SA before breaking a finger or something. So if he wasn't injured he would of still been in the side. I don't think Shaun is a number 4 though.

People go on about how many opportunities he gets but lets face it, the very talented players whether its cricket or football or any sport always get given more chances & Shaun fits in that category.

Everyone other than Smith has been disappointing BT.

What had Maxwell done to deserve a test spot? He couldn't get a game with the Vics.

[KT31]

Re: The Marshs

Cricket ekers

Marsh-Mellows.

[The Pie Man]

Re: The Marshs

Mitch has never made a run ever so i can't understand that selection.

Shaun has always been a whipping boy. I think he deserved his chance. He replaced Khawaja in Sri Lanka then made a ton & then made 63 in the first test against SA before breaking a finger or something. So if he wasn't injured he would of still been in the side. I don't think Shaun is a number 4 though.

People go on about how many opportunities he gets but lets face it, the very talented players whether its cricket or football or any sport always get given more chances & Shaun fits in that category.

Everyone other than Smith has been disappointing BT.

What had Maxwell done to deserve a test spot? He couldn't get a game with the Vics.

Agree with this - Shaun has a perception issue, though he was very poor this test...not on his Pat there, but still disappointing. I get Mitch being picked as the seam bowling all-rounder with two spinners, but needed to actually bowl to justify the spot.

Maxwell coming in didn't make much sense given he'd be the 3rd spinner that Smith doesn't trust with the ball (thought Henriques deserved another opportunity) I find it weird that previous form in shorter forms on a particular surface can influence test selection, though in this case Glenn somewhat justified it with two solid outings. Why Smith doesn't throw him the ball more often .....I find Smith an ordinary captain, but that's another story.

[Cyberdoggie]

Re: The Marshs

When was the last time Warner batted deep into an innings?
He is just about always the first one out, especially when you just need him to occupy the crease.

[Bornadog]

Re: The Marshs

When was the last time Warner batted deep into an innings?
He is just about always the first one out, especially when you just need him to occupy the crease.

In test matches - 113 against Pakistan

[GVGjr]

Re: The Marshs

Didn't Shaun Marsh save our arse in the 3rd test? So as soon as we look like losing a test its Shaun Marsh that gets the blame?

Why not talk about Warner who never makes a run outside Australia. If we're playing on a road Warner would be the next picked after Smith but in India he shouldn't be picked.

Agree Marsh should have done better but he has done better than Warner who everyone loves and never comes under scrutiny.?

My opinion of him is based over the 4 tests and 8 innings. For a guy that was horses for courses selection given the conditions, 2 scores over 50 is a good enough return and I think it places his position within the team under a bit more scrutiny.

Warner and Handscomb didn't do enough by a long shot either but their best seems to be a lot better than S.Marsh's.

I'd certainly have to have a rethink on if I would select Warner for another sub-continent tour. His average was poor but he kept up his normal scoring rate which indicates to me he doesn't have the application for the slower tracks

[Topdog]

Re: The Marshs

My opinion of him is based over the 4 tests and 8 innings. For a guy that was horses for courses selection given the conditions, 2 scores over 50 is a good enough return and I think it places his position within the team under a bit more scrutiny.

Warner and Handscomb didn't do enough by a long shot either but their best seems to be a lot better than S.Marsh's.

I'd certainly have to have a rethink on if I would select Warner for another sub-continent tour. His average was poor but he kept up his normal scoring rate which indicates to me he doesn't have the application for the slower tracks

It's interesting that you say Marsh did enough and then question Warner and Handscomb. They both made 40 more runs than Marsh in the series.

[hujsh]

Re: The Marshs

It's interesting that you say Marsh did enough and then question Warner and Handscomb. They both made 40 more runs than Marsh in the series.

Looks like a typo to me since it was followed up with "I think it places his position within the team under a bit more scrutiny."

No way Marsh did enough to justify his spot and if he plays the next test (whenever that is) at Khwaja's expense then Khwaja is the new Hodge.

[Topdog]

Re: The Marshs

Probably right hujsh I had cataract surgery on Monday so my eyesight is still a bit wobbly

[hujsh]

Re: The Marshs

Probably right hujsh I had cataract surgery on Monday so my eyesight is still a bit wobbly

Well that's about as good a reason I could imagine for that.