Carlton Supporters Club

Mitch Marsh has been named in the squad replacing Sayers.

Looks like Hanscombe will be out and the Marsh brothers will play....

Surely not

Mitch Marsh has been named in the squad replacing Sayers.

Looks like Hanscombe will be out and the Marsh brothers will play....

Do the Marsh brothers have incriminating photographs?

Do the Marsh brothers have incriminating photographs?

Glen Maxwell obviously is so out of form he cant be considered I presume??? he cant be that unpopular with Smith and crew can he?
Mitch Marsh in for Handscomb cant be based on a batting technique improvement, they must want the extra bowler......

Glen Maxwell obviously is so out of form he cant be considered I presume??? he cant be that unpopular with Smith and crew can he?
Mitch Marsh in for Handscomb cant be based on a batting technique improvement, they must want the extra bowler......

Smith refuses to bowl Maxwell so he doesn't provide a relief bowler.

The selectors must have a grand plan that's too sophisticated for mere mortals to comprehend  :-\

Smith refuses to bowl Maxwell so he doesn't provide a relief bowler.

The selectors must have a grand plan that's too sophisticated for mere mortals to comprehend  :-\

Smith pretty much refuses to bowl himself, and his bowling was probably rated higher than Maxwell and Lyon as a teenager.

Personally, I don't see Maxwell as a Test bowler, he's useful in One Day or 20/20, maybe a spot for him on the continent, but he barely bowls more than 2 or 3 over spells in local Shield cricket let alone a test.

You'd have Maxwell in the team for two reasons, he is a batting X-Factor which can take the game away from the opposition in a session, a bit like Doug Walters used to be. He's also possibly the best fieldsman in the country and it likely to make that catch or create a run-out that others won't.

But there is this aspect, the argument for Mitch Marsh as a bowler is even weaker than the bowling argument for Maxwell! ;)  Marsh had 153 overs to get some action happening when the Vics made 450 runs, and he barely raised a whimper.

I think the selectors have done a pretty good job so far this series....

Marsh and Paine have been very good.
Paine in particular surprised me with his glove work, and his batting gave our first innings a lot of impetus.

Selecting cricket sides is not about looking at stats, if it was you wouldn't have selectors.
I am not a M Marsh fan at all but they obviously have their reasons.
I would suggest his 130km + bowling is a big part of it.

I think the selectors have done a pretty good job so far this series....

Marsh and Paine have been very good.
Paine in particular surprised me with his glove work, and his batting gave our first innings a lot of impetus.

Selecting cricket sides is not about looking at stats, if it was you wouldn't have selectors.
I am not a M Marsh fan at all but they obviously have their reasons.
I would suggest his 130km + bowling is a big part of it.

Jeepers, all is required is for a batsman to be able to do what Andrew Symonds used to do with the ball & they'd be a shoe in.

Mitch Marsh.....that's just an injury insurance policy, nothing more, and replace one walking wicket (Handscombe) with another.

Jeepers, all is required is for a batsman to be able to do what Andrew Symonds used to do with the ball & they'd be a shoe in.

Mitch Marsh.....that's just an injury insurance policy, nothing more, and replace one walking wicket (Handscombe) with another.

That's the point, M Marsh is quite an effective bowler. Not so great with the bat
I think they are looking to take full advantage of the quick bowlers we have by bowling them in shorter spells.

Like his brother, who has actually performed, a surprise to many of us, Mitch Marsh has been batting well so has earned his recall. This he'll play too with Handscomb out of form. On the other hand Maxwell has been batting in outstanding fashion and would be very unlucky. If the next Test was in Sydney I'd reckon Maxwell would've been picked, being more conducive to spin, but being in Perth they went with Marsh.

Always scares me with Marsh's in the team but if you're producing the form then I suppose you'd earned your chance.

I think they are looking to take full advantage of the quick bowlers we have by bowling them in shorter spells.

Why would we need shorter spells if they had enough in the tank for a follow-on in Adelaide, isn't that suggestion therefore a contradiction?

That's the point, M Marsh is quite an effective bowler. Not so great with the bat
I think they are looking to take full advantage of the quick bowlers we have by bowling them in shorter spells.

he has been averaging 71 with the bat his season....

Why would we need shorter spells if they had enough in the tank for a follow-on in Adelaide, isn't that suggestion therefore a contradiction?

Cummins is injury prone and Starc has had his moments, you need five bowlers IMO and maybe I am old fashioned but I like an allrounder in the team.
M.Marsh would give us a bit if a tail as he unproven at test level but given Cummins is playing well with the bat and the English bowling is mediocre so
we may get away with it.

Problem with Marsh is that he isnt good enough with either bat or ball to hold his place and is more of a bits and pieces cricketer...the classic allrounders were usually good enough in at least one skillset to hold their place....ie Flintoff was no great bat but was a good enough bowler to be picked on his bowling alone.
This is why M.Marsh wont work IMO and would be a short term fix.....we have been desperate for years to find a quality allrounder but unlike other countries we cant find them...

Cummins is injury prone and Starc has had his moments, you need five bowlers IMO and maybe I am old fashioned but I like an allrounder in the team.
M.Marsh would give us a bit if a tail as he unproven at test level but given Cummins is playing well with the bat and the English bowling is mediocre so
we may get away with it.

Problem with Marsh is that he isnt good enough with either bat or ball to hold his place and is more of a bits and pieces cricketer...the classic allrounders were usually good enough in at least one skillset to hold their place....ie Flintoff was no great bat but was a good enough bowler to be picked on his bowling alone.
This is why M.Marsh wont work IMO and would be a short term fix.....we have been desperate for years to find a quality allrounder but unlike other countries we cant find them...

On the bright side at least he is batting well for WA. Gambled successfully on one Marsh, hopefully it follows.

Cummins is injury prone and Starc has had his moments, you need five bowlers IMO and maybe I am old fashioned but I like an allrounder in the team.
M.Marsh would give us a bit if a tail as he unproven at test level but given Cummins is playing well with the bat and the English bowling is mediocre so
we may get away with it.

Problem with Marsh is that he isnt good enough with either bat or ball to hold his place and is more of a bits and pieces cricketer...the classic allrounders were usually good enough in at least one skillset to hold their place....ie Flintoff was no great bat but was a good enough bowler to be picked on his bowling alone.
This is why M.Marsh wont work IMO and would be a short term fix.....we have been desperate for years to find a quality allrounder but unlike other countries we cant find them...

Time will tell EB.

One could say the same about Maxwell (excluding very recent form with bat)?

Time will tell EB.

One could say the same about Maxwell (excluding very recent form with bat)?

Maxwell is a batsman who bowls IMo, M. Marsh is more a true allrounder but isnt proficient enough at either IMO to hold his place.
You wouldnt bat him 6 if he couldnt bowl and he wouldnt be a 3rd or 4th choice only pace bowler .

The selectors have had a desire for a true allrounder for years now......Watson didnt work out, Cartwright was a overnight fad that was put to bed real quick....and now we are back to Marsh.

Why would we need shorter spells if they had enough in the tank for a follow-on in Adelaide, isn't that suggestion therefore a contradiction?

I don't know? Maybe they would concentrate on the game they are currently playing, then focus on the next one?
Maybe the series defining game, Adelaide was there to be won?
FFS I thought you said you had played plenty of 3 and 4 game cricket?
Did you read what Warne, Taylor and even now what Smith have said since the game has finished?

Maxwell is a batsman who bowls IMo, M. Marsh is more a true allrounder but isnt proficient enough at either IMO to hold his place.
You wouldnt bat him 6 if he couldnt bowl and he wouldnt be a 3rd or 4th choice only pace bowler .

The selectors have had a desire for a true allrounder for years now......Watson didnt work out, Cartwright was a overnight fad that was put to bed real quick....and now we are back to Marsh.

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 don't know? Maybe they would concentrate on the game they are currently playing, then focus on the next one?
Maybe the series defining game, Adelaide was there to be won?
FFS I thought you said you had played plenty of 3 and 4 game cricket?
Did you read what Warne, Taylor and even now what Smith have said since the game has finished?

As you know I am not a critic of Smith's decision to bat, it was the right decision.

Do you think the selections for the next match are consistent with the various statements given how little Marsh has bowled recently, and given his history of breaking down when bowled heavily? Is it consistent to drop Sayers and bring in Marsh for a game in which they claim they will need an extra front line bowler?

Personally, I think they've brought Marsh in as a batsmen, it will be interesting to see how much he bowls. There is a stench to that decision.

It's fair for me to question the consistency of claims that the decision to bat in Adelaide was unjustified based on bowlers loads, but for the same critics to call for an extra bowler in Perth, a wicket traditionally more favorable to fast bowlers. Especially if the chances are high Lyon retains a spot for a location not know to be a spin bowler favorite.

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.

The Cummins argument is a strong one and one I agree with, which is why I'd bat him higher and bring in another certified front line bowler for Handscomb, Sayers. You still have Paine and Starc batting of a fast flat track that they have a good history on. Once we have Starc, Cummins, Hazlewood, Sayers it's clear Lyon regardless of his form should come out of the team for that one test with Maxwell an option based on batting alone. That would be a hell of a formidable horses for courses squad to play in Perth targeting a fast and large total. The only way to get a result there is rapid scoring, and Maxwell is a clear first choice.

For mine Sayers and Hazlewood are workhorse bowlers, you won;t get the best out of them in short sharp spells, they need overs a plenty to become effective. Cummins and Starc are the sharp spell types.

For subsequent tests you then have two ways to go, firstly Lyon comes back in for Melb and Sydney, but he can come in for Maxwell or Sayers subject to performance.

Is Mitch Marsh going to be an effective batsmen on turning wickets in either Melb or Sydney, does that mean he's coming on for one test with little hope of a second?

As you know I am not a critic of Smith's decision to bat, it was the right decision.

Do you think the selections for the next match are consistent with the various statements given how little Marsh has bowled recently, and given his history of breaking down when bowled heavily? Is it consistent to drop Sayers and bring in Marsh for a game in which they claim they will need an extra front line bowler?

Personally, I think they've brought Marsh in as a batsmen, it will be interesting to see how much he bowls.

The Cummins argument is a strong one and one I agree with, which is why I'd bat him higher and bring in another certified front line bowler for Handscomb, Sayers. You still have Paine and Starc batting of a fast flat track that they have a good history on. Once we have Starc, Cummins, Hazlewood, Sayers it's clear Lyon regardless of his form should come out of the team for that one test with Maxwell an option based on batting alone. That would be a hell of a formidable horses for courses squad to play in Perth targeting a fast and large total. The only way to get a result there is rapid scoring, and Maxwell is a clear first choice.

For mine Sayers and Hazlewood are workhorse bowlers, you won;t get the best out of them in short sharp spells, they need overs a plenty to become effective. Cummins and Starc are the sharp spell types.

For subsequent tests you then have two ways to go, firstly Lyon comes back in for Melb and Sydney, but he can come in for Maxwell or Sayers subject to performance.

Is Mitch Marsh going to be an effective batsmen on turning wickets in either Melb or Sydney, does that mean he's coming on for one test with little hope of a second?

Have they actually claimed they need another front line bowler?
I don't think Marsh will bowl a lot.
12 overs an innings should make a big difference to the other quicks.
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.

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.

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.

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.

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!

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!

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.

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.

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

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

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. 

I  wish Dean Jones + Brad Hodge ( And now Maxwell ) got the same chances back in the day.

There is a power of players who never got equivalent opportunities.

Clarke made an interesting comment, he described the Marsh's as ripper blokes, the sort you want to have around the team. Hardly a reason for test selection, maybe that can keep them around like Nugget!

I may have told this story before but nepotism in cricket is very real, and not always the way you think. A friends son was blatantly blackmailed three years ago, threatened by a state cricket official, told to leave home and play grade cricket in NSW or he'd never pull on the baggy green even though he had represented his State and Australia multiple times at junior level. He declined and the abuse and interference became so bad, abusive txts and phone calls, hassling his parents, hassling his club and coach, that in the end he gave the game away and chose football!

The NSW official turned out to be a relative of a high ranking Australian and NSW cricket official, it seems they were making the you'll play for us or nobody scenario very real! They were in effect standing over kids in other states to move to NSW grade clubs or else.

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.

If Marsh is going to bat in the top 6 his strength needs to lean towards his batting. He's always going to be the 5th bowler, and a very handy one he is, always good for a wicket or two, but importantly we need him to make run. His bowling is going to be more relief.

Outside of a pure genuine all rounder probably the ideal type you were talking about was Andrew Symonds. A genuine batsman that averaged over 40, who was a more than proficient bowler that could provide relief.

If Marsh is going to bat in the top 6 his strength needs to lean towards his batting. He's always going to be the 5th bowler, and a very handy one he is, always good for a wicket or two, but importantly we need him to make run. His bowling is going to be more relief.

Outside of a pure genuine all rounder probably the ideal type you were talking about was Andrew Symonds. A genuine batsman that averaged over 40, who was a more than proficient bowler that could provide relief.

The problem is Marsh is nowhere near good enough to bat at 6 in a Sheffield Shield team.

Is Marsh a good enough bowler to be selected as a bowler in the Test team?  No, definitely not.

You don't even have to think about whether his batting is good enough.

An all rounder must be good enough to earn a place in the team as a batsman or as a bowler.  Marsh misses out on both counts and his inclusion in the Test squad is inexplicable.

It's amazing how the most emotive debates seem to form around players who are a compromise.

The problem is Marsh is nowhere near good enough to bat at 6 in a Sheffield Shield team.

Is Marsh a good enough bowler to be selected as a bowler in the Test team?  No, definitely not.

You don't even have to think about whether his batting is good enough.

An all rounder must be good enough to earn a place in the team as a batsman or as a bowler.  Marsh misses out on both counts and his inclusion in the Test squad is inexplicable.

He's had a good FC season with the bat this year so hopefully that is going to carry over to the Test arena. His last 6 innings 95, 28, 141, 11, 43 and 38no. Let's hope it carries over as he has never filled me with confidence. Only bright side is that he couldn't bat worse than Handscomb right now plus he'll bowl.

Can only reward form but that being the case Maxwell must consider himself very unlucky.

He's had a good FC season with the bat this year so hopefully that is going to carry over to the Test arena. His last 6 innings 95, 28, 141, 11, 43 and 38no. Let's hope it carries over as he has never filled me with confidence. Only bright side is that he couldn't bat worse than Handscomb right now plus he'll bowl.

Can only reward form but that being the case Maxwell must consider himself very unlucky.

Averages around 21 with the bat at test cricket...he would probably bat at No 3 for England ;) but here in Aus you need to be at around 35-40 IMO  even batting at six to earn your money. Maybe they might bat Paine at six if Marsh plays....

Averages around 21 with the bat at test cricket...he would probably bat at No 3 for England ;) but here in Aus you need to be at around 35-40 IMO  even batting at six to earn your money. Maybe they might bat Paine at six if Marsh plays....

Hopefully 2nd time round that will improve. Of that glorious Australian sides through the late 90's/2000s every batsman was dropped at some stage. They were much better then 2nd, even 3rd time around. Symonds was once considered a professional fieldsman at one stage then eventually went on to be pretty good.

M.Marsh's recent form has been good and this summer picking blokes in good FC form like Bancroft, S.Marsh and Paine has been a success so far.

I say that out of hope as having two Marsh's in the side scares me, although we certainly can't complain about Shaun's form.

Maxwell is in better form and scoring more runs than M Marsh

Maxwell is in better form and scoring more runs than M Marsh

There's that too.

Maxwell is in better form and scoring more runs than M Marsh

Apparently that doesn't matter, coach has declared Mitch has earned his spot so that's that. Handscome will have to work hard to get back in this side but he's done for this series I reckon.

If Marsh has "earned his spot" .... I call bulldust.

Maxwell should be pretty aggrieved right now, maybe he should change his surname to Marsh and move to NSW to ensure selection.

Kevin Pietersen has got it right, England are a fecking embarrassment and after the latest incident where they were out on the piss fighting again its clear some of their blokes are just here for a holiday and couldnt be bothered trying, he named Cook as being finished and not trying anymore and I reckon he missed a few others in the same category. They sent Ali out as captain in the latest tour match and didnt even bother selecting anyone else from the test team and its not like their batsman dont need the practice..
Was going to go the Test in Melbourne but I couldnt be bothered spending my money on a game where only one team are trying...hopefully we smash them in Perth and they send some of these slack ar$e players home and get some new ones who can behave properly,make a contest and give the public their moneys worth...

If Marsh has "earned his spot" .... I call bulldust.

Maxwell should be pretty aggrieved right now, maybe he should change his surname to Marsh and move to NSW to ensure selection.

Just quoting the coach justifying his selection, Mitch will play no doubt about it.

If Marsh has "earned his spot" .... I call bulldust.

Maxwell should be pretty aggrieved right now, maybe he should change his surname to Marsh and move to NSW to ensure selection.

Maxwell needs dual citizenship like some of our politicians, he would get a game for NZ...
Plenty of cricket heavyweights dont like Maxwell and are critical of his selfish " its all about me" approach, Haddin(didnt want him in NSW and said so) Warne, Berry all slagged him off over the Wade debacle and Lehmann and Smith took to the public forum to criticise him which isnt the norm.
He isnt popular and thats the bottom line, he will need 200 every innings to force his way back...unlike the Marsh bros who are popular with their peers and as we have seen with Shaun get plenty of love from their team-mates especially when they do well...

Reminds me of Jamie Siddons ex Vic and SA state cricketer, should have played for Aus during the Waugh years but I heard didnt get on with Steve Waugh in particular and didnt get a look in at test level.

Kevin Pietersen has got it right, England are a fecking embarrassment and after the latest incident where they were out on the piss fighting again its clear some of their blokes are just here for a holiday and couldnt be bothered trying, he named Cook as being finished and not trying anymore and I reckon he missed a few others in the same category. They sent Ali out as captain in the latest tour match and didnt even bother selecting anyone else from the test team and its not like their batsman dont need the practice..
Was going to go the Test in Melbourne but I couldnt be bothered spending my money on a game where only one team are trying...hopefully we smash them in Perth and they send some of these slack ar$e players home and get some new ones who can behave properly,make a contest and give the public their moneys worth...

Absolutely agree EB. I haven't seriously followed cricket for many years - I was right into it at the time when the WIs were riding high and I used to love it then. It's become a pale shadow these days and England are an absolute disgrace. They should be told to feck off home IMO since they are only here it seems to party and cause trouble and embarrassment. I could understand some celebration if they were actually winning but they are an embarrassment to the sport on field as well. I wouldn't shell out one cent to watch tbh, England are scornful of the paying public, and it will be interesting to see what happens in the Boxing Day test.  >:(

If Marsh has "earned his spot" .... I call bulldust.

Maxwell should be pretty aggrieved right now, maybe he should change his surname to Marsh and move to NSW to ensure selection.

Vics have been copping it on the Test selection front for some time - Dean Jones, Cameron White, Glenn Maxwell, Brad Hodge, Rob Quiney, Aaron Finch, David Hussey, Matthew Elliott, Marcus Harris (should have been picked ahead of Renshaw) were either unfairly dumped or never got a deserved chance at Test level.  Even Darren Lehmann couldn't get a gig until he went back to South Australia.

The NSW Cricket Mafia have had it their own way for too long.  And now Trevor Hohns is promoting Queenslanders before their time.

At least it means the Vics have dominated the Sheffield Shield for the past 10 seasons or thereabouts.

I heard on the radio today that Marsh has only bowled 21 overs this season.  Is that correct?

Yep.  Apparently he's an allrounder.... Cant bat and can't bowl... Allround crap.

Yep.  Apparently he's an allrounder.... Cant bat and can't bowl... Allround crap.

he's coming off shoulder surgery....

... which means his bowling is restricted i.e. can't bowl.  And we know from his test record thus far that he isn't a test no. 6's bootlaces.  So the justification for being picked is that he is  good bloke or something of that ilk?

... which means his bowling is restricted i.e. can't bowl.  And we know from his test record thus far that he isn't a test no. 6's bootlaces.  So the justification for being picked is that he is  good bloke or something of that ilk?

I think you've nailed it Prof!

Imagine how good out test record would be if the selectors picked the best 12 players for each test  ???

I heard on the radio today that Marsh has only bowled 21 overs this season.  Is that correct?

I was debating this very point last week, that is clearly proof to me he's been picked for batting which just doesn't make sense.

As a batsmen he'd be well down the pecking order.

Vics have been copping it on the Test selection front for some time - Dean Jones, Cameron White, Glenn Maxwell, Brad Hodge, Rob Quiney, Aaron Finch, David Hussey, Matthew Elliott, Marcus Harris (should have been picked ahead of Renshaw) were either unfairly dumped or never got a deserved chance at Test level.  Even Darren Lehmann couldn't get a gig until he went back to South Australia.

The NSW Cricket Mafia have had it their own way for too long.  And now Trevor Hohns is promoting Queenslanders before their time.

At least it means the Vics have dominated the Sheffield Shield for the past 10 seasons or thereabouts.

Yep, I agree with much of that, going back 10 years to 2006/7, Vic have won 5 titles & Tassie 3  Yeahh !!!!   :-)

but NSW players have certainly dominated the Aus side in that time.  Obviously that doesn't help their side with regards the domestic comp.

It has been going on for longer than that though, and to be fair, is not restricted to Vic players not getting a go.  I could mention a few Tassie lads who were battering down the door back as far as the 90s through to recent years.......Jamie Cox, Deane Hills, Michael DiVenuto through to the likes of Luke Butterworth.  In fact if it weren't for Boonie, who paved the way for Tassie players to at least be considered, I hate to think how many players might have been overlooked.

Mind you, I can remember a certain Australian side of around 1981 I reckon that had at least 7 West Australians in it, so the NSW dominance hasn't always been the case.  Here's my attempt at dragging those names from my memory:  Graham Wood, Bruce Laird, Kim Hughes, Bruce Yardley, Rod Marsh, Terry Alderman & Dennis Lillee......there may have been someone else as well, can't remember !

cheers

Mal.

Here we go...for anyone interested in this cr@p !

1st Test, 1981 vs Pakistan.  The Australian side, 7 from WA....no-one from NSW (Border & Thommo had both moved to Qld by this stage)

B M Laird
G M Wood
G S Chappell*
K J Hughes
G N Yallop
A R Border
R W Marsh†
B Yardley
D K Lillee
J R Thomson
T M Alderman

Dean Jones, Cameron White, Glenn Maxwell, Brad Hodge, Rob Quiney, Aaron Finch, David Hussey, Matthew Elliott, Marcus Harris

Jones and Elliott had fair runs at Test level, maybe Jones got pushed early?

White - not god enough imo.

Maxwell - well  maybe, but clearly has pissed a lot of people off and his batting has never been consistent until very recently.

Hodge - yep, ripped off big time.

Quiney, Hussey and Finch - meh. Hussey was never going to replace his brother?

Harris - no idea tbh.

Jamie Siddons was the worst case IMO...had the runs on the board and was just ignored through being disliked....think Siddons was the 3rd highest run scorer in Shield cricket and ultra consistent but couldnt crack a game for Aus, think he played the one ODI.

Steve Waugh even stuck it up him with a now infamous sledge  where he said the following after Siddons had a crack at him:

In a  Sheffield Shield match Steve Waugh was taking his time getting ready to face his first ball.

Jamie Siddons had enough and remarked: “For f***’s sake, mate, it’s not a f***ing test match!”.

To which Waugh replied: “Of course it’s not… You’re here”.

Think that summed up how Waugh felt about Siddons and everyone knows the likes of the Aus selectors/John Buchanan let Steve Waugh have a big say in selection issues and that Siddons would never get a game while Waugh was in charge.....

It's pretty easy saying this guy or that guy should have played.

Start with who they should have replaced, then we will get a clearer picture.

Suggesting blokes like Finch and White were hardly done by is garbage.
Harris? Really?

Dean Jones and Elliott had plenty of chances.
Hodge? He could undoubtedly play but was he better than Ponting, S Waugh, M Waugh, D Martin, M Hussey? They are the guys he was fighting for a spot with.

Hodge? He could undoubtedly play but was he better than Ponting, S Waugh, M Waugh, D Martin, M Hussey? They are the guys he was fighting for a spot with.

Yes for some of them!

Hodge clearly had the runs on the board literally, more so than M Waugh or Martin. Martin is another mystery selection on many occasions.

Back then though, the test and one day teams were one and the same, it was like playing for NSW and Australia. When you got a gig at one the other was an automatic, the old jokes about one cap on your head and the other in a brown paper bag for later don't exist for nothing! ;)

Dean Jones and Elliott had plenty of chances.

Are you saying they failed?

I suspect you'll find Jones got the kibosh because of his mouth, not his performances.

Elliott's problem was that Australia was generally crap at the time he was playing, and he got his last gig to the West Indies with a team playing on pitches that were designed to simulate lunar landing environment. He was an opener forced to bat at three behind Langer and Hayden which seems fair, with Lehman and Martyn clinging to diminishing careers as support. That was a weird time for Australian test cricket, they had Katich batting just above Gilchrist who was captaining, no offense to Gilchrist but seriously? :o

It's pretty easy saying this guy or that guy should have played.

Start with who they should have replaced, then we will get a clearer picture.

Suggesting blokes like Finch and White were hardly done by is garbage.
Harris? Really?

Dean Jones and Elliott had plenty of chances.
Hodge? He could undoubtedly play but was he better than Ponting, S Waugh, M Waugh, D Martin, M Hussey? They are the guys he was fighting for a spot with.

Better than Martin IMO.....Steve Waugh picked the coach John Buchanan and picked the team, thats how it operated....he wanted a weak operator like Buchanan so he could control things and as long as the team were winning it functioned that way...players out of the mates loop like Hodge never got a look in no matter how many Shield runs they piled up....

Yes for some of them!

Hodge clearly had the runs on the board literally, more so than M Waugh or Martin. Martin is another mystery selection on many occasions.

Hmm, gee Martyn was a class player though, average of 46.3.  I don't think he got the credit he deserved because he batted at his best away from Australia.  Averaged almost 46 away from home as well & hit 9 of his 13 hundreds away.....that says to he how valuable he was, particularly on the subcontinent & South Africa.

Hmm, gee Martyn was a class player though, average of 46.3.  I don't think he got the credit he deserved because he batted at his best away from Australia.  Averaged almost 46 away from home as well & hit 9 of his 13 hundreds away.....that says to he how valuable he was, particularly on the subcontinent & South Africa.

Not disputing whether he was good or not, just whether he was the best available at the time.

Better than Martin IMO.....Steve Waugh picked the coach John Buchanan and picked the team, thats how it operated....he wanted a weak operator like Buchanan so he could control things and as long as the team were winning it functioned that way...players out of the mates loop like Hodge never got a look in no matter how many Shield runs they piled up....

Not a chance in hell he was better than Martyn.
Martyn averaged 46.40 from 67 tests. 55.50 in India.
He was a seriously good player.

Not a chance in hell he was better than Martyn.
Martyn averaged 46.40 from 67 tests. 55.50 in India.
He was a seriously good player.

Like most batsmen his average OS was marginally lower than his average at home.

Dean Jones averaged 92 in India!

Most of the time, so few innings are built OS that the averages depend more on the weather, injuries or opportunities than anything else. So I'm not sure we should hang our hats on stats that involve a handful of innings.

Hodge was lambasted by some scribes for batting too slowly when making 203 off 332 balls in Perth, but Steven Smith is a hero scoring 142 of 326!

What are we to think?

Not a chance in hell he was better than Martyn.
Martyn averaged 46.40 from 67 tests. 55.50 in India.
He was a seriously good player.

Didnt realise Martyn averaged over 45 so yep happy to agree a very good player..I could be smartar$e and suggest Hodge averaged 55 at test level but
we all know that was only a small sample of six tests..
IMO Hodge could have averaged around what Martyn did given the same opportunities but we will never know......

Not a chance in hell he was better than Martyn.
Martyn averaged 46.40 from 67 tests. 55.50 in India.
He was a seriously good player.

he was a very classy player and also copped from from the NSW club....

Didnt realise Martyn averaged over 45 so yep happy to agree a very good player..I could be smartar$e and suggest Hodge averaged 55 at test level but
we all know that was only a small sample of six tests..
IMO Hodge could have averaged around what Martyn did given the same opportunities but we will never know......

I have no issue with him, very very good player at state level, but as you have pointed out Martyn was a very good player over a long time at test level.
His batting in India was exceptionally good.

Just a test to see how old you are, this memory from the WACA is up on the CA site today:

http://www.cricket.com.au/video/terry-alderman-bad-tackle-askes-folklore-waca-1982-shoulder-injury-pitch-invasion-optus/2017-12-09?autostart=true

I was watching the coverage & remember it vividly......now looking back at it I am ever more staggered that this happened at a cricket ground.

Horrible injury to Terry Alderman ......but I was impressed with DKs choker hold on the moron, he wasn't hanging about !

Did Marsh just drop the test match, that was truly "A Grass-and-a-Half!"

PS; Now Lyon grasses another one, tougher but still very get-able. Marsh in, team confidence gone!

Thankfully Cummins benefits from having Hazlewood all over them, must be time for Smith to make a change!

Mitch Marsh = Shane Watson. ..useless pri.k...Handscomb would have swallowed that at 1st slip

Root gone!

Umpire Marais Erasmus is quietly asking Hazlewood to give the Poms a chance!

It would be truly ironic if Match Referee Sir Richie Richardson had anything to say about short pitched bowling!

A snorter from Starc.

The English are pooing themselves. Lots of chin music!

I don't really understand why the Poms batted Bairstow so low in the order.  He is a decent batsman when he has another batsman at the other end.

This could be a fairly even contest and that would make a pleasant change.

Poms with their noses in front, said it before but Milan is a classy player especially on a flat track like the WACA where he can just let the short stuff go and cream anything full and he cover drives as well as any player going around.
Bowlers looked a bit sore and sorry at days end too, Mitch Marsh's bowling is handy but on that wicket he looked very friendly and if he is going to play he needs to be bowling more than seven overs to help our other quicks who look like they are feeling the effects of the first two tests.
Marsh also dropped a straight forward catch and while the commentators keeping saying Bancroft is a great fielder he looked ordinary in the slips and Handscomb was missed in that area..
Lets hope the wicket is at its flattest when we bat and can post a big total, the ball was swinging late in the evening session and I wouldnt want to have Anderson and Broad getting that same assistance that Starc and Hazlewood got late...

I don't really understand why the Poms batted Bairstow so low in the order.  He is a decent batsman when he has another batsman at the other end.

This could be a fairly even contest and that would make a pleasant change.

Agree...Bairstow is very orthodox and a calming affect at No 6...Ali is more of a slasher who throws the bat but can be careless, thought Bairstow played Lyon well and the
damming stat of Lyon getting 10 of his wickets vs left handers this series and only one vs right handers showed Bairstow should have batted between the lefties higher up the order.

Starc is the most over-rated bowler I've seen for a while.  Bowls a lot of pies for a bloke touted as world class.

Still not sure why we played Mitch Marsh....  has hardly bowled and it was innocuous medium paced dross when he did.  Plus, he has dropped catches.  Potential... meh... time to show up or p!ss off Mitch...22 tests and yet to do anything.   I reckon he's about negative about 80 runs and going further behind every over right now.

Agree re Marsh...

Just watching the post game Ashes doco, saw some footage of Thommo that brought memories back. Never batted against him, but as a kid I got to bat in the the net next to him bowling off about a 5m run up.

I've never seen a bowler like him of 5 or 6 steps, I was hoping like hell he didn't move to my net.

If I ever have to listen to Langer dribble on about how Marsh "just needs an opportunity" I will seriously spew up.

Just watching the post game Ashes doco, saw some footage of Thommo that brought memories back. Never batted against him, but as a kid I got to bat in the the net next to him bowling off about a 5m run up.

I've never seen a bowler like him of 5 or 6 steps, I was hoping like hell he didn't move to my net.

doesn't pull any punches old Thommo!

i had forgotten about the Ian Chappell Botham stoush!!

Mitch Marsh = Shane Watson. ..useless pri.k...Handscomb would have swallowed that at 1st slip

he's an all rounder who bats and bowls ...... he cant be expected to catch as well :D

the bloke is an excellent catcher. We've all dropped catches at times we should have swallowed.....

Bancroft too?

the bloke is an excellent catcher. We've all dropped catches at times we should have swallowed.....

Bancroft too?

For a slipper he had his hands in a real awkward position, Bancroft looked like he had even less idea....keep hearing he is a great short leg which may be true but
I like specialist slips fielders and not sure why we are rotating players through that area..
Reckon Smith is our best slipper and should be at first slip every ball...

Nice of Smith to bring Marsh on to help Bairstow get to his hundred...like the way Bairstow headbutted his helmet to celebrate... ???

he's an all rounder who bats and bowls ...... he cant be expected to catch as well :D

I wonder if the selection geniuses have reconciled dropping Handscomb for Marsh while keeping Lyon in the side? Then watching catches get dropped, and England push on for a score heading for 500 with our bowling All-Rounder on his 10th over going at nearly 5 an over!

This is the sort of pitch that would have restored Handscomb's form and confidence, instead he's off to play 20/20 if weather permits. No wonder those nepotists were so keen to get Marsh in, they are obviously saving his energy for batting in a match that may well only have two innings!

Also, why stop at that when you can destroy Lyon's confidence at the same time, bowl-him-a-plenty on a dead straight skidding pitch while your new 140kph All-Rounder rests in slips after a grueling 4 over spell! Bullets fired cheaper by the dozen.

By the way, what happened to Marsh's 140kph plus, he must be worried about getting a speeding ticket off the radar because there is no way he's tired! ;)

And all this on the pitch that should favor Australia more than any other!

Possible the worst chain of decisions since forever, maybe not as bad as those that led to banning Andrew Symonds, but pretty poor! :o

My apologies I take it all back, I just realised that maybe our team management use an Indian Bookmaker! ;)

Starc is the most over-rated bowler I've seen for a while.  Bowls a lot of pies for a bloke touted as world class.

Still not sure why we played Mitch Marsh....  has hardly bowled and it was innocuous medium paced dross when he did.  Plus, he has dropped catches.  Potential... meh... time to show up or p!ss off Mitch...22 tests and yet to do anything.   I reckon he's about negative about 80 runs and going further behind every over right now.

The way this stinking, rotten flat benign pitch has played i'm now glad he's playing as we have to bowl alot of overs.

Sooner we piss the WACA off the better. This is the worst possible pitch to be a road as the bounce is so even and true. 2 years ago the first innings were 559 and 624.

And the slowest bowler gets the wicket, after the batsmen has made 140, lucky the sub was on!

Then England collapse like a house of cards, how lucky are we that they are as crap as that?

Wow, they've gone form being a soda to make 500, to struggling to make 400.

And the slowest bowler gets the wicket, after the batsmen has made 140, lucky the sub was on!

knock 'em over for under 400 and suddenly its not all bad

that is IF we can get a couple of decent early partnerships.  that middle order worries me.
Marsh
Marsh
Paine

is not exactly
Waugh
Ponting
Gilchrist

Honestly, And Starc gets 4 wickets after bowling tripe

It's just rubbish isn't it!

So, it seems pretty clear that M Marsh must have been picked for his batting  ::)

I'm over you Warner, make some runs or F89%)^ off.  You've been a passenger for a bloody long time.

As for Bancroft's LB...  Root is hit on the back pad in Adelaide and it apparently went over the stumps, yet in Perth, the bounciest pitch in the world, "ball tracking" said that the ball was going down to hit the stumps.  I CALL BULL DUST!

I'm over you Warner, make some runs or F89%)^ off.  You've been a passenger for a bloody long time.

As for Bancroft's LB...  Root is hit on the back pad in Adelaide and it apparently went over the stumps, yet in Perth, the bounciest pitch in the world, "ball tracking" said that the ball was going down to hit the stumps.  I CALL BULL DUST!

Been a couple of those LBW's for both teams in this series that have been not out IMO, Bancroft wasnt that far forward though, once again he was falling over to the off side and looked off balance, when he got hit on the pads. I knew he might be in trouble if they challenged......Bancroft has technical issues and wont be suitable to play in England given he falls over his crease and his back leg doesnt seem to move in line. He will be slips practice on seaming wickets as he also plays with an angled bat.

Warner is trying to be responsible and text book like, he needs to be the old Warner and throw the bat if he is playing an attacking shot and not push at the ball, Overton did bowl him a good one though, seems his lower pace coupled with his height is getting more out of the wicket.
Warner needs to watch Smith and just be himself, dont overthink too much....they are eye players who need to trust their luck and shot making ability.

Been a couple of those LBW's for both teams in this series that have been not out IMO, Bancroft wasnt that far forward though, once again he was falling over to the off side and looked off balance, when he got hit on the pads on I knew he might be in trouble if they challenged......Bancroft has technical issues and wont be suitable to play in England given he falls over his crease and his back leg doesnt seem to move in line. He will be slips practice on seaming wickets as he also plays with an angled bat.

Warner is trying to be responsible and text book like, he needs to be the old Warner and throw the bat if he is playing an attacking shot and not push at the ball, Overton did bowl him a good one though, seems his lower pace coupled with his height is getting more out of the wicket.
Warner needs to watch Smith and just be himself, dont overthink too much....they are eye players who need to trust their luck and shot making ability.

I reckon Warner's ball hit a crack as it "seamed" a long way. Overton "turned" the ball more than Lyon with that one. Those cracks are looking a dangerous to the left handers facing the bowler bowling around the wicket. Done a few strange things.

Root's no lbw decision was beyond farcical.

Mitch MarRSH 100NO at Tea!!

Smith 182no

Mitch MarRSH 100NO at Tea!!

Smith 182no

Those selectors are bloody good  :)

It's a long bow to draw that Handscomb or any other Australian batsmen wouldn't have made runs on this pitch, after all England were 4 for 368, two Poms made tons, and they are poo!

It's a long bow to draw that Handscomb or any other Australian batsmen wouldn't have made runs on this pitch, after all England were 4 for 368, two Poms made tons, and they are poo!

Handscomb had clearly lost all confidence - had to go. Was Marsh the next best choice?

In the eyes of the selectors yes....and they know a f.... load more than us about the players.

300 run partnership.

That's exceptional.

Must be hard coming in at 4 for 350 on that deck against a tired half baked attack.

Exactly what the team needed but I wouldn't call them hard runs.  A couple of wickets would be just as valuable now.

Must be hard coming in at 4 for 350 on that deck against a tired half baked attack.

Exactly what the team needed but I wouldn't call them hard runs.  A couple of wickets would be just as valuable now.

um the bowlers were tired? They'd had a full night's rest, then S. Marsh and Smith added 15 odd runs early today before he was out.

Were they tired then? FFS, simply BS.

Dunno which game you were watching, that attack was weak, really weak.  Four right arm fast mediums and a crap spinner on a pitch doing f all.  Nice hundred but like I said, a soft kill.

Good knock from the selectors lovechild in Mitch Marsh but I remain unconvinced, his technique is still flawed IMO and he needs to show some resistance on a wicket doing doing something before I am going to get on his bandwagon...

Must be hard coming in at 4 for 350 on that deck against a tired half baked attack.

Exactly what the team needed but I wouldn't call them hard runs.  A couple of wickets would be just as valuable now.

It was 4/248 when he got in. Alot of pressure as we were still 155 behind. One more wicket could've changed everything. Then he faced the new ball not long after he got on with bowlers rested overnight. Poms list 6/35.on that deck.

Good knock from the selectors lovechild in Mitch Marsh but I remain unconvinced, his technique is still flawed IMO and he needs to show some resistance on a wicket doing doing something before I am going to get on his bandwagon...

well, you can only do what you can do....at the time.

well, you can only do what you can do....at the time.

Agree he played well and did the job but the commentators showed him plenty of love even before he got going...the Marsh bros seem cricketing royalty
at the moment and its got a bit sickening listening to Michael Clarke and crew throwing bouquets at Mitch and then ditto for Shaun as being everyone's favourite teammate.
Neither have proved anything IMO and I want to see further evidence before I join the bandwagon of Marsh fans.....probably the worst English team ever and their bowling is half rat power county scrubs these days with Anderson and Broad having a pre retirement holiday and the rest being sub district standard including one who bowled with a cracked rib.

It was 4/248 when he got in. Alot of pressure as we were still 155 behind. One more wicket could've changed everything. Then he faced the new ball not long after he got on with bowlers rested overnight.

Poms list 6/35.on that deck.

You think that is something to do with the deck or bowlers?

I wrote many days ago that this was an opportunistic selection, the WACA pitches have been runs feast fodder for several years now. The slimmest of chances existed that a batsmen in half-form wouldn't make runs on this pitch, not the other way around. England should have made 500 or even 600 from that position, in much the same way the Australia is about to!

The big problem is this, whichever in-from player was picked he was going to more than likely make runs. On a dead-flat benign pitch against an attack that is built around players who are a puddle of their former self. If there wasn't any political bullcrap, we'd have probably played Mitch Marsh and Glenn Maxwell to give ourselves the best chance of fast scoring and favourable result. Instead we get political spin about needing all-rounders for tired bowlers and then only bowl the bloke 9 of 115 overs.

The real question should be asked, how can it be we have blokes so far out of form that we applaud 30s or 40s on that pitch at an SR of 35%? When we have other players around the country making tons, double tons even almost triple tons at strike rates of 70 to 80%

Where does form come into the selections, it looks more like a lottery, one that has been fixed by the mafia!

Handscomb had clearly lost all confidence - had to go. Was Marsh the next best choice?

In the eyes of the selectors yes....and they know a f.... load more than us about the players.

yep. Well done selectors and well done Mitch Marsh and Steve Smith.

Going back to that other discussion about unlucky/stiff Australian players... it’s all about timing (eg. when you get selected, and who you play against).

Handscomb last test had to bat under lights with ball hooping, gets dropped, Marsh comes in on his home track and bats on an autobahn and destroys them.

Going back to that other discussion about unlucky/stiff Australian players... it’s all about timing (eg. when you get selected, and who you play against).

Handscomb last test had to bat under lights with ball hooping, gets dropped, Marsh comes in on his home track and bats on an autobahn and destroys them.

The assertion I make is that if a spud like me sees this coming weeks before it happens then there is no doubt the selectors knew exactly what was going to happen. The perfect opportunity to return Handscomb to form was Perth!

I suspect the dropping of Handscomb has more to do with the 1st and 2nd test criticism of Smith's captaincy than the requirement for an All-Rounder who barely bowls. We'd be all over England, even more than we are now, if we had a dynamic and effective captain. The only issue is would Smith bat as well without the captaincy?

Pitch is a nightmare now. Those cracks have widened and they are playing absolute havoc. Poms will have fun batting on it.

Balls are very low, bouncing, cutting miles off the cracks. Hard work batting on it.

The assertion I make is that if a spud like me sees this coming weeks before it happens then there is no doubt the selectors knew exactly what was going to happen. The perfect opportunity to return Handscomb to form was Perth!

I suspect the dropping of Handscomb has more to do with the 1st and 2nd test criticism of Smith's captaincy than the requirement for an All-Rounder who barely bowls. We'd be all over England, even more than we are now, if we had a dynamic and effective captain. The only issue is would Smith bat as well without the captaincy?

Like Michael Clarke, Smith's batting average as captain is higher than it was before he became captain.

I think Smith's captaincy in this test has been more spontaneous and less formulaic.

As for Handscomb, I think you're right about him batting back into form at the WACA.  Now he has no opportunity to spend time in the middle.

or he may have failed again....

or he may have failed again....

We'll never know  ;)

The assertion I make is that if a spud like me sees this coming weeks before it happens then there is no doubt the selectors knew exactly what was going to happen. The perfect opportunity to return Handscomb to form was Perth!

I suspect the dropping of Handscomb has more to do with the 1st and 2nd test criticism of Smith's captaincy than the requirement for an All-Rounder who barely bowls. We'd be all over England, even more than we are now, if we had a dynamic and effective captain. The only issue is would Smith bat as well without the captaincy?

Handscomb's technique is an issue getting him into trouble. He needs time in the nets. Poms had worked him out.

Poor Vince! You're unlikely to see a ball, like Starc bowled him with, like that again ever. No man could play that.

Handsome is every but as back foot dominant as Smith was and is, but Handscomb can't hide down the list as a bowler like Smith did! Smith had the luxury of staying in the side even when his batting form didn't warrant it.

In his first 3 years Smith averaged 34.64 from 16 innings, 2 centuries and 5 fifties, and wasn't dropped.
Over Handscomb's first 2 years he has averaged 47.35 from 12 innings, 2 centuries and 4 fifties, and got the kibosh!

Now the sycophants are claiming Smith is the greatest batsmen since Bradman, well I'll call that rubbish as well because in my opinion the quality of the opposition matters, and at the moment global Test Cricket and Test Bowling has never been weaker. It's being severely damaged by the growth of the IPL and 20/20 and blokes earning big money for 1 over spells!

Handscomb's technique is an issue getting him into trouble. He needs time in the nets. Poms had worked him out.

Not according to Steve Waugh.  He reckons that Handscomb's technique is fine and he was dropped because of lack of form.

What he needs is time in the middle and he's not going to get that now. 

Not pretty reading:


Forecast for the rest of Monday
SummaryMax 21Possible morning storm. Showers.Possible rainfall: 5 to 15 mmChance of any rain: 90% 
Perth area
Cloudy. Very high (90%) chance of showers, becoming less likely in the early afternoon. The chance of a thunderstorm early this morning. Damaging winds possible early this morning. Winds westerly 30 to 45 km/h turning southwesterly 35 to 45 km/h in the late morning then decreasing to 25 to 35 km/h in the late afternoon.

Not according to Steve Waugh.  He reckons that Handscomb's technique is fine and he was dropped because of lack of form.

What he needs is time in the middle and he's not going to get that now.

Other past champions say otherwise. You can see he is having issues. The Poms have worked him out. He needs time in the nets so sort things. Won't be getting back in the side in a hurry now after Marsh made 181 plus having the ability to bowl.

Handsome is every but as back foot dominant as Smith was and is, but Handscomb can't hide down the list as a bowler like Smith did! Smith had the luxury of staying in the side even when his batting form didn't warrant it.

In his first 3 years Smith averaged 34.64 from 16 innings, 2 centuries and 5 fifties, and wasn't dropped.
Over Handscomb's first 2 years he has averaged 47.35 from 12 innings, 2 centuries and 4 fifties, and got the kibosh!

Now the sycophants are claiming Smith is the greatest batsmen since Bradman, well I'll call that rubbish as well because in my opinion the quality of the opposition matters, and at the moment global Test Cricket and Test Bowling has never been weaker. It's being severely damaged by the growth of the IPL and 20/20 and blokes earning big money for 1 over spells!

Handsccomb is totally dominant on his back foot, Smith while he shuffles across, goes forward to balls that require him too, not unlike Ian Chappell back in the day.

Handsccomb is totally dominant on his back foot, Smith while he shuffles across, goes forward to balls that require him too, not unlike Ian Chappell back in the day.

There is very little difference between Handscomb and Smith, especially if we restrict comparisons to their first few seasons.

In the Sydney Test vs Pakistan Handscomb was praised for quick footwork and getting down the pitch to the three Pakistani spinners. The media were all over Khawaja and Smith in the 1st innings and used the contrast of Renshaw's big forward stride and Warner and Handscomb's fast foot work as an example of what Smith and Khawaja should do. I think between them Renshaw, Warner and Handscomb scored more than 400 of Australia's 500+ total. In the Australian 2nd innings Renshaw didn't bat, Khawaja and Warner opened and Smith promoted himself to 3 ahead of Handscomb for the quick run chase.

Leaky covers? Someone doesn't want the series over before boxing day.

Leaky covers? Someone doesn't want the series over before boxing day.

You'll be labeled a crazy conspiracy theorist if you keep this up!

If pictures surface of Warnie pissing on the pitch we'll know which broadcaster to blame! ;)

Fair effort by the Aussies
Love the skipper. What a great series thus far.
Selectors have done a great job too. I wouldn't have guessed Paine or the Marsh brothers but all did very well.
Hazlewood very good too

Stokes and his mum into the English 11 should stiffen them up a fair bit.

There is very little difference between Handscomb and Smith, especially if we restrict comparisons to their first few seasons.

In the Sydney Test vs Pakistan Handscomb was praised for quick footwork and getting down the pitch to the three Pakistani spinners. The media were all over Khawaja and Smith in the 1st innings and used the contrast of Renshaw's big forward stride and Warner and Handscomb's fast foot work as an example of what Smith and Khawaja should do. I think between them Renshaw, Warner and Handscomb scored more than 400 of Australia's 500+ total. In the Australian 2nd innings Renshaw didn't bat, Khawaja and Warner opened and Smith promoted himself to 3 ahead of Handscomb for the quick run chase.

Quite a bit of difference between them. Smith shuffles but goes forward and back. Handscomb's footwork is all back right now and the Poms have sorted him out.

Stokes and his mum into the English 11 should stiffen them up a fair bit.

His grandmum would give more effort.....I'd drop Broad and Cook......holiday makers not cricketers, both pathetic contributors in this test.
Ok they might have been there and done it all but dont come on tour, take the money if you are not going to try.......
They found a classy player in Milan though and I think Vince can also make the grade......
Ali is another who needs resting, way out of form and his bowling could be described as friendly at best...
Think the Poms will play Foakes and Crane in Melbourne, ...Curran might also get a game to replace Overton who looked sore.
Worst English team I have seen......I'd make Bairstow captain and let Root stick to batting....

Yep selectors got it right with Paine and M. Marsh...the latter still hasnt won me over but you cant knock 181 with the willow....
Smith is a freak, no textbook to describe how he plays but he might well be the next best Aus batsman to Bradman when his career ends.....ok World Test cricket is poor and bar the South Africans
no one can win away from home but Smiths consistency is phenomenal...
Lets go for 5-0 and send this pretend touring team home back to county cricket where they belong....

Thank God for Mitch Marsh... 9 overs 0-43 and 3 overs 0-14

What on earth would we have done without him..

Starc, Hazelwood and Lyon will be buying him beers all night.... :D

Thank God for Mitch Marsh... 9 overs 0-43 and 3 overs 0-14

What on earth would we have done without him..

Starc, Hazelwood and Lyon will be buying him beers all night.... :D

Uh and a lazy 180 odd.

yes great innings...... but he was brought in to give the bowlers a chop out.  I left Cummins out... doh.

yes great innings...... but he was brought in to give the bowlers a chop out.  I left Cummins out... doh.

And because the English are so poor they hardly neede a chop out. That is the reality?

yes great innings...... but he was brought in to give the bowlers a chop out.  I left Cummins out... doh.

Exactly!  You can't fault his batting in this test, but he was specifically brought into the team to provide a 5th bowler who would be threatening at over 140kph. 

I have a feeling that he is welded on to the test team for the next 6-8 tests and will do nothing.

And because the English are so poor they hardly neede a chop out. That is the reality?

my point exactly - we didn't need to bring in an all rounder.  We have 4 of the best bowlers in the world and we bring in an all rounder to help them out ??  It's got me buggered

And now because the Poms are that poor that he's gone out there and snagged 180 and has cemented his spot ahead of Handscombe which is BS. IMO

Exactly!  You can't fault his batting in this test, but he was specifically brought into the team to provide a 5th bowler who would be threatening at over 140kph. 

I have a feeling that he is welded on to the test team for the next 6-8 tests and will do nothing.

yep agreed... he batted well and has cemented his spot for the rest of the series and probably beyond. 

His technique is ok for Aus conditions where he can hit through the line but his hard hands and heavy feet... Dunno on other surfaces.  Bowling also needs work.

His older brother has a classical technique which the side needs but his penchant for soft dismissals is of concern.

Cant see this side winning in England for the above reasons.  Batsmen have clumsy, power oriented techniques perfect for our tracks but nowhere else.

His technique is ok for Aus conditions where he can hit through the line but his hard hands and heavy feet... Dunno on other surfaces.  Bowling also needs work.

His older brother has a classical technique which the side needs but his penchant for soft dismissals is of concern.

Cant see this side winning in England for the above reasons.  Batsmen have clumsy, power oriented techniques perfect for our tracks but nowhere else.

Is that a product of T20?  Does the IPL, etc mean that our blokes no longer get experience of English conditions via County cricket, Lancashire League, etc?

His technique is ok for Aus conditions where he can hit through the line but his hard hands and heavy feet... Dunno on other surfaces.  Bowling also needs work.

His older brother has a classical technique which the side needs but his penchant for soft dismissals is of concern.

Cant see this side winning in England for the above reasons.  Batsmen have clumsy, power oriented techniques perfect for our tracks but nowhere else.

Apart from SA no one wins away from home anyway, every series sees the home side doctor up the wickets to suit their bowlers.
Anderson looks like Dale Steyn at home but out here is just a trundler, ditto for Broad, agree on the Marsh bros but the selectors/teammates love them and I agree with DJ that
Mitch Marsh is in the team to stay given his 181 and the love for anything Marsh.
Agree on the technique side too, its all about power and grunt rather than a straight bat next to a pad with no gap, you have your No 3 who cant play spin bowling but none of that matters out here in Aus where its pace and bounce that rule...

Apart from SA no one wins away from home anyway,

Apart from the Aussies in South Africa!

Recent series have seen them beating us at home,

And us returning the favour over there!

Probably the two countries with the most similar conditions in world cricket.......
And that’s where we head next.  Will be very interesting!

Cheers
Mal.

Apart from the Aussies in South Africa!

Recent series have seen them beating us at home,

And us returning the favour over there!

Probably the two countries with the most similar conditions in world cricket.......
And that’s where we head next.  Will be very interesting!

Cheers
Mal.

Think they have performed a bit better on the sub continent than most other visiting teams....Saffies play with plenty of attitude
and dont mind it when the game gets tough and willing, They are usually well led and have decent attacks....often with non descript bowlers outside of their stars who dont generate much hype but get the job done.
Should be a great series.....fancy us to win with our attack and Steve Smith leading the way although the attack will be tested with some of their big name batsman....Elgar, DeVilliers, Du Plessis, Amla and DeKock aint shabby...

Think they have performed a bit better on the sub continent than most other visiting teams....Saffies play with plenty of attitude
and dont mind it when the game gets tough and willing, They are usually well led and have decent attacks....often with non descript bowlers outside of their stars who dont generate much hype but get the job done.
Should be a great series.....fancy us to win with our attack and Steve Smith leading the way although the attack will be tested with some of their big name batsman....Elgar, DeVilliers, Du Plessis, Amla and DeKock aint shabby...

DeKoek is a gun......he's looking every bit as dangerous as a keeper batsman as Gilchrist....and I thought we'd never see another one of him.

Think they have performed a bit better on the sub continent than most other visiting teams....Saffies play with plenty of attitude
and dont mind it when the game gets tough and willing, They are usually well led and have decent attacks....often with non descript bowlers outside of their stars who dont generate much hype but get the job done.
Should be a great series.....fancy us to win with our attack and Steve Smith leading the way although the attack will be tested with some of their big name batsman....Elgar, DeVilliers, Du Plessis, Amla and DeKock aint shabby...

They took one horrible shellacking the last time they went to India. Real bad! We've performed the best in India in recent times.

Australia and South Africa are pretty even. Weird how it works where the "away" sides always wins. Last series here we have to totally overhaul the side for the 3rd Test. That Hobart loss too them has turned things around since for Australia.

We went into the last home series vs. SA underprepared and got whipped.  Take home message; be prepared, do homework and PLAY LEAD IN MATCHES!!!

.....  And crunch time for Mitch has come sooner rather than later.  No runs and no wickets in first dig, time to produce when it matters. 

.....  And crunch time for Mitch has come sooner rather than later.  No runs and no wickets in first dig, time to produce when it matters.

Well, he certainly produced when it mattered. Batted until the end. To me that knock of 29no off 166 balls was every inch as valuable as his 181 last Test.

Agreed.  Just need Bancroft to turn starts into runs and Khawaja to get going.  Bird shouldn't play next test, 135 doesn't cut it on flat decks.

Agreed.  Just need Bancroft to turn starts into runs and Khawaja to get going.  Bird shouldn't play next test, 135 doesn't cut it on flat decks.

Dont see it with Bancroft, doesnt have the technique at test level IMO, not convinced about the Marsh bros either, these wickets have been roads and the Poms attack is rubbish.
I like Marcus Harris ahead of Bancroft, more shots and more compact vs the moving ball IMO..

Agree on Bird, lacks pace and lacked penetration like the English quicks....

Khawaja is a decent player IMO but  has looked shaky initially when he starts his innings. this cant play spin thematic seems to have ruined his confidence...his feet are not moving to get behind the ball and his good shots seem to find the field all the time.

re: Sydney test ...Wonder if we might go Agar if Starc doesnt play.....

Curator shouldn't get another gig.
24 wickets in 5 days is a blight on test cricket

Agreed totally on the oz bats EB, they are so heavy footed and hard handed.  When it comes down to crunch time you need a reliable technique and so many our blokes don't have it.  Bancroft needs remedial work very quickly, his angled bat and gappy defence is sloppy.  Saffie quicks will sort this mob out quick smart.

Marsh's bowling, which was a strength, has been decidedly underwhelming.

Curator shouldn't get another gig.
24 wickets in 5 days is a blight on test cricket

David Sandurski resigned from the MCG on the 17th of Nov and took up the GABBA job. But he basically prepared all this seasons drop in pitches.

He will be replaced by Matthew Page who is moving across from the WACA after the ground hosted it's last match. So the expectation is that next years pitches will be completely different.

David Sandurski resigned from the MCG on the 17th of Nov and took up the GABBA job. But he basically prepared all this seasons drop in pitches.

He will be replaced by Matthew Page who is moving across from the WACA after the ground hosted it's last match. So the expectation is that next years pitches will be completely different.

The issue I see is that pitches are losing their character and are becoming more or less the same. The WACA isn't the feared wicket for touring sides it once was, the GABA has lost it's first session 'juice' that used to give the bowlers assistance and as for the MCG wicket, well lets just say it gave nothing to anyone and ruined one of the great cricket occasions of the year. Drop in pitches make a lot of sense from a logistics point of view but we run the risk of ruining test cricket if we're not careful.

Do not know how correct this is but talking to a grounds-person she said the big problem is drop in pitches are isolated from drawing moisture from the rest of the ground. This creates a problem with how they are managed and the way they behave after rain.

The match regulations prevent ground-staff watering the pitch directly, but they used to be able to water the surrounds which would migrate up through the soil and have some effect on the pitch moisture levels. So the woman I talked to basically said the ICC need to change the rules to make some form of direct watering for drop in pitches an option, then you will get see pitches that vary with venue, break up and crack like they used to and all the varying conditions.

Sounds reasonable.

PS;
I agree with Warne's call for a Day/Night Boxing Day Test.

The reason is simple, you can blame the pitch for the lack of deviation, but you cannot blame the pitch for the lack of movement in the air, that is just down to the weather. It seems that a big advantage of Day/Night cricket is that the evening session almost certainly guarantees some form of swing. Even in Adelaide where movement through the air is normally minimal we saw plenty of late swing.

Agreed totally on the oz bats EB, they are so heavy footed and hard handed.  When it comes down to crunch time you need a reliable technique and so many our blokes don't have it.  Bancroft needs remedial work very quickly, his angled bat and gappy defence is sloppy.  Saffie quicks will sort this mob out quick smart.

Marsh's bowling, which was a strength, has been decidedly underwhelming.

Not sure what quicks the Saffies will use....Steyn has been injured and close to retiring, they seem to have Rabada as their No 1 quick and in a strange turn of events have unearthed a decent spinner
in Maharaj, both these players are in the top ten wickets takers in test cricket for 2017 so it appears a changing of the guard. They have a bowler called Duanne Oliver who is meant to be very quick and nasty but they are all unknowns to me having never seen them play but I am sure they will field a decent attack with old pros like Philander and Morkel still playing..
I think their batting is very strong though with De Kock giving them a real edge as both keeper amd specialist batsman which allows them to play someone like Duminy at No 7...

Mitch Marsh has the tools to become a real good player but I think the One day/ 20/20 formats where he has built his reputation have hampered his technique in both bowling and batting....I'd like to see him used more as a bowler and encouraged to take wickets rather than just be a fill in while the main quicks rest...if he can learn to bowl in the corridor he could be handy IMO..

Agreed totally on the oz bats EB, they are so heavy footed and hard handed.  When it comes down to crunch time you need a reliable technique and so many our blokes don't have it.  Bancroft needs remedial work very quickly, his angled bat and gappy defence is sloppy.  Saffie quicks will sort this mob out quick smart.

Marsh's bowling, which was a strength, has been decidedly underwhelming.

Marsh is not long back from a shoulder reco.

Our bats usually do ok in South Africa conditions and the bowlers really do well. Suits genuine fast bowling and for our batsmen the ball comes on to the bat nicely hence, bar the odd time, our techniques haven't been tested there as they might be in English or sub continent conditions. True fast bowling never worries our bats. We haven't lost in South Africa since they were back in the fold. Funnily enough they've won the last 3 series here. We seems more suited to their conditions than ours.

Gee, Khawaja has been ordinary at 3. Rate the guy but he should be dropped....or at least put on notice....

Marsh is not long back from a shoulder reco.

Our bats usually do ok in South Africa conditions and the bowlers really do well. Suits genuine fast bowling and for our batsmen the ball comes on to the bat nicely hence, bar the odd time, our techniques haven't been tested there as they might be in English or sub continent conditions. True fast bowling never worries our bats. We haven't lost in South Africa since they were back in the fold. Funnily enough they've won the last 3 series here. We seems more suited to their conditions than ours.

Not sure I agree on true fast bowling....Steyn has had it all over our blokes IMO, anyone who bowls outswingers on the money at 145-150km is going to worry you..Morkel and Philander we have covered but not DS.
We have been fortunate this present era has had few genuine quick opposing bowlers......I think the Saffies success in Aus is down to Steyn who can reverse swing the ball like no one else and takes the big wickets but lucky for us he is on the way out. England cleaned up the Saffies in England so I dont think that speaks well of the SA form and I would expect us to win unless we get an injury to one main quick...pity Pattinson cant get on the park...dont see Bird, Sayers etc providing much back up, prefer to see Jason Behrendorff on tour than Bird..
I'd stick with Khawaja at 3......

Marsh is not long back from a shoulder reco.

True, then why let him rehab at Test level if he is clearly incapable of what he was in the past.

Surely he should be proving he can get back to his best at a lower level?

He's a Marsh though. Seriously though, I think Justin Langer is having a big influence on selection lately, hence Agar into the squad for sydney

Langer... FMD... No wonder we're carp, when are we going to get fair dinkum and get smart people without BS agendas around the team?

Langer... FMD... No wonder we're carp, when are we going to get fair dinkum and get smart people without BS agendas around the team?

Langer will probably be the next coach after Lehman gives it away..

I realise that public speaking is not a harbinger of coaching ability but that bloke is the poorest speaker I have ever heard.  His rationale concerning the selection of Mitch Marsh was rambling gibberish.

Langer... FMD... No wonder we're carp, when are we going to get fair dinkum and get smart people without BS agendas around the team?

The problem remains that top level sports administration is just like suburban or regional sports administration, it's the domain of the old boy!

AFL, Cricket, NRL and Soccer in Australia could easily be labelled semi-professional due to the way administrative appointments are handled.

Too many "Old Boys" with a finger in the pie!

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/records/averages/batting_bowling_by_team.html?id=11645;team=2;type=series (http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/records/averages/batting_bowling_by_team.html?id=11645;team=2;type=series)

He's a Marsh though. Seriously though, I think Justin Langer is having a big influence on selection lately, hence Agar into the squad for sydney

As Gerard Whately pointed out, Agar is the incumbent second spinner having had the role the last time we played two spinners.  There's not a huge difference between the performances of all of the contending spinners and probably not enough to displace Agar.

And he's a very decent bat too....

True, then why let him rehab at Test level if he is clearly incapable of what he was in the past.

Surely he should be proving he can get back to his best at a lower level?

Because he was batting very well at Shield level, 141 and a 95 amongst others, and they just wanted someone to relieve the bowlers. He did get picked on his batting form and I think that has been justified.

I'd have gone with Swepson if they're going to play a 2nd spinner. Poms have never liked leggies so it was a good time to play Swepson. A left arm orthodox bowler like Agar is bread and butter to England.

Not sure I agree on true fast bowling....Steyn has had it all over our blokes IMO, anyone who bowls outswingers on the money at 145-150km is going to worry you..Morkel and Philander we have covered but not DS.
We have been fortunate this present era has had few genuine quick opposing bowlers......I think the Saffies success in Aus is down to Steyn who can reverse swing the ball like no one else and takes the big wickets but lucky for us he is on the way out. England cleaned up the Saffies in England so I dont think that speaks well of the SA form and I would expect us to win unless we get an injury to one main quick...pity Pattinson cant get on the park...dont see Bird, Sayers etc providing much back up, prefer to see Jason Behrendorff on tour than Bird..
I'd stick with Khawaja at 3......

Maybe but we have 3 quicks and we've never been too bad against Steyn, especially, surprisingly when we've faced him in South Africa. He averages 27.5 against us and has a good strike rate but we take him for 3.6 runs an over on average too. He plays better against us in Australia than he does at home. It's strange how they beat us here but we beat them there.  At bats and bowlers seem to revel playing there. Their pitches suit us.

I'd have gone with Swepson if they're going to play a 2nd spinner. Poms have never liked leggies so it was a good time to play Swepson. A left arm orthodox bowler like Agar is bread and butter to England.

Lyon and Smith is enough IMO...I'd keep up the pace barrage and keep the bouncers coming... :)

He's a Marsh though. Seriously though, I think Justin Langer is having a big influence on selection lately, hence Agar into the squad for sydney

Yep, they are opportunistically going after Matthew Page as well. He's in the gun for leaving WA and they are going to put him on a pike for the Boxing Day pitch.

Not one media outlet has published the fact that the wickets were prepared by Sandurski before he left for the GABBA, even though the media know full well it takes more than half a year to prepare a drop in pitch, and Page didn't join the MCC until after the WACA test!

Our fielding is atrocious at the moment, it's been glossed over because we beat up on timid opposition in the first 3 tests with superior bowling and solid batting, but our fielding will cost us dearly and soon if something is not done. Smith should field at fine leg

Yep, they are opportunistically going after Matthew Page as well. He's in the gun for leaving WA and they are going to put him on a pike for the Boxing Day pitch.

Not one media outlet has published the fact that the wickets were prepared by Sandurski before he left for the GABBA, even though the media know full well it takes more than half a year to prepare a drop in pitch, and Page didn't join the MCC until after the WACA test!

Simply untrue
Every article I've read said he was employed recently but did not turn up until after the Melbourne test started

Smith should field at fine leg

Yep of course he should

Our fielding is atrocious at the moment, it's been glossed over because we beat up on timid opposition in the first 3 tests with superior bowling and solid batting, but our fielding will cost us dearly and soon if something is not done. Smith should field at fine leg

Go have a look at that catch and tell me he should field at fine leg.
I love you parochialism but geez

Fair enough, that comment was a bit tongue in cheek, but he did drop the previous 4 or 5 that came to him, and most were regulation catches for a good fielder (which he undoubtedly is). I am worried about our fielding overall though, the catches that Cummins and Hazlewood dropped were sodas, and continued a trend that appears to be worsening rather than improving