Ongoing Test match XI speculation thread.

[LukeParkerno1]

I said shortly,lol.No way Labs would be captain and prefer Cummins to him.Carey or Whiteman ahead of Maxwell you are joking although I see a future down the track with Carey as a batsman.You would think if Paine not captain only a matter of time that he is replaced.

Nup he’s still the best gloveman until Inglis is ready and I do think Inglis needs 12 months. Yes I’d pick them over Maxwell as if trust them more when we have to save a test. Wouldn’t have a fast bowler as captain no way. Too much on his plate as it is. It’s either Smith or Labs and so doubt Smith will want it again.

 

[Voice of the G]

Nup he’s still the best gloveman until Inglis is ready and I do think Inglis needs 12 months. Yes I’d pick them over Maxwell as if trust them more when we have to save a test. Wouldn’t have a fast bowler as captain no way. Too much on his plate as it is. It’s either Smith or Labs and so doubt Smith will want it again.

As I said we are out to win a test,not save it.Lets get on the front foot and attack.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

As I said we are out to win a test,not save it.Lets get on the front foot and attack.

You have to do both. Not every test you can win. A draw is as good as a win sometimes.

 

[Seedsfan]

Not as if he was consistent so it wasn’t a shock.

He was coming of making 100 in India and gets dropped. If that isn’t bad enough he makes 700 runs in the shield at 50 from 15 innings and then can’t get back into the side even with Smith Warner and Bancroft getting suspended. Never been fairly treated Maxwell, our first tour post the ball tampering was in the UAE he is a good player of spin and provides an extra bowling option

 

[LukeParkerno1]

He was coming of making 100 in India and gets dropped. If that isn’t bad enough he makes 700 runs in the shield at 50 from 15 innings and then can’t get back into the side even with Smith Warner and Bancroft getting suspended. Never been fairly treated Maxwell, our first tour post the ball tampering was in the UAE he is a good player of spin and provides an extra bowling option

Was his only score in that series though. I wasn’t surprised at all when he was dropped at all.

 

[Voice of the G]

Was his only score in that series though. I wasn’t surprised at all when he was dropped at all.

Has gone back to the shield but as said surely those stats with a average of 50 he surely should have been considered again.Your negative talk about Maxwell confuses me at times and your negative talk about saving games.If the top order do their job and lets say Aust. 4/180 off 80 1st day you need guys like Maxi to bat to win the game,not save.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Has gone back to the shield but as said surely those stats with a average of 50 he surely should have been considered again.Your negative talk about Maxwell confuses me at times and your negative talk about saving games.If the top order do their job and lets say Aust. 4/180 off 80 1st day you need guys like Maxi to bat to win the game,not save.

You need to be able to do both. There’s a reason why the real top bats are up there- they can win a test but also save a test in that situation. Picking a bloke that will go out there and thrash a ball when you are trying to save a test helps no one. It certainly won’t save a test and you are losing tests you shouldn’t. I wouldn’t pick Maxwell as I don’t trust him to not get 20 or so then throw his wicket away.

 

[Voice of the G]

You need to be able to do both. There’s a reason why the real top bats are up there- they can win a test but also save a test in that situation. Picking a bloke that will go out there and thrash a ball when you are trying to save a test helps no one. It certainly won’t save a test and you are losing tests you shouldn’t. I wouldn’t pick Maxwell as I don’t trust him to not get 20 or so then throw his wicket away.

Can I remind of his test 100 in India.

 

[Seedsfan]

Was his only score in that series though. I wasn’t surprised at all when he was dropped at all.

An away 100 in difficult conditions is huge. Deserved an opportunity back at home

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Can I remind of his test 100 in India.

Yes his one score. Not as if he was consistent so don’t blame the selectors if they don’t pick inconsistent blokes

 

[Seedsfan]

You need to be able to do both. There’s a reason why the real top bats are up there- they can win a test but also save a test in that situation. Picking a bloke that will go out there and thrash a ball when you are trying to save a test helps no one. It certainly won’t save a test and you are losing tests you shouldn’t. I wouldn’t pick Maxwell as I don’t trust him to not get 20 or so then throw his wicket away.

Pant almost won two games throwing the bat. Our batting is one paced

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Pant almost won two games throwing the bat. Our batting is one paced

Only because Warner especially was out of form. Even Smith wasn’t at his fluent best.

 

[BronCrow]

Yes his one score. Not as if he was consistent so don’t blame the selectors if they don’t pick inconsistent blokes

Yet they persisted with Mitch Marsh for so long.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Yet they persisted with Mitch Marsh for so long.

Neither are and were the answer

 

[Seedsfan]

Yet they persisted with Mitch Marsh for so long.

Yet Maxy who since returning from Bangladesh made 494 runs at 70 in the shield got dropped

 

[The Passenger]

I don't think Maxwell would* have succeeded long term as a test cricketer, but I do believe - given some of the batsmen who have been picked in recent years - he should have got more of a run, especially at home, to either succeed or fail on the strength of his own performances, rather than being pretty stooged at the selection table. If he plays 15 to 20 tests and his batting average is still below 30, or even low 30's, then you can say "fine we gave it a shot, but it hasn't worked".

If he did succeed he'd have been a bloody handy hitter at #6 who can send down some off spin and is an amazing fielder. Obviously he wasn't particularly popular with team management and leadership for a period, but there have been plenty of guys come back from that situation.

*or will, if he does somehow get another chance.

 

[JackOutback]

I don't think Maxwell would* have succeeded long term as a test cricketer, but I do believe - given some of the batsmen who have been picked in recent years - he should have got more of a run, especially at home, to either succeed or fail on the strength of his own performances, rather than being pretty stooged at the selection table. If he plays 15 to 20 tests and his batting average is still below 30, or even low 30's, then you can say "fine we gave it a shot, but it hasn't worked".

If he did succeed he'd have been a bloody handy hitter at #6 who can send down some off spin and is an amazing fielder. Obviously he wasn't particularly popular with team management and leadership for a period, but there have been plenty of guys come back from that situation.

*or will, if he does somehow get another chance.

Agree with this, particularly after the South Africa debacle meant our stocks were so low. There were, and still are, worse options than Maxwell. Might be a quick fix, might not make the grade, but I would have picked him ahead of the likes of Maddinson and Patterson.

 

[BronCrow]

Neither are and were the answer

I am making light of the lack of consistency on policy selection.

While I don't think you are entirely wrong about Maxwell, he was more worthy of being persisted with than Mitch.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

I am making light of the lack of consistency on policy selection.

While I don't think you are entirely wrong about Maxwell, he is more worthy of being persisted with than Mitch.

Why pick either of them though! Neither were ever going to be reliable.

 

[BronCrow]

Why pick either of them though! Neither were ever going to be reliable.

Why don't you ask the selectors that, who are willing to be patient with some and not others.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Why don't you ask the selectors that, who are willing to be patient with some and not others.

Probably because in general they are better players

 

[BronCrow]

Probably because in general they are better players

Marsh is better than Maxwell?

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Marsh is better than Maxwell?

Neither are any good. Let’s call it a nil all draw. Marsh would have been okay as a number 8

 

[BronCrow]

Neither are any good. Let’s call it a nil all draw. Marsh would have been okay as a number 8

Probably, not sure that I agree about Marsh at 8. He reminds of being a bit of a tweener, to use a footy term.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Probably, not sure that I agree about Marsh at 8. He reminds of being a bit of a tweener, to use a footy term.

Do feel he would have been fine as an 8, as a 3rd quick.