The Third Test in the Ashes Series - WACA (14 December)

[LP]

Hazlewood didn't bowl like a workhorse bowler in Adelaide.
This bloke is as good as we have. I was in Adelaide all 5 days and he was putting them under more pressure than anyone.
He is a seriously good bowler. Absolute World Class, and I think now with his pace up, they want the All Rounder to use these guys as weapons in short bursts more.

I stated as much, I wrote that Starc was dead lucky he had Hazlewood there at the other end, Starc cleans up tails like Junk-time Eddie kicks goals.

I agree that Hazlewood was under-bowled, I thought it was quite mischievous for Smith to come out post match and claim Hazlewood was not bowling well or under-performing.

Twice during the match you must have been perplexed by Smith's bowling changes. Both Hazlewood and Lyon were in spells and all over the Poms like a rash and Smith removed them from the attack after relatively short spells by their standard.

[crashlander]

I would not have selected Mitch Marsh.
In his favour, he is a big, athletic lad who hit the cover off the ball and bowl about the pace of the present English bowlers. That is not a bad set of traits to have.
However, as a bowler he does not tend to move the ball in the air or off the pitch enough. Too many of his balls come through gun-barrel-straight! That is not good for an international bowler.
Secondly, as a batsman he does not deal well with a moving ball. This means he has periods of low scores against pace or spin.
These weaknesses are not the things to bring into test cricket, especially against the Poms.

It has been a LONG time since we had a true allrounder in the side. In the '70's, almost every player could and did bowl a bit. Keith Stackpole had a pretty good leg break in his arsenal. Ian Chappell bowled some leggies. Greg Chappell was a medium pacer who could move ht eball either way. Doug Walters was the official 'patnership breaker'.
After that we still had guys who were wickettakers as bowlers. Simon Katich bowled chinamen and bowled them well. Injury restricted his bowling, but he took 6 wickets in a innings. Bevan was an unreliable bowler, but his left arm wronguns simply couldn't be read. He got a lot of wickets, and had he better contro he would have made the team as a bowler.
Now we don't have that. Warner and Smith can bowl leggies, but they rarely do.

We need a batsman who can bowl properly. Not many of them around.

[LP]

It's funny isn't it, years ago blokes like Gilmore or Davidson often bowled the bulk of overs.

I suppose prior to Cummins and Starc we had Johnson. Going back Lindwall wasn't a spud, and Benaud of course.

I don't consider players like Warne and Waugh as true All-Rounders, I think Johnson falls in that category but many rate him an All-Rounder.

Miller was the stand-out, really our only player who came close to Sobers.

It's hard to get a gauge on some of the older players, because of the mix of playing conditions like 6 and 8 ball overs, etc., etc.. Back in the 8 ball over days very few ordinary All-Rounders made it as bowlers, it's amazing the difference two extra deliveries make to part-timers!

By my definition, an All-Rounder should be top order capable in either bowling or batting. Australia has had very few All-Rounders(Excluding some keepers who for some reason are over-looked) that are capable of batting above 5 or opening the bowling.

[flyboy77]

I would not have selected Mitch Marsh.
In his favour, he is a big, athletic lad who hit the cover off the ball and bowl about the pace of the present English bowlers. That is not a bad set of traits to have.
However, as a bowler he does not tend to move the ball in the air or off the pitch enough. Too many of his balls come through gun-barrel-straight! That is not good for an international bowler.
Secondly, as a batsman he does not deal well with a moving ball. This means he has periods of low scores against pace or spin.
These weaknesses are not the things to bring into test cricket, especially against the Poms.

It has been a LONG time since we had a true allrounder in the side. In the '70's, almost every player could and did bowl a bit. Keith Stackpole had a pretty good leg break in his arsenal. Ian Chappell bowled some leggies. Greg Chappell was a medium pacer who could move ht eball either way. Doug Walters was the official 'patnership breaker'.
After that we still had guys who were wickettakers as bowlers. Simon Katich bowled chinamen and bowled them well. Injury restricted his bowling, but he took 6 wickets in a innings. Bevan was an unreliable bowler, but his left arm wronguns simply couldn't be read. He got a lot of wickets, and had he better contro he would have made the team as a bowler.
Now we don't have that. Warner and Smith can bowl leggies, but they rarely do.

We need a batsman who can bowl properly. Not many of them around.

Marsh bowls consistently above 140kmhr and can move it if the Doctor is blowing!

[LP]

Marsh bowls consistently above 140kmhr and can move it if the Doctor is blowing!

I think that is a wait and see.

If you had written occasionally above 140kph I'd have agreed, but consistently above 140kph I'm not so sure.

A lot of these modern "Average Speeds" are coming out of 20/20, fours overs in one or two over spells isn't really a useful tell!

[malo]

I think Cummins is a technically better bat than M Marsh.
Marsh has previously planted his front foot to early.

Maybe the selectors think the tail is good enough that they can afford to play M Marsh at 6, or even Paine at 6 and M Marsh at 7.

I agree with you about Cummins....but he'll be far more dangerous coming in at 8 or 9 than if they were to bat him up higher & put extra pressure on him, he doesn't need that when he's just finally getting a few regular games under his belt.

He will be a bewdy that's for sure.

[maxm68]

Do the Marsh brothers have incriminating photographs?

I reckon their old man took the pictures and has them on file.......


Surely to Christ we don't need another bowler.......... ?  if the selectors think we do then they have rocks in their head.

If they think Mitch Marsh is the 6th best batsman in the country they have rocks in their head......

Ok........  I've just worked it all out.

The Selectors do have ROCKS IN THEIR HEAD.

[JonHenry]

I reckon their old man took the pictures and has them on file.......


Surely to Christ we don't need another bowler.......... ?  if the selectors think we do then they have rocks in their head.

If they think Mitch Marsh is the 6th best batsman in the country they have rocks in their head......

Ok........  I've just worked it all out.

The Selectors do have ROCKS IN THEIR HEAD.

I'm no supporter of the selectors but they have done a good job with S Marsh and Paine.
Bancroft also got an 80.
Credit where it's due

[flyboy77]

Hopefully, the WACA pitch will the WACA pitch of yesteryear...

[maxm68]

I'm no supporter of the selectors but they have done a good job with S Marsh and Paine.
Bancroft also got an 80.
Credit where it's due

I was mainly talking about the Mitch Marsh selection for the next test.......  IMO they ( the selectors ) got very lucky with Shaun Marsh making that tonne but given that many chances he was bound to come good at some stage..    I  wish Dean Jones + Brad Hodge ( And now Maxwell ) got the same chances back in the day.