Selectors have made it pretty clear they want an all rounder who bowls pace. It's the reason why Maxwell hasn't had an opportunity for years.
-
LIVE: Richmond v Melbourne - 7:25PM Wed
Squiggle tips Demons at 77% chance -- What's your tip? -- Team line-ups »
Mitchell Marsh
- Thread starter JG22
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Mar 25, 2003
- 35,681
- 28,334
Absolutely. It's also why Henriques has been given despite only an average body of work in shield cricket. Don't necessarily agree with it, but that is the way they see things.
LukeParkerno1
Post-Human
At least Henriques could bat- neither are really test quality. All of these all rounders are not top 6 bats. The one I feel that was underbowled this series was Wade. If he’s in our best 6, him bowling a bit could be an idea.
Last Ashes in England (2015) he played, he averaged 18 with the ball off about 44 overs and 3 matches. He's worth picking as a bowler in England. I wondered if he'd do well once they picked him as I knew he'd had good figures last time here and while I was surprised to see him get a five for, I wasn't surprised that he got wickets. He'd got the tools for English conditions.
It did help that they gave him a decent amount of overs though and he's not just brought on after 50 overs.
He can't jump better bowlers to the front line anywhere else, that would be daft.
- Mar 25, 2003
- 35,681
- 28,334
The thing is Marsh can bat (yeah, yeah hear me out) in the sense that he has a lot of desirable attributes - he obviously hits the ball hard, which is attractive to selectors at all levels. He's got a few glaring technical weaknesses, such as too big of a gap between bat and pad and swipes across the line too early in his innings, but by and large from a technique perspective he is as reasonably sound as many other batsmen playing test cricket.
But what he blatantly doesn't have is a hunger for runs and the concentration to achieve those runs (both qualities that are intrinsically linked). You know this because he so often gets out to nothing balls - just decent balls that are in a decent region, but nothing spectacular. He nicks off, or plays down the wrong line. How often does his sequence of outs run something like block, block, block, block, the over looks like it's petering out to a maiden and then suddenly he plays down the wrong line to a similar ball and it hits the stumps. That's just purely a concentration problem.
The problem for him is you can't coach concentration and hunger into a player - it's gotta come from within. The batsmen himself has to have the desire (and not just talk of having the desire) to be a better player and score more runs. The great players you can see their mindset is no matter what, no matter how good this guy is bowling, and how good this next ball is going to be, I've just gotta get my bat between the ball and stumps and live for another ball, and another over, and these guys will tire out and I can cash in. Marsh doesn't give the impression that he plays with that mindset. He faces up to six good balls in a row, gets out, and it looks like he just thinks "well what could I do? this guy is bowling well".
Stating the obvious here but as it stands now, the Marsh the selectors have in their heads, is a long way short of Marsh the reality.
Last edited:
- Jan 13, 2015
- 1,528
- 908
- AFL Club
- Sydney
the problem for m.marsh now is that he may well have played his last test for Australia. even if he hasn't it will take 30 or so tests averaging 45 with the bat to then become a respectable average bumped up to approx. 35. he has fallen well short of what the selectors and the public want from him and that's to be a #6.
I don't subscribe to a keeper batting at 6 to allow marsh to bat at 7. we effectively get the same result.
besides gilchrist is the only keeper we've had that could've held down a top 6 spot (never needed to as we had warne/McGrath and didn't need a 5th bowler, only occasionally).
haddin probably could've held down #6 and wayne Phillips who kept played as a batsman initially - both averaged low 30's - no other aussie keeper has averaged 30+.
people wanting paine @ 6 is just crazy - he has 1 first class century in over 200 games.
I don't subscribe to a keeper batting at 6 to allow marsh to bat at 7. we effectively get the same result.
besides gilchrist is the only keeper we've had that could've held down a top 6 spot (never needed to as we had warne/McGrath and didn't need a 5th bowler, only occasionally).
haddin probably could've held down #6 and wayne Phillips who kept played as a batsman initially - both averaged low 30's - no other aussie keeper has averaged 30+.
people wanting paine @ 6 is just crazy - he has 1 first class century in over 200 games.
And it was a double century very early in his career in a match he wasn't the keeper in.
Lots of good points re Mitch Marsh, but there is literally no justification to how he can be a top 6 bat for Australia from what we have seen.
Nor is he our 3rd best pace/seam option, so he would have to be shoehorned into the side to accomodate.
I don’t see him playing this summer in tests, unless she scores bucketloads of runs in the shield before the 1st test
Nor is he our 3rd best pace/seam option, so he would have to be shoehorned into the side to accomodate.
I don’t see him playing this summer in tests, unless she scores bucketloads of runs in the shield before the 1st test
The Falcon Strike
Hall of Famer
On a horse for courses basis - marsh was worth it at the oval
He took wickets and averaged as much as most other top 6 batsman
He needs to be able to consistently average 30-35 to be in the side
Hell that’d almost make him top 6 by default
Ultimately the problem isn’t marsh - the problem is there is no viable alternative for a test allrounder at present
He took wickets and averaged as much as most other top 6 batsman
He needs to be able to consistently average 30-35 to be in the side
Hell that’d almost make him top 6 by default
Ultimately the problem isn’t marsh - the problem is there is no viable alternative for a test allrounder at present
- Jan 13, 2015
- 1,528
- 908
- AFL Club
- Sydney
if there's no decent allrounder out there, then ditch the plan.
I've always said for test cricket play your best 6 batsmen, surely 1 can roll the arm over in need.
besides, with the current bowling attack we have, we shouldn't need a 5th bowler.
and with the bowling attack we have , if there are back to back tests, we have plenty of quicks in reserve.
The Falcon Strike
Hall of Famer
We generally don’t need a 5th bowler
However at the end of a long tour and compact test series with our three best bowlers on the brink - a 5th bowler was necessary
As I said it was horses for courses.
I doubt if there was a 10 day break marsh would have been picked
You need to be able to take 20 wickets to win a test match
- May 5, 2006
- 62,726
- 70,017
- AFL Club
- West Coast
Our top 6 didn't even last two tests in the Ashes before changes were made. Marnus came in by chance, Bancroft and Khawaja were both axed for not performing. Harris came in and Warner stayed in and neither averaged 10.
Realistically Marsh came in for a guy who had scored 191 runs in 8 digs and made 24 and 17. If you take his bowling out of the equation it's a bit of a nothing switch.
I was pleased that he was able to hang around and face 50+ balls per innings but displeased that he got out to dumb shots.
A guy who averages 25 shouldn't in our top 6, but we shouldn't have a top 6 with 5 players used that were unable to reach that mark in a 5 test series either. At least in Australia Warner should make runs and Wade while inconsistent has shown he can make scores.
rocker_oz33
TheBrownDog
Are their any other quality allrounders in the game that play test cricket?
Stokes batting all rounder.
There used to be alot more.
Oh there was a really good one in the WC plays for a mino team.
Stokes batting all rounder.
There used to be alot more.
Oh there was a really good one in the WC plays for a mino team.
- May 5, 2006
- 62,726
- 70,017
- AFL Club
- West Coast
All rounders tend to live off purple patches. Flintoff tormented us in the 2005 Ashes but was otherwise just a good ordinary player. If Marsh averaged 32 with the bat and 33 with the ball I doubt we would make him a Member of the Order of Australia. Even Stokes is only 36 / 33. It's the epic innings and series that these guys are remembered for.
In my time I've seen Jacques Kallis who was a top class test batsman and took 292 wickets @ 33. Steve Waugh started as an all rounder but was just a batsman when he made all his runs. AB a part timer. Chris Gayle bowled a bit in his 100 odd tests but you wouldn't pick him just for the extra bowling.
Before my time there were Hadlee, Khan and Botham who were bowling all rounders. The guy who will average 40-50 with the bat and under 30 with the ball is a unicorn.
In my time I've seen Jacques Kallis who was a top class test batsman and took 292 wickets @ 33. Steve Waugh started as an all rounder but was just a batsman when he made all his runs. AB a part timer. Chris Gayle bowled a bit in his 100 odd tests but you wouldn't pick him just for the extra bowling.
Before my time there were Hadlee, Khan and Botham who were bowling all rounders. The guy who will average 40-50 with the bat and under 30 with the ball is a unicorn.
Shakib Al Hasan - a true all-rounder and had an insanely good World Cup. The only other quality all-rounder at Test level that I can think of off the top of my head is Jason Holder. Gun. While holding a ragtag team together and somehow working with an incredibly terrible board. It's quite incredible really.
- Jan 13, 2015
- 1,528
- 908
- AFL Club
- Sydney
I get it's a long tour etc. but isn't that why we had a squad of 17 - starc , patto and neser would have been fresh if you are saying cummo and josh were cooked.
Blue Arrow
Club Legend
- Feb 22, 2019
- 1,415
- 1,474
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
- Other Teams
- The Renegades, Vics
Colin de Grandhomme is pretty solid for New Zealand. Puts Marsh to shame
|
eth-dog
Tier 1 WW Player
Shakib is a star too.
rocker_oz33
TheBrownDog
I didn't know garden gnome played tests not a recond .
- Mar 25, 2003
- 35,681
- 28,334
De Grandhomme looks so average in every aspect, but he gets the job doesn't he. Or at least, to this point of his career he has. He contributes something in just about every test he has played, even if it's just 40-odd runs or a couple of wickets.
Probably deserves a bit more recognition than he gets.
- Mar 25, 2003
- 35,681
- 28,334
Aboslutely. And even none of the guys you mention did just that and they are legends of the game.
Tony Greig is an often overlooked member of the great all rounders club. Averaged just over 40 with the bat, 2.5 wickets a test (141 from 58) at 32. That is a very strong record - probably the equivalent level for a batting all rounder as Ian Botham was to a bowling all rounder, although is must be said Beefy's overall career record was seriously depreciated by the final 6 years of his career.
There's four blokes that have the +40/-30 and taken more than 10 wickets in the process. Two are knockabout Aussie legends who most wouldn't expect on this list - Doug Walters and Darren Lehmann. Though obviously their status as genuine all rounders would be in question as they only took about a wicket every second test, which would make them good part time bowlers.
The other two are the only two that have done the +40/-30, played more than 10 tests and took over a wicket a test - Aubrey Faulkner and Charles MacCartney.
In summary, +40 with the bat and -30 with the ball is not even close to a realistic expectation of any cricketer.
- May 5, 2006
- 62,726
- 70,017
- AFL Club
- West Coast
Given that 40-30 isn't realistic, and we have batsmen struggling to make 40 and an all rounder struggling to make 40 or 30 (though if he bowled more I think the latter is achievable) - what next?
- Mar 25, 2003
- 35,681
- 28,334
People need to accept that over 35 with the bat and under with the ball - whilst taking over a wicket a test - is at the very least, a handy all rounder, if not a very good all rounder.
