Sport The Hangar Cricket Thread IV

Remove this Banner Ad

I'd prefer Pattinson to play more shield cricket to ensure his body is rock solid. I like him, as I think every Australian cricket fan does, but I don't want to bring him in to the test team, over load him, then see him break down again. Let's get him right this time, he's too important to our future.
 
Warner hit on the thumb at training. Could miss the next test. Might see Marsh open with Burns and bring in someone like Handscomb or Maddinson.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Disagree. New Zealand are a good side and to beat them would be a good achievement for our side, given the transitional phase they're still in.
 
Tassieboy said:
Things are thin on the batting front at the moment. A second-tier in the 90s such as Jamie Cox would now comfortably get a game. Still maintain Marsh can't bat at 6.
Click to expand...
It's a shame that Wade got injured when he was perfectly poised to put pressure on Nevill to bat at 6/keep potentially.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

First test vs WI I would love to see:

Burns
Warner
Smith (c)
Voges
Handscomb
Maxwell (I would put Henriques or Faulkner here but they've gotten themselves injured)
Nevill (+)
Pattinson
Lyon
Hazlewood
Behrendorff

I included Behrendorff in because the selectors love a left-handed quick and he's pretty much the only one who's uninjured atm. If Faulkner plays slide him out for Bird.
 
eth-dog said:
Bird is probably the man. 16 wickets this season so far.
Click to expand...
bir's form has been lukewarm since returning from injury (did nothing last season, did nothing for his county, first fiver in ages today....when SA were 360 runs ahead and trying to go run-a-ball), and he doesn't meet the 140kmh speed target. I wouldn't be surprised at all if he was over-looked, even if they added 2 seamers to the squad.
 
Despair said:
lol Mitch Marsh, are you high? He averages less than 30 in first class cricket with the bat and his bowling doesn't seem to offer anything that Watson's doesn't.

"We don't know because he's the only one who gets a chance there." - Doolan, Hughes, Khawaja - all have batted at 3 and were less successful, not to mention none of them could bowl either.
Click to expand...
eth-dog said:
Yet has outperformed Watson in both tests they've played. Have you watched him at all or are you just going on stats? Mitch Marsh is better than Watson now and in the future. Watson averages 38 batting at 3, a whopping 1 more run than Hughes did while he was there.

Shane Watson is the king of the dead rubber. There's a reason his average in the 5th test of a series is 16 runs more than his career average.
Click to expand...
Despair said:
I have watched Mitch Marsh, not just in the test series but in domestic games. He isn't as good a batsman as Watson and that is reflected in his dismal batting average of <30

I find it strange that you infer that Watson is a "love child" who doesn't have any actual relatives of particular note in the cricketing world, then you offer up Mitch Marsh who will be provided just as much opportunity off the back of his last name.
Click to expand...
eth-dog said:
Averaged 35 with the bat in the shield last season and averages above 30 when you take away his seasons as a teenager. So how much of him have you really seen? Not as much as you claim I suspect.

You don't understand what I'm saying? I also like how you completely ignore my points about M Marsh outperforming Watson in the test matches and how Watson's the dead rubber king... And how Marsh scored more runs in less tests for the year. Watson's been mediocre for 3 years yet gets a consistent run at it despite that. It's like how many accuse Kommer or Melksham being love childs at Eseendon.
Click to expand...
Despair said:
You reeled off a couple of stats and somehow deduced (from that) that I haven't seen much of him.. that's uh..... interesting :confused:

He outperformed Watson in two matches, hold the press.

As pointed out by Phone, Mitch Marsh is the love child, not Watson.

What I don't get is why don't they just open with Watson? Averages over 40 (read: More than Rogers) as an opener and will be around for a few more years than Rogers.
Click to expand...
eth-dog said:
You claim to have watched him yet say that he's not a good bat in domestic games, using a sub 30 average as an excuse, yet can't acknowledge that in the past 3 shield season's he's averaged above 30 in each of them, which clearly indicates that you're pretending to be more knowledgeable than you are.

He also has more runs in less test matches for 2014, with a hamstring injury in 2 of his innings'. Marsh outperformed Watson last year.

Marsh can be construed as a love child with his initial selection but Watson has been continually selected despite being mediocre for 4 years and Marsh performed when he was called up. The years 2011-2014 Watson made 1679 runs at 30, never averaging over 35 in that period and twice averaging under 30 over a year. If that's not love child treatment, nothing is.

Rogers has nearly 1500 runs at 41 since his return (read: more than Watson) and Rogers is arguably the best 4th innings batsman in the country. Averges nearly 50 in the 4th innings, which is as good as Matthew Hayden's record, and 8th on Australia's openers list in terms of average for players who've played more than 5 innings' batting last, and also the most centuries in the 4th innings as an opener, equal with Mark Taylor.
Click to expand...
Despair said:
Because I don't use arguments that support your case I'm clearly pretending to be more knowledgeable than I am... Lol righto.

It's not just the fact that he averages less than 30 (which is terrible), his actual technique is not very compact and lends itself more towards slogging than actual strokeplay.

Right on cue, Watto goes bang bang 8)
Click to expand...
eth-dog said:
Take away his seasons as a teenager and he averages over 30 in FC cricket, and under 30 with the ball. You make excuses about his batting when he was a teenager to have him out of the test side.

His technique is fine, it's far far better than Watson's plonking onto the front foot and playing around the pad. Yes he can slog but his strokeplay is still very good, which suggests even more to me you're far less informed than you think you are again.

Also funny thing about averages, Watson averaged 30 between 2011 and 2014. The sooner he's out of the side, the better for Australian cricket.
Click to expand...

(Quotes from Jan 2015)

Hey eth-dog, have you been enjoying watching Mitchell Marsh flap around like Magikarp at the crease?

18 innings, 0 100s, 1 50 - average: 23.68

My favorite part was where you suggested he has a better technique than Watson lmao
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top