Matt Renshaw

[Ciderhound]

Simply has to remain in the side now. Have not seen a gutsier 34 from a 20 year old in quite some time

 

[TommyD13]

certainly should stay in. Looks a good pick

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

Reminds me of the old days of Taylor and Marsh. It's not good for the current state of test cricket having an opener battling away for a 30 odd off 140 balls.

Besides, he never earnt his spot to begin with. Replace with Marsh and let him earn his place with consistency over a two year period.

 

[Van_Dyke]

Besides, he never earnt his spot to begin with

He was by far the best option. Who would you have picked instead?

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

He was by far the best option. Who would you have picked instead?

By far???

Strange comment after 10 first class games.

 

[Van_Dyke]

By far???

Strange comment after 10 first class games.

Answer the question. Who would you have picked, than the opener who was averaging 44, after 10 games, being 20, when the side is looking for the youf.

 

[BRWB]

Best player and missed since M Taylor....

Now just needs to learn to play the odd drive...or cut...anything through the off side in front of point.

 

[Gough]

Good old Yorkshire DNA. Best thing about this Test apart from Ussie's innings. Saw us through that short spell on the first evening too before getting a good ball.

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

Answer the question. Who would you have picked, than the opener who was averaging 44, after 10 games, being 20, when the side is looking for the youf.

Somebody who has earnt a spot.

And there's no need to get defensive because you made an exaggerated comment.

 

[Van_Dyke]

Somebody who has earnt a spot.

Who? Who has earnt that spot?

 

[Richard Cranium]

Simply has to remain in the side now. Have not seen a gutsier 34 from a 20 year old in quite some time

I think calling 34* when in pursuit of 127 gutsy is over doing a bit, no?

 

[Ciderhound]

I think calling 34* when in pursuit of 127 gutsy is over doing a bit, no?

I think I'm justified in calling it a gutsy innings from a 20 year old given the quality of the South African attack.

 

[Kram]

He's like the lovechild of Lawry and Boycott

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

Who? Who has earnt that spot?

I'd have opened with Khawaja for a start if Marsh wasn't fit. Then any number of middle order batsman should have been promoted before Renshaw. Quite a few actually.

Also Wade should never have been promoted either. Nevill's a far better batsman and keeper.

 

[bird_man]

Reminds me of the old days of Taylor and Marsh. It's not good for the current state of test cricket having an opener battling away for a 30 odd off 140 balls.

Besides, he never earnt his spot to begin with. Replace with Marsh and let him earn his place with consistency over a two year period.

Not good for test cricket having a guy that digs in and values his wicket?

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

Not good for test cricket having a guy that digs in and values his wicket?

Digs in? He was lucky not to be out about a dozen times. Had more plays and misses outside off stump than he had scoring shots. Test cricket has changed from 20 years ago where making 80 in a day and surviving was considered a good innings.

 

[frankrizzo]

He had to remain in the team even if he had a poor test, you can't rebuild with these kids if you just sack them and bring in a new batch every second test.

If the selectors had no plans to actually give this new lot a decent run then it was an awful move to bring them in.

 

[Doodlesweaver]

Digs in? He was lucky not to be out about a dozen times. Had more plays and misses outside off stump than he had scoring shots. Test cricket has changed from 20 years ago where making 80 in a day and surviving was considered a good innings.

Where the Aussies are concerned, anyone who can survive more than two sessions is an automatic pick.

 

[frankrizzo]

Digs in? He was lucky not to be out about a dozen times. Had more plays and misses outside off stump than he had scoring shots. Test cricket has changed from 20 years ago where making 80 in a day and surviving was considered a good innings.

We have changed, other teams still know how to play test cricket which is why they grind us down when the conditions are tough.

As for playing and missing, that's part of being an opener having the ability to miss one or two or three then put it to the side and play the next ball as you see it.

 

[damochandler]

I wish he had another few years of first class cricket under him. His first innings was important i

 

[Van_Dyke]

Then any number of middle order batsman should have been promoted before Renshaw. Quite a few actually.

Patterson?

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Reminds me of the old days of Taylor and Marsh. It's not good for the current state of test cricket having an opener battling away for a 30 odd off 140 balls.

Besides, he never earnt his spot to begin with. Replace with Marsh and let him earn his place with consistency over a two year period.

No. Marsh replaces Maddinson in the middle order

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Digs in? He was lucky not to be out about a dozen times. Had more plays and misses outside off stump than he had scoring shots. Test cricket has changed from 20 years ago where making 80 in a day and surviving was considered a good innings.

Yeah and how's that been working for us. Collapse like the stock market far too often.

Collapse in India, in England (Broad's devastating spells ). Now collapsing at home with monotonous regularity.

A 20yo who values his wicket is worth persisting with for now.

 

[Hamingja]

He is more Ed Cowan than Buck Rogers at the moment.

He still has to be capable of actually scoring.

Early days though, revist after 5-10 tests really.

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

Patterson?

I like Patterson. Not sure he's quite ready either but he's a better selection that Renshaw.