Mitchell Marsh

[gym4life]

I booed Goodes because he was and still is a crud stirring dickead with a chip on his shoulder. Thats it. Mitch deserves his place over all the spud you name.

Mitch didn’t deserve his place, he’s absolute shithouse. I’m West Australian but I’ll never support Mitch marsh due to how many times he’s let down the country, deserves his treatment by the vic crowd.

 

[Carbine Chaos]

Mitch didn’t deserve his place, he’s absolute shithouse. I’m West Australian but I’ll never support Mitch marsh due to how many times he’s let down the country, deserves his treatment by the vic crowd.

An alternate viewpoint is he's a very nice young man (for the record, he is) who isn't responsible for his continued selection. I'd understand your anger being directed towards the selectors but to comment that he's 'let down the country' is an unnecessarily vindictive comment from somebody sitting on their arse watching from afar.

 

[Scotland]

19-4-31-0

Well at least you can't accuse the selectors of picking an all rounder and then not using him as a bowler.

Marsh was the right pick for this test, he is the best pace option we have for a batting all rounder. His batting has been mostly disappointing at test level, but the bloke can play. Not expecting big things with the bat but at least he's giving our 3 strike bowlers a chop out ahead of a short turnaround between tests. And he's bowling tightly too.

The bigger concerns are that we needed to pick an all rounder because the selectors knew the MCG pitch would yet again be carpet over concrete and that a bloke with 5, 16, 4, 0, 12, 0, 13, 5 as his last 8 test scores (with minimal form at other levels) is both next in line for a recall and doesn't look completely out of place next to the rest of the top 6.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Calling Mitch Marsh a batting all rounder is extremely generous! I’ve said for a long time he’s a bowling one at best, which is why I’ve also said that 6 is way too high. He’s basically a 7 or 8.

He’s done a job with the ball though. If he’s in the side needs to bowl 15 overs an innings as his batting isn’t test standard by itself.

 

[Tassieboy]

Marsh is hardly FC standard. Averages 32 and 1.5 wickets a match.

 

[Scotland]

If you're picked at #6 you're a batting all rounder. Marsh bats at #4 for WA in the Shield. I know people don't rate him but he's there to be a #6 batsman that bowls. If we were going to pick another front line quick who can bat a bit we'd probably just promote Cummins and Paine up the order and pick Siddle or Tremain.

 

[Starburns_]

Handscomb deserved to be dropped. Would you have booed him if he had played? Or was it just childish, and a little partisan, nonsense.

No, Handscomb would hardly have been the first player to underperform and survive the axe.

Mitch Marsh is an entirely unique example, no Australian player in the last 25 years has received the armchair ride that he has, despite doing so little to deserve it (not even other favourite whipping boys like Shaun Marsh or Watson come close). It takes a special kind of offensive selection to draw this sort of reaction.

Bird has six not outs from nine innings. I know you're a resident of the Bay, so if you're going to use this kind of garbage logic, perhaps stay there.

You were the one who made it about Bird's batting in the first place even though that was beside the point, so the troll response was all that your argument deserved.

They’d be better off picking a Pattinson as 4th quick, him and Cummins are pretty close to equal with the bat to Marsh.
Marsh has proven time and again he’s a limited overs player I don’t understand why they keep persisting with him.

Saying that watch him score runs on the highway and all the apologists for him will be slapping each other on the back about how he’s turned the corner.

^^This. He'll pad his stats on a road like last year and the morons will claim he's turned the corner, completely ignoring the fact that even Nic Maddinson could (and did) make runs on this deck.

Pattinson was the ideal choice, but his history does pose some risks. Almost any reasonable choice was better than Marsh though.

 

[sherb]

Ah yes, that famous batsman Jackson Bird.

That's "famous all-rounder Jackson Bird" thank you.

 

[The Speaker]

You were the one who made it about Bird's batting in the first place even though that was beside the point, so the troll response was all that your argument deserved.



^^This. He'll pad his stats on a road like last year and the morons will claim he's turned the corner, completely ignoring the fact that even Nic Maddinson could (and did) make runs on this deck.

Pattinson was the ideal choice, but his history does pose some risks. Almost any reasonable choice was better than Marsh though.

No, now you're just contradicting yourself. Your original claim was that a fifth bowler would be more effective with the ball, and no worse with the bat. Therefore it was entirely legitimate to point out that Bird is a proper tail-ender.

And then in the next breath you complain because Marsh might actually score plenty of runs after all, thereby negating your original argument! Very sad.

 

[frankrizzo]

If marsh was used only on flat tracks people would have been fine with it but there is no evidence he will be a horses for courses pick from this point on as we were told he was a 5th bowler before yet always played on decks where he wasn't needed to bowl.

 

[reggie]

funny reading west Aussies mock vics for booing marsh as you shouldn't 'boo one of your own' from a state that used too boo Adam Gilchrist when he first went to WA as he took Tim zoehers spot in the shield team.

Funny reading anyone mocking any booing of our own players. Queenslanders also booed Gilly when he replaced Healy. Happens everywhere because unfortunately there are morons in every state.

Even worse is hearing people justifying why it's ok to boo a player representing our country

 

[Starburns_]

No, now you're just contradicting yourself. Your original claim was that a fifth bowler would be more effective with the ball, and no worse with the bat. Therefore it was entirely legitimate to point out that Bird is a proper tail-ender.

Except I never said that, but nice attempt to shift the goalposts again. The direct quote was: "With what Marsh brings with the bat they may as well have picked a 5th bowler." Marsh has a career average of 26 and his recent record is significantly worse than that, so on balance it's not much to sacrifice to add another genuine bowler on a pitch where Cummins could comfortably hold down a spot in the top 7.

 

[Richard Pryor]

Proof won't be in the pudding until he bats, but so far I think Marsh has justified his selection as the allrounder/extra bowler, but he hasn't done enough to justify the selection of an allrounder/extra bowler in the first place.

 

[Blue1980]

Marsh is hardly FC standard. Averages 32 and 1.5 wickets a match.

That’s the record of an average first class cricketer.

At least he’s bowled here and done quite well doing the grunt work. Smith seemed to forget he was in the side when he captained.

 

[La Dolce Vita]

I'd not head to a game of football over in WA then. All they ever do is BOOOO.

rubbish

 

[Ant_]

rubbish

Booooo

 

[La Dolce Vita]

Booooo

good timing he is bowling at the minute

 

[Scotland]

That’s the record of an average first class cricketer.

At least he’s bowled here and done quite well doing the grunt work. Smith seemed to forget he was in the side when he captained.

Stoinis averages 42 and just under a wicket per match. Maxwell 44 and just under a wicket per match. Let's not pretend we have Jacques Kallis running around in the Shield. His bowling record at FC level is exactly what we want him to reproduce at test level. He's not a front line bowler at Shield level, never has been and never will be.

Frustrating as he is Marsh has a top score of 181 and best figure of 4/61 at test level. That's why they go back to him when they want an all rounder.

 

[Doodlesweaver]

So you call that post out for generalising but don't bother to call the ones about Victorians booing Marsh out. Dumbass

Aah, Merry Christmas to you too, sweetie.

 

[Buzzasto DaSilva]

Bowled really, really well.

 

[Demosthenes]

Has done a job for us in this Test, that's for sure. Without him in the side I'd be very worried about the health of our quicks going into Sydney.

And whoever used Maddinson as an example of a shit batsman clearly doesn't watch Shield.

 

[Dayan Warna]

30 test matches
Batting average of 26 and bowling average of 43.
That's absolute trash
Cant bat, cant bowl and he isnt the fielder handscombe is.
He would have to be the most carried player for 31 tests.

 

[Catters 070911]

I think Mitch and his brother cop it because of their surname.

Father-son is embraced in AFL, and fans love when the son of a Legend plays for their team, and gets behind him.

But in cricket, for some reason, people see it as "nepotism" and think that they only get games because of who their father was.

Mitch Marsh could get three centuries in a row, and prove you all wrong, and yet you would still say that he ONLY got the spot because of his last name.

I bet if his name was Mitch JONES or Mitch SMITH, rather than Mitch Marsh, you would get behind him more, rather than want to see him fail, so that you can justify your prejudices, because you never got advantages in life based on your heritage.

 

[Catters 070911]

Its happened, again.

Why do the selectors keep going back to this guy?

20 tests as a batting all rounder have proven he is shit.

Does he hold nudes of Mark Waugh? Or has Glenn Maxwell hooked up with a selectors daughter?

So you don't like someone being in the side who isn't Victoria and has family connections?

 

[Catters 070911]

The way most of you talk, you actually sound like you WANT Marsh to fail, rather than turn it around and prove you wrong.

Because most people on BigFooty would rather be right than a sportsperson proving them wrong.