Third Test - Australia v India, Melbourne

[FrediKanoute]

Re: Third Test - Australia v India, Melbourne

For mine we have some serious issues with batting that moving Finch to 5 alone wont solve. The Ashes next year will be a shambles. As good as guys like Head and Harris have looked, they have some serious flaws. Harris' dismissal in the first was temperament. The dismissal in the 2nd was technique. Head, bowled 2 x in a test suggests that he is not completely on top of his shot selection. The Marsh brothers need to be consigned to the scrap heap. The All-Rounder role is not one we need as a team.

[SlimPickens]

Re: Third Test - Australia v India, Melbourne

For mine we have some serious issues with batting that moving Finch to 5 alone wont solve. The Ashes next year will be a shambles. As good as guys like Head and Harris have looked, they have some serious flaws. Harris' dismissal in the first was temperament. The dismissal in the 2nd was technique. Head, bowled 2 x in a test suggests that he is not completely on top of his shot selection. The Marsh brothers need to be consigned to the scrap heap. The All-Rounder role is not one we need as a team.

Smith and Warner in will help but I see your point.

[Remi Moses]

Re: Third Test - Australia v India, Melbourne

I'm not so sure that is right Remi. Lyon has had an excellent series as well.

Yep . Forgot about him

[GVGjr]

Re: Third Test - Australia v India, Melbourne

I don't think things are as bad as many believe. We had India on the ropes on day one in Adelaide and were probably just one wicket away from dominating that test. We won the 2nd test and copped the worst of the conditions here in Melbourne. It was a bad toss to lose.
Our batsman are failing and we are frustrated by the selectors but it's not necessarily all doom and gloom.

[Bornadog]

Re: Third Test - Australia v India, Melbourne

I don't think things are as bad as many believe. We had India on the ropes on day one in Adelaide and were probably just one wicket away from dominating that test. We won the 2nd test and copped the worst of the conditions here in Melbourne. It was a bad toss to lose.
Our batsman are failing and we are frustrated by the selectors but it's not necessarily all doom and gloom.

No centuries to date, no innings over 300 - we must do better.

[Bornadog]

Re: Third Test - Australia v India, Melbourne

Love this tweet:

Justin Langer announces line up for Sydney Test;
Geoff Marsh
Mrs Marsh
Graham Marsh
Shaun Marsh
PJ Marsh
Mitchell Marsh
Rod Marsh
Melissa Marsh
Dan Marsh
Paul Marsh
Nathan Hindmarsh

[jeemak]

Re: Third Test - Australia v India, Melbourne

Not sure I can agree totally, or disagree with the sentiments here:

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/cricket/short-sighted-selectors-should-have-picked-team-for-birmingham-20181230-p50ou3.html

I actually think with Warner and Smith in the side, much of the pressure is off the likes of S. Marsh, Finch and Usman and they could probably contribute if they carry form through the next couple of months.

Say for instance we lost our two to three best bats 2005 era and had to rely on Clarke and Martyn to score all of our runs without the benefit of depth such as Lehman and Hodge et al to back them up (I get Clarke and Martyn were technically much better than our current stocks, but the point is still illustrated well enough)...…...it would have been ugly.

I'd get Burns and Wade in, at the expense of M. Marsh and Finch and see how everyone who misses out performs when the shield season commences again before I started to worry about England.

[Bornadog]

Re: Third Test - Australia v India, Melbourne

Some talk of Marnus Labuschagne coming in for Mitch Marsh.

The selectors have basically lost the plot.

[GVGjr]

Re: Third Test - Australia v India, Melbourne

Some talk of Marnus Labuschagne coming in for Mitch Marsh.

The selectors have basically lost the plot.

That's not the worst suggestion.
He's a handy bowler, good close in fieldsman and he just needs to learn to occupy the crease for longer periods
Maxwell should a in the mix as well but probably because he bowls off spin it will rule him out.

Renshaw for Finch should happen but probably won't.

Just noticed Labuschagne has been added to the squad

[Sedat]

Re: Third Test - Australia v India, Melbourne

Some talk of Marnus Labuschagne coming in for Mitch Marsh.

The selectors have basically lost the plot.

For some reason Australia seem to think playing a part-timer spinner or unfinished article like Marnus will do the job as 2nd spinning option on turning decks because they erroneously think that the batting ability is more important for a 2nd spinner than their bowling ability. It's a flawed strategy to state the bleeding obvious.

Fawad should be playing in Sydney. Hell, even Stephen O'Keeffe would be a better option if he can stay off the piss - he did take 12 wickets in a match against the same mob only last year.

[Sedat]

Re: Third Test - Australia v India, Melbourne

That's not the worst suggestion.
He's a handy bowler, good close in fieldsman and he just needs to learn to occupy the crease for longer periods.

Marnus is a work in progress with both bat and ball. We should be playing the 2nd best spinner in the country (Fawad) for Sydney and bolstering the batting with the most in-form batsman not currently in the team (Wade). Give Starc a rest and go in with 2 seamers and 2 spinners, with Wade to provide some relief overs - the 2 spinners will bowl the bulk of overs after the new ball anyway.

I don't mind Marnus long term but he needs to keep working on both disciplines so that he is a walk-up start in the team in at least one of them - he's not there yet IMO.

[GVGjr]

Re: Third Test - Australia v India, Melbourne

For some reason Australia seem to think playing a part-timer spinner or unfinished article like Marnus will do the job as 2nd spinning option on turning decks because they erroneously think that the batting ability is more important for a 2nd spinner than their bowling ability. It's a flawed strategy to state the bleeding obvious.

Fawad should be playing in Sydney. Hell, even Stephen O'Keeffe would be a better option if he can stay off the piss - he did take 12 wickets in a match against the same mob only last year.

Agar could be considered and I don't mind the suggestion of Fawad. SOK would be lucky to be given another game given he can't control himself.

Labuschagne should be in the mix as he toured with the side in exactly the role we are now looking to fill
I've never been a big fan of Maxwell but he should be considered.

[Sedat]

Re: Third Test - Australia v India, Melbourne

Agar could be considered and I don't mind the suggestion of Fawad. SOK would be lucky to be given another game given he can't control himself.

Labuschagne should be in the mix as he toured with the side in exactly the role we are now looking to fill
I've never been a big fan of Maxwell but he should be considered.

The issue I have with the bolded bit is that the role we are looking to fill is not the right one for the current test team. If Marnus is selected at no 6 our batting is still completely uneven - he is currently no better an option in the top 6 than Mitch Marsh. And for Sydney our bowling would be lopsided with 3 quicks, 1 specialist spinner and 1 work in progress spinner (India went with a work in progress spinner instead of Jadeja in Perth and lost). We should have 2 quicks, 2 specialist spinners (Agar would be ok but I'm not completely sold on his bowling) and 1 relief bowling option who is the best batsman available so we actually have a chance to score over 300 runs in an innings - we are simply repeating the same mistakes if we replace Mitch Marsh with Marnus at 6.

They'll pick Marnus anyway so the point is moot.

[hujsh]

Re: Third Test - Australia v India, Melbourne

Not sure I can agree totally, or disagree with the sentiments here:

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/cricket/short-sighted-selectors-should-have-picked-team-for-birmingham-20181230-p50ou3.html

I actually think with Warner and Smith in the side, much of the pressure is off the likes of S. Marsh, Finch and Usman and they could probably contribute if they carry form through the next couple of months.

Say for instance we lost our two to three best bats 2005 era and had to rely on Clarke and Martyn to score all of our runs without the benefit of depth such as Lehman and Hodge et al to back them up (I get Clarke and Martyn were technically much better than our current stocks, but the point is still illustrated well enough)...…...it would have been ugly.

I'd get Burns and Wade in, at the expense of M. Marsh and Finch and see how everyone who misses out performs when the shield season commences again before I started to worry about England.

In 2005 we had the likes of Hussey yet to be picked/making his debut. There was depth in the state leagues we don't have right now. Maybe it's related to the fact that we pause all first class cricket for a 20/20 tournament every year.

[GVGjr]

Re: Third Test - Australia v India, Melbourne

The issue I have with the bolded bit is that the role we are looking to fill is not the right one for the current test team. If Marnus is selected at no 6 our batting is still completely uneven - he is currently no better an option in the top 6 than Mitch Marsh. And for Sydney our bowling would be lopsided with 3 quicks, 1 specialist spinner and 1 work in progress spinner (India went with a work in progress spinner instead of Jadeja in Perth and lost). We should have 2 quicks, 2 specialist spinners (Agar would be ok but I'm not completely sold on his bowling) and 1 relief bowling option who is the best batsman available so we actually have a chance to score over 300 runs in an innings - we are simply repeating the same mistakes if we replace Mitch Marsh with Marnus at 6.

They'll pick Marnus anyway so the point is moot.

I guess it's looking more likely he is in at the expense of Mitch Marsh with all other batsman holding their spots. I agree the ideal setup should have two front line spin bowlers and maybe Wade as a medium pace option