Post BF Upgrade Feedback - Click Here

Remove this Banner Ad

Mitchell Marsh

  • Thread starter Thread starter JG22
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Demosthenes said:
Well if you're picking between two people with an ordinary average, it makes sense to go with the one who doesn't have a reputation as a rolled gold arseh*le.
Click to expand...
Of course.

But I'm just explaining that his average isn't the only reason Vics were outraged over him being dropped.
 
Scotland said:
Mennie arguably wasn't the next best quick outside the test team when he got a call up, but CA's one test wonder selections last year were dumb.
Click to expand...

Was the leading wicket taker in Shield cricket the summer prior, so it was hardly the "dumb" selection some make it out to be. I'd prefer evidence-based selections than "gut feel" "we think he has something, even though he'd shown SFA recent form and has a mediocre record" selections, a la Marcus Stoinis (granted, he performed when picked, but still).
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

I feel for Mitch Marsh today. Dropped a catch he should've taken and has bowled 2 overs out of 71. Not a whole lot he can really do to redeem himself until the captain throws him the ball or we're 4 down in the second innings.

Our selectors and captain are just not on the same page. Now he's finally back on for his 3rd with an old ball and two set batsmen. If he doesn't keep it under 3 an over or get wickets he'll be criticised more.
 
MCG of the EFL said:
Not sure we saw enough of Hodge in Test cricket to say that.A very un lucky player that was around at the wrong time with all the good bats we had in his era.
Click to expand...

Fair point. If only Hodge was mates with Punter like Symonds. Hodge was a quality bat and miles ahead of Symonds IMO. Whether he would have been a quality test bat we will never know as nepotism ruined his chances.
 
Scotland said:
I feel for Mitch Marsh today. Dropped a catch he should've taken and has bowled 2 overs out of 71. Not a whole lot he can really do to redeem himself until the captain throws him the ball or we're 4 down in the second innings.

Our selectors and captain are just not on the same page. Now he's finally back on for his 3rd with an old ball and two set batsmen. If he doesn't keep it under 3 an over or get wickets he'll be criticised more.
Click to expand...

Agree in part. But you've just outlined the job description of a fifth bowler so that's no excuse.
 
Mitch Marsh getting selected was a joke, family tie selection nothing more or less. He will barely bowl and they will be hoping it is a road so he can score some runs and justify putting him into the side.
 
no.1. Mitch Marsh is Australia's best all rounder option for the future, give the kid a break.
no.2 Australian cricket is littered with big headed, big mouthed I ams, if Mr Maxwell had kept his mouth shut he would be in ahead of Marsh.
no.3 I'm Victorian and also barrack for Australia, maybe some of you triple heads need to realize the world doesn't end at the rabbit proof fence.
no.4 And maybe a few Victorians don't be so hard on Western Australians, they're a sensitive breed with feelings.
no.5 Mitchell Marsh deserves his spot and I hope he becomes a permanent member of our team.
 
davis_756 said:
family tie selection nothing more or less.
Click to expand...
Stevi_Tigers said:
if his name wasn't marsh he would never get near the side
Click to expand...
4d9.jpg
 
Last edited:

Remove this Banner Ad

Carbine Chaos said:
4d9.jpg
Click to expand...
np_trcg_3.jpg


They prattled on all week about how the swap would only happen if they needed an extra bowler, he has 2 wickets @ 46 this season at FC level and has done nothing to write home about thus far with his bowling.

His only saving grace was he was averaging 44 with the bat which quickly became meaningless when Maxwell didn't even get a look in despite averaging 73 with the bat.

I don't really care that he is in the side, what annoys me is they expect us to believe this rubbish about it being a selection based on the pitch when it is as clear as day it is a boys club selection. Don't lie to us and give bullshit reasoning for your decisions.
 
BRWB said:
Agree in part. But you've just outlined the job description of a fifth bowler so that's no excuse.
Click to expand...

Ended up bowling 7 overs as the 3 front line quicks bowled 60 between them - more than the first innings of the 2nd test when they needed a rest! England are only 4 down so we could be bowling most of tomorrow. Makes no sense to grind nothing overs out of the front line quicks while Marsh is just standing around at slip or third man.

7 overs for 25 is roughly equivalent to the overall run rate for the day's play. Given a decent spell I would've backed Marsh to bowl 10-15 overs for 3-3.5 runs an over today which for a 5th bowler is useful. He nearly had an outside edge in his first 2 overs and bowled a great yorker in his second spell, so could've jagged a wicket as well.

Picking Marsh and scarcely bowling him does nothing to ease the load on our front line quicks, unsettles the batting order and likely weakens the overall batting strength of the top 6. I don't get it.
 
Cold Sober said:
no.1. Mitch Marsh is Australia's best all rounder option for the future, give the kid a break.
no.2 Australian cricket is littered with big headed, big mouthed I ams, if Mr Maxwell had kept his mouth shut he would be in ahead of Marsh.
no.3 I'm Victorian and also barrack for Australia, maybe some of you triple heads need to realize the world doesn't end at the rabbit proof fence.
no.4 And maybe a few Victorians don't be so hard on Western Australians, they're a sensitive breed with feelings.
no.5 Mitchell Marsh deserves his spot and I hope he becomes a permanent member of our team.
Click to expand...

didn't know that what you say/don't say is more important than your performance :rolleyes:
 
I don't mind the idea of picking a bowling all rounder. but if we do, we should give him a decent amount of the ball. otherwise we should have chosen a batting all rounder and given him 5 or so overs a day.

I really hope Mitch succeeds and delivers with the bat and the ball. Especially after that dropped catch.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

davis_756 said:
np_trcg_3.jpg


They prattled on all week about how the swap would only happen if they needed an extra bowler, he has 2 wickets @ 46 this season at FC level and has done nothing to write home about thus far with his bowling.

His only saving grace was he was averaging 44 with the bat which quickly became meaningless when Maxwell didn't even get a look in despite averaging 73 with the bat.

I don't really care that he is in the side, what annoys me is they expect us to believe this rubbish about it being a selection based on the pitch when it is as clear as day it is a boys club selection. Don't lie to us and give bullshit reasoning for your decisions.
Click to expand...

Pretty much nailed it. The cricket Australia fraternity will pick him no matter what logic it flies in the face of.

If he doesn't bowl significantly more tomorrow, the reasons given for his selection are confirmed as complete fabricated nonsense.

Anyone who's played cricket at any level will know that politics and favouritism plays a part in selection. Hardly conspiracy material.
 
Cold Sober said:
no.1. Mitch Marsh is Australia's best all rounder option for the future, give the kid a break.
no.2 Australian cricket is littered with big headed, big mouthed I ams, if Mr Maxwell had kept his mouth shut he would be in ahead of Marsh.
no.3 I'm Victorian and also barrack for Australia, maybe some of you triple heads need to realize the world doesn't end at the rabbit proof fence.
no.4 And maybe a few Victorians don't be so hard on Western Australians, they're a sensitive breed with feelings.
no.5 Mitchell Marsh deserves his spot and I hope he becomes a permanent member of our team.
Click to expand...


Exactly what is it Maxwell is ever supposed to have said?

He’s got a nickname that he cops shit over because he allegedly gave it to himself - which never actually happened - and in terms of his public persona, there’s never been a word out of place.

Playing outrageous shots doesn’t make him an outrageous character.
 
Scotland said:
Ended up bowling 7 overs as the 3 front line quicks bowled 60 between them - more than the first innings of the 2nd test when they needed a rest! England are only 4 down so we could be bowling most of tomorrow. Makes no sense to grind nothing overs out of the front line quicks while Marsh is just standing around at slip or third man.

7 overs for 25 is roughly equivalent to the overall run rate for the day's play. Given a decent spell I would've backed Marsh to bowl 10-15 overs for 3-3.5 runs an over today which for a 5th bowler is useful. He nearly had an outside edge in his first 2 overs and bowled a great yorker in his second spell, so could've jagged a wicket as well.

Picking Marsh and scarcely bowling him does nothing to ease the load on our front line quicks, unsettles the batting order and likely weakens the overall batting strength of the top 6. I don't get it.
Click to expand...

That’s a fairly weak argument.

Literally anyone at first class level will beat the bat occasionally and can bowl a good yorker. Hell, give me 6 cracks at it and I could bowl at least one good Yorker in an over of test cricket.

What makes a bowler stand out is what happens in between all those instances, things that heighten their chances of those specific deliveries succeeding
 
Scotland said:
Ended up bowling 7 overs as the 3 front line quicks bowled 60 between them - more than the first innings of the 2nd test when they needed a rest! England are only 4 down so we could be bowling most of tomorrow. Makes no sense to grind nothing overs out of the front line quicks while Marsh is just standing around at slip or third man.

7 overs for 25 is roughly equivalent to the overall run rate for the day's play. Given a decent spell I would've backed Marsh to bowl 10-15 overs for 3-3.5 runs an over today which for a 5th bowler is useful. He nearly had an outside edge in his first 2 overs and bowled a great yorker in his second spell, so could've jagged a wicket as well.

Picking Marsh and scarcely bowling him does nothing to ease the load on our front line quicks, unsettles the batting order and likely weakens the overall batting strength of the top 6. I don't get it.
Click to expand...

It made no sense to pick him before the test and still none now.

Bowling 7 overs, will so the front liners bowl 14 balls less for the day? Are they really so paranoid about bowler breakdowns we have to pick a guy who has never shown top 6 ability with the bat who has barely bowled in first class cricket for 6 months?
 
I was thinking we took our losses ridiculously hard in the golden era of the 2000s.

Lose to India In 2001 - avoid enforcing the follow on at all costs, forever

Lose to England in 2005 - Must keep the dream alive of our own Freddie flintoff.

Mitch marsh has a record that all of England’s touted next Bothams pre Freddie that would make them blush.

Actually craig whites record is only marginally better than Mitch Marsh’s (24 with the bat, 37 with the ball)
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom