Cricket-Match-Special ... A forum for discussion

Mitch Marsh is a funny one...Has all the talent in the world...has the shots, fantastic batsman, and with the ball..has height, pace, bounce, and a good array of skills, but god he is so frustrating!!! Has had a lot of chances and has never really claimed a spot in any of the national sides...How long do they perservere before sending him back to domestic cricket and bring in someone else?

He only has 2 test match 50's in 29 innings, with an average of 24. With the ball he only has 33 wickets from 18 tests, average is okay at 36, but it isn't a lot of wickets, and his strike rate is 62.

In odi's his stats are better... averages 38 with the bat, with 7 50's and 1 100 from 40 games... but he only has 36 wickets from those 40 games, admittedly with a good average of 34.

He is good enough but will he ever fulfill his potential? And if he dosen't who takes his place?

He is only 24, so still plenty of time for him. Maybe he should have been dropped to give him the kick he might require.

I have a feeling that cricket Australia are going to stick with him and hope his career follows a similar trajectory to Steve Waugh. Highly unlikely i know, but a young all rounder rushed into the team before he was ready. Given the opportunity to prove themselves over an extended time.

Took Waugh 40+ innings before he got his first ton, and 4 years of being around the test team. Think he was 24 when he made his first 100. Though he had made 10 50's before his maiden ton, whilst so far Mitch only has 2 x 50'S in 12 less innings.

Australia will really hope he comes good. I think he will have a big future in the shorter formats, but not to sure he will be a big hit in tests. I hope i'm wrong though

With Watson out of the way,surely he is even more in demand?

When you look at Marsh's stats, you wonder if Faulkner would do any worse with the bat? Would certainly be a better bowler not that Young Marsh is a bad bowler.

Faulkner is not good enough to bat at 6, but Marsh has shown nothing yet that he should bat at 6 either.

Mitch3 looks more of a bowler to me. Seems a bit heavy footed for a bat, like Woakes does, but I'm not sure Marsh will be quite as good with the ball.

Faulkner is the better bowler of the two. In theory Marsh is the better bat, but Faulkner has done more impressive things in ODI with his bat than Marsh has.

Faulkner has one test to his name, and i'm not sure he will get any more tests. But i reckon if he had played the same number of test as Mitch 3, he would have better stats.

Faulkner is only 26 so maybe he will get more chances at test level.

Marsh doesn't look like a top six bat. But he looks a bit more than a fifth bowler. If Australia had a convincing batter keeper, maybe Mitch3 would be easier to indulge. Perhaps the same is true of Faulkner too, who could conceivably bat at seven, but not six.

Yep, maybe if Aus got a keeper who could bat at 6, could solve all the problems.

yuppie wrote:
Took Waugh 40+ innings before he got his first ton, and 4 years of being around the test team. Think he was 24 when he made his first 100. Though he had made 10 50's before his maiden ton, whilst so far Mitch only has 2 x 50'S in 12 less innings.

The actual son of Steve has been in the runs recently. Austin1.

yuppie wrote:Yep, maybe if Aus got a keeper who could bat at 6, could solve all the problems.

Nail on the head there , I think , yuppie...

A Gilchrist (they should be so lucky) , or at least a Haddin at his best , might allow Faulkner at seven ; which would arguably improve both batting and bowling balance.


Unfortunately there doesn't seem to be such a creature around at the moment...

Aussies have got batters-who-keep though. Handscomb, if he started packing his gloves again. Wade and Paine. Bancroft, if they want to go the whole Jonny Bairstow.

who would replace Marsh should he get dropped as well? Don't think there's a long list of contenders?..... Henriques, Christian, Stoinis? anyone else?

cricketfan90 wrote:who would replace Marsh should he get dropped as well? Don't think there's a long list of contenders?..... Henriques, Christian, Stoinis? anyone else?

I would choose Faulkner.

Warner
Burns
Khawaja
Smith
Voges
Neville
Faulkner
Starc
Hazlewood
Cummins
Lyon

If they're going to pick a batting keeper, surely they need to look beyond Nevill.

Nevill started well, but has done nothing recently. I think he does need to be replaced, his test record is worse than Wades, though a much better keeper.

Could Faulkner almost be picked as the third seasmer? Probably not quite. And im sure he can not bat at 6, though i reckon he would have had a better test average than Marsh after the same amount of tests. And would be a better bowler. Not that Marsh has not been a bad bowler in tests.

AS mentioned above, a keeper who can bat would be ideal. Even Haddin level of quality would be good enough.