Mitchell Marsh

[MC Bad Genius]

i'm not sold on marsh playing #8 as a 3rd quick though.

he may well be ahead of siddle these days in the bowling department but not ahead of patto or starc (whose batting is actually compariable to marsh).

I agree that he's not ahead of Pattinson/Starc, but he definitely offers a point of difference in his bowling. That being said, despite Marsh not being a top 6 bat and his Test average only being marginally higher than Starc's, I think to say they are of comparable batting ability isn't true at all. Starc is a decent lower-order batsman that just loves to go out and hit the ball as far as he can, whereas Marsh has a genuine batter's technique and application.

 

[The Speaker]

I'm definitely on the third quick train. Would actually be a good no. 7, if the batting was stronger.

 

[melanChronic]

I agree that he's not ahead of Pattinson/Starc, but he definitely offers a point of difference in his bowling. That being said, despite Marsh not being a top 6 bat and his Test average only being marginally higher than Starc's, I think to say they are of comparable batting ability isn't true at all. Starc is a decent lower-order batsman that just loves to go out and hit the ball as far as he can, whereas Marsh has a genuine batter's technique and application.

Agree on the technique, disagree massively on the application. It's clearly the thing holding him back from being a test batsman. Both his dismissals this test were infuriating examples of his lack of application, and his inability to bat according to the context; in the first innings he just had to stick with Smith, but couldn't resist trying to pull Archer. In the second, you just had the feeling that his padding up to the leg stump line from the spinners was eventually going to come undone because he did not look comfortable doing it. Lo and behold he then went and reached out with a limp shot to one from Root that was clearly going to be turning down leg.

It seems he still has the need to feel bat on ball and be striking the ball hard. Until he can develop the mindset of putting that away, digging in like a proper batsman should (especially when given a life) he does not belong in the top 7. I'd argue that although Starc is susceptible to going out very early in an innings (the trait of a tailender) he has shown more ability than Marsh to bat to the situation. In his 50 last test he stuck around well with Smith to get him to 200, and then started playing shots alongside Lyon.

 

[Blue1980]

Agree on the technique, disagree massively on the application. It's clearly the thing holding him back from being a test batsman. Both his dismissals this test were infuriating examples of his lack of application, and his inability to bat according to the context; in the first innings he just had to stick with Smith, but couldn't resist trying to pull Archer. In the second, you just had the feeling that his padding up to the leg stump line from the spinners was eventually going to come undone because he did not look comfortable doing it. Lo and behold he then went and reached out with a limp shot to one from Root that was clearly going to be turning down leg.

It seems he still has the need to feel bat on ball and be striking the ball hard. Until he can develop the mindset of putting that away, digging in like a proper batsman should (especially when given a life) he does not belong in the top 7. I'd argue that although Starc is susceptible to going out very early in an innings (the trait of a tailender) he has shown more ability than Marsh to bat to the situation. In his 50 last test he stuck around well with Smith to get him to 200, and then started playing shots alongside Lyon.

It’s an indictment on m Marshs all round prospects we are even having a conversation of whether his batting is better than Starcs or not

 

[LukeParkerno1]

It’s an indictment on m Marshs all round prospects we are even having a conversation of whether his batting is better than Starcs or not

I wouldn't be completely against him batting at 8 as the third seamer though

 

[MC Bad Genius]

It’s an indictment on m Marshs all round prospects we are even having a conversation of whether his batting is better than Starcs or not

Haha. That's a very good point.

 

[MC Bad Genius]

This is not trying to start a rumour, but do Steve Smith and Mitch Marsh like each other? Watching the footage of Smith taking that screamer to get rid of Woakes, he seems to not go to Mitch for congratulations, despite him being the bowler. I didn't think anything of it until I watched a few of Smith's other ridiculous catches and there was one off Guptill (I think?) in an ODI and again it was Marsh bowling and again Smith didn't seem to acknowledge him. It's probably just a weird coincidence, but wasn't sure if anyone knew anything more.

 

[Belnakor]

That is just Smith being awkward pretty par for the course with him

 

[The Convert]

He would have been handy in the sides with gilly, bat him at 7 and gilly at 6 just treat him like handy lower order hitter and use him as a frontline 4th quick.

Unless we find that keeper who can bat 6 it's just hard to see how we pick marsh, is he really good enough to take a frontline quick like patto/starc/richardsons spot in a 4 man attack?

In this current side we just don't have the batting to pick him as a 5th bowling option not when he averages 25 after 5 years of test cricket.

You cannot have 5th bowling option unless they are a top 6 batsman.

On SM-G950F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[to1994]

Disagree, he's the only one who can swing the ball. He's ahead of Siddle in the bowling department. There's no reason as a bowling allrounder he can't come in at 8 or even 7 behind a keeper-batsman who can actually score runs. That could be Wade.

There's no way he's in our best 4 bowlers.

Pattinson, Cummins, Hazlewood, Starc, Richardson, Bird, Nesser are well ahead on bowling alone, then you've got a lot of fringe players who have far more experience and better FC records then he does.

You can make an argument that in perfect conditions where his bowling suits you could look at including him but he's a long way off of being in the First XI just for that. Keep in mind the only reason he got a lengthy bowl was because Siddle's bowling was putrid and he needed to be taken out of the attack.

Marsh made the most of his opportunity and it was a great display, but a number 8 batsmen who isn't in your top 3 quicks is a liability in the Test arena, England just lost the urn on the back of trying to make these sort of selections work for the last few years.

 

[Scotland]

You cannot have 5th bowling option unless they are a top 6 batsman.

On SM-G950F using BigFooty.com mobile app

You can, it's just traditionally uncommon.

His peak is a lot higher but Ben Stokes averages 35 bat / 32 ball. Andrew Flintoff 32 / 33. Mooen Ali 29 / 37. Sam Curran 30 / 29. Woakes 28 / 31. The +40/-30 guy is a bit of a unicorn unless you are 1990s South Africa. For a while England have had an unorthodox XI with no real standout batsmen other than Cook and Root. They went into tests last Ashes with Ali-Bairstow-Woakes-Overton-Broad-Anderson as 6-11. Ali has batted 1-9, Broad 7-11, Woakes 6-9, Stokes 3-11... Bairstow has kept 2/3 of the time and has batted 3-8 with most of his innings being split evenly between 5, 6 and 7. Jos Buttler is about 50/50 for matches as keeper and has opened once and batted 5-8.

Point being they shuffle their order around like nobody's business. Meanwhile Paine has batted 39/45 innings at #7. You can pretty much guarantee that the top 5 will be batsmen, 6 will be a batsman or Marsh as an all rounder, Paine will bat 7, Cummins 8, Starc 9, Lyon 10, Hazlewood 11. The bottom 4 shuffle around occasionally if Starc or Cummins aren't there or we pick a second spinner like Holland who we think belongs at 11, but I doubt we are going to see a scenario like the 4th test where a batsman ends up coming in at #8 (Buttler #7 + Overton nightwatchman pushing him down a spot).

Not saying England are right or wrong but it's what they have chosen to do with the players they have available. Marsh, Cummins, Starc can all bat. Marnus can bowl. We would like to think we can field a top 6 that averages 40-45+, a keeper that averages 30-35+ and then 7-11 who if they make runs it's a bonus. In the Ashes just finished we had Smith 110, Marnus 50, Wade 33, Head 27, Marsh 20, Usman 20, Bancroft 11, Harris 10, Warner 9.5. That's the top 6 talent pool. Meanwhile we had Siddle 28, Pattinson 23, Starc 54* in two innings. Having a 5th bowling option in the 5th test was great, but the problems were that we dropped one of the middle order when the top 2 are the biggest problem, and Marsh twice got in then got out to poor shots.

 

[gbatman]

Disagree, he's the only one who can swing the ball. He's ahead of Siddle in the bowling department. There's no reason as a bowling allrounder he can't come in at 8 or even 7 behind a keeper-batsman who can actually score runs. That could be Wade.

I've thought for years Mitch Marsh had something as a bowler.

Bowls mid to high 130's.
Bowls a genuine outswinger and hits the seam.
Bowls accurately.
Is tall with a high arm action and hits the pitch pretty hard.

I think in test cricket he could play as an early first change bowler, especially if there was a bit of swing about.
ODI and especially T20 cricket it would be good to see him with the new ball swinging it about.

We just need to stop seeing him as a batsman. He's a good slogger and a fast-medium outswing/seam bowler.

 

[Scotland]

Marsh is fine as a bowler, just took 7 wickets for the match.

But in this series we've picked Pattinson, Siddle, Cummins, Hazlewood, Starc 8-11 and not Marsh. He's behind at least those 5 in the pecking order, realistically more like 10 or so.

At the moment his best chance is Carey taking over from Paine at some stage and batting at 6 with Marsh at 7.

 

[apollo_creed]

Disagree, he's the only one who can swing the ball. He's ahead of Siddle in the bowling department. There's no reason as a bowling allrounder he can't come in at 8 or even 7 behind a keeper-batsman who can actually score runs. That could be Wade.

. one good bowling game in English conditions does not make him a frontline bowler. Back on our roads where he cant make runs he cant take wickets either. But of course you’d pick him. 30+ tests of being shit obviously not enough of a sample size.

 

[holybishop]

This is not trying to start a rumour, but do Steve Smith and Mitch Marsh like each other?

Wouldn't surprise me if they're not fans of each other. Smith as captain rarely if ever bowled MMarsh. I wouldn't be surprised if he privately advocated for him to be dropped.

 

[Seagrave_Holmes]

Batting at 6 his primary concern should be scoring runs with relief overs/occasional wickets being second.

Until he can make some decent runs he is basically just a 4th seamer.

 

[Hamingja]

Neser was never going to play in the Ashes.

He scored 481 runs @ 43 and took 33 wickets @ 23 in the shield.

How about Mitch just ****s off until he can at least string together a season like that in the shield.

 

[omarlittle1]

Neser was never going to play in the Ashes.

He scored 481 runs @ 43 and took 33 wickets @ 23 in the shield.

How about Mitch just fu**s off until he can at least string together a season like that in the shield.

I'm interested to see how Neser goes this Shield season. If he puts numbers like that up again, he could well force his way into the Test side.

I think Marsh should be considered as a white ball player, at least for the immediate future, I'd be wanting to see some consistent Shield form before he makes the Test side again. Particularly with the bat.

 

[PT Bar None]

Well, given he took 7 and made 25odd in the 2nd dig, there's plenty of time to figure it out. 'Cause he ain't going anywhere.


Can someone please pass the powdered Freddy biography over here? Got a sniffle

 

[DIG]

Marsh is fine as a bowler, just took 7 wickets for the match.

But in this series we've picked Pattinson, Siddle, Cummins, Hazlewood, Starc 8-11 and not Marsh. He's behind at least those 5 in the pecking order, realistically more like 10 or so.

At the moment his best chance is Carey taking over from Paine at some stage and batting at 6 with Marsh at 7.

This.

I couldn’t have worded it better.

It can only potentially work if we have another test quality all-rounder or two already in the line-up.

 

[The Passenger]

Coming back to Australia we'll definitely pick an all rounder and with 7 wickets in the last test he'll get the role for sure, barring injury.

If our batting was stronger, he could bat #7 and it would all fit reasonably nicely. But our top five isn't strong enough, and Paine can't bat #6. Australia hasn't typically picked bowling all rounders too often - and whilst he is being picked as a batting all rounder, he is playing as a bowling all rounder and that role just just doesn't fit into our XI (and hasn't for at least a decade).

Funnily enough, from purely a role filling perspective he would've fit much better into the Australian team's of the early 2000's where our batting was easily strong enough for Gilchrist to bat #6, and a fifth bowling option would've been handy to take some of the load off Brett Lee. But obviously his performances are a long way short of what that time would've demanded.

I think our best bet is working on Labuschange's bowling. At the moment he is a good #6 part time bowler but a bit weak for #5, but I reckon he's good enough to get to genuine all rounder status (which I would generally consider someone who takes roughly 1.5 wickets per test with an average under 35). But batting all rounders who bowl leg spin are pretty rare - leg spin is a difficult enough art form for a specialist, let alone someone who does it as a secondary skill. It's also a pretty difficult role to captain - all round leg spinning options are notoriously inconsistent and typically a captain is looking for a steady #5 bowling option to rest the front four bowlers, which is why medium pacers and off spinner's typically dominate the bowling skill set of all rounders.

Anyway, the selectors will go with Marsh for the home summer, I'm almost certain of that. If he can't score runs against NZ and Pakistan at home, then that would have to be it for at least a few years, but somehow I doubt it.

 

[frankrizzo]

Frustrating part is they will pick him at 6 where he isn't suited and then because it's not swinging he won't bowl anywhere near as much as he should and we just got back to those no rounder marsh years, a part time bowler who bats at 6 but looks like a number 8.

 

[Tigerssaints]

his stroke getting out in the first innings reminded me , that he is still only
a 1 day player.

 

[Scotland]

1 ???
2 ???
3 Marnus 38 / 30
4 Smith 65
5 Head 43
6 Marsh 25 / 39
7 Paine 31
8 Cummins 18 / 21
9 Starc 23 / 28
10 Lyon 12 / 32
11 Hazlewood 12 / 26

If both Starc and Cummins were good for 20-25+ and Marsh 30+ it wouldn't look so bad for an unorthodox XI. Just need a couple of openers that last more than 5 balls each.

With Warner and Harris the above is a 281 run side. During the Ashes everyone was down on their career averages except Smith and Marnus, and Wade was in 5 or 6 and made a couple of scores. Starc and Siddle also chipped in with a couple of handy innings.

Do wonder if there is any plan for Marsh at all. Last Shield game for WA he batted at 4 (made 2 and 105) and bowled 7 and 5 overs across two innings. He really needs to be batting at 4 to get time in the middle at Shield level while also bowling more than a handful of overs.

 

[Richard Pryor]

Wouldn't surprise me if they're not fans of each other. Smith as captain rarely if ever bowled MMarsh. I wouldn't be surprised if he privately advocated for him to be dropped.

Pure speculation, but could be something to it. It comes across as though Smith doesn't get along with Maxwell and there was that Test where O'Keefe bowled like 50 overs and Maxwell bowled 4 or something bizarre like that. Could also just be Smithy not knowing how to use the 5th bowler too.