Mitchell Marsh

[Bucking Beads]

Could the selectors go with mcsweeney at 6 over Webster? Mcsweeney actually has a better FC bowling average and strike rate. I think having stronger batting at 6 is more important for this current team. I was impressed with mcsweeney’s ability to survive for long difficult periods and I think with increased confidence over time and batting down the order he’ll find it easier to score

Strengthening the batting for the fifth test works as we only need to draw it. Just bat for as long as we can. Marsh won’t help with that.

 

[big_e]

If Mitch Marsh had any surname apart from Marsh, he would have already been dropped.

A batting all rounder, who has barely bowled all series, despite us losing a pace bowler to an injury in the last Test, and who averages sub 30 with the bat.

Both his father and brother were also afforded far more opportunities than their records deserved. Clear proof that the boys club that controls cricket in this country protect their own, even if it costs the team games.

There is about a 2% chance he should be selected for the 5th Test, but he probably will and he will score an inconsquential 50/100 and it will be used as justification to keep him in the team all the way up to next year's Ashes series no matter how pathetic his record is in the lead up to the series.

And the scary thing is , I don’t think he will dominate Shield cricket if he has to work his way back. I feel like the drop in speed of his seamers has made him only a batting option. There are better number 6s going around and allrounders.

Heck, he could come out today and snag 2 wickets and book his spot for Sydney.

Of all the nonsense things posted in the last few days, this one takes the cake.

How exactly does his name protect him? Does Tony Dodemaide pipe up during a selection meeting and remind Bailey and McDonald that Geoff Marsh took him to a great cafe in Brisbane in 1986/7 and that means his son will get picked forever?

Notwithstanding that he spent four years out of the test team and only got back in because of an injury, of course. And that upon recall, he scored 50s in 6 out of his first 10 matches back in the team.

He deserved his inclusion at the start of the series as a batter, and he deserves to be dropped now. But if he hangs on, it's because of the usual selector excuses like not wanting to change a winning side, or that he's a popular member of the team. Those things do matter in team environments, by the way. (I'd still drop him, though.)

Everyone is free to weigh in on whether Marsh should be in the side or not, but at least discuss it on it's merits, and don't talk absolute crap.

 

[JackOutback]

Of all the nonsense things posted in the last few days, this one takes the cake.

How exactly does his name protect him? Does Tony Dodemaide pipe up during a selection meeting and remind Bailey and McDonald that Geoff Marsh took him to a great cafe in Brisbane in 1986/7 and that means his son will get picked forever?

Notwithstanding that he spent four years out of the test team and only got back in because of an injury, of course. And that upon recall, he scored 50s in 6 out of his first 10 matches back in the team.

He deserved his inclusion at the start of the series as a batter, and he deserves to be dropped now. But if he hangs on, it's because of the usual selector excuses like not wanting to change a winning side, or that he's a popular member of the team. Those things do matter in team environments, by the way. (I'd still drop him, though.)

Everyone is free to weigh in on whether Marsh should be in the side or not, but at least discuss it on it's merits, and don't talk absolute crap.

The idea that the Marshes are some kind of puppet masters controlling selection is absurd. I mean, Shaun got plenty of chances because of his talent but was rarely given an extended run. Last picked, first dropped. With a bit more luck, would have carved out a solid career but injury played a big part in his up and down run.

 

[Underarm]

Strengthening the batting for the fifth test works as we only need to draw it. Just bat for as long as we can. Marsh won’t help with that.

If we want to strengthen the batting, mcsweeney still isn't the answer.

 

[Underarm]

I have read from a few saying he has had a great career. He hasn't, he has played some good innings from time to time but given how many chances he has had its been a fairly average career.

Webster has to.come in for the Sydney tetest.

The only top 7 batsmen worse for Australia are:
Richie Benaud (2nd GOAT)
Ian Healy
Rod Marsh
Gregory (captain from federation).

 

[Art Vandelay_]

 

[Burtonsgottago]

I think he will keep his spot. Bowling was a little better. Just needs some runs.

McSweney got dropped averaging 14. Marsh is averaging 10.

 

[Burtonsgottago]

Of all the nonsense things posted in the last few days, this one takes the cake.

How exactly does his name protect him? Does Tony Dodemaide pipe up during a selection meeting and remind Bailey and McDonald that Geoff Marsh took him to a great cafe in Brisbane in 1986/7 and that means his son will get picked forever?

Notwithstanding that he spent four years out of the test team and only got back in because of an injury, of course. And that upon recall, he scored 50s in 6 out of his first 10 matches back in the team.

He deserved his inclusion at the start of the series as a batter, and he deserves to be dropped now. But if he hangs on, it's because of the usual selector excuses like not wanting to change a winning side, or that he's a popular member of the team. Those things do matter in team environments, by the way. (I'd still drop him, though.)

Everyone is free to weigh in on whether Marsh should be in the side or not, but at least discuss it on it's merits, and don't talk absolute crap.

The problem is with a Test batting average of 29, Marsh isn’t there on merit.

 

[DaRick]

The problem is with a Test batting average of 29, Marsh isn’t there on merit.

He definitely isn't now, but they weren't dropping a bloke who scored a crucial 80 in the last Test before this series.

He was the incumbent, and he's squandered incumbency. Simple as.

 

[Burtonsgottago]

He definitely isn't now, but they weren't dropping a bloke who scored a crucial 80 in the last Test before this series.

He was the incumbent, and he's squandered incumbency. Simple as.

So… let’s see what someone else can do in that position. I don’t see the point of picking him at the detriment of someone else’s career.

 

[DaRick]

So… let’s see what someone else can do in that position. I don’t see the point of picking him at the detriment of someone else’s career.

Yes, I think he's done too.

At no point did I recommend keeping him in the side.

 

[Pacman Carney]

He’s gotta go. If Sydney is likely to be a turner, I’d consider batting McSweeney at 6 and giving him a bowl- he’s not a bad spin bowler.

McSweeney isnt in the squad.

 

[Rookie]

If we continue the madness of selecting Mardh over Webster, and India continue selecting Rohit (and Kohli), then it's a huge advantage to us.

 

[Blackhawk42]

Definitely. The second greatest all rounder in Ashes history*

View attachment 2195424

*Minimum 15 wickets taken

Isn't his average massively inflated by that big score on a ROAD on Boxing Day one year?

Also, I almost fell off my chair when I saw Mitch was still only 33. We could have 3 more summers of this discussion yet.

 

[ABAB]

McSweney got dropped averaging 14. Marsh is averaging 10.

They told us he can bowl if required but this Test has proven he can't so will be very interesting what happens.

 

[DaRick]

Isn't his average massively inflated by that big score on a ROAD on Boxing Day one year?

Also, I almost fell off my chair when I saw Mitch was still only 33. We could have 3 more summers of this discussion yet.

Nah, but he did score two centuries on road-tastic WACA and SCG wickets.

 

[Cleavy]

All you need to know for the New Year's Test | cricket.com.au

It's all on the line in Sydney, with both sides still able to take home the Border-Gavaskar Trophy

www.cricket.com.au

"The form of Tasmania allrounder Beau Webster has put pressure on Mitch Marsh, who is out of runs and out of luck but continuing to receive the backing of head coach Andrew McDonald, who said the allrounder's lack of bowling had been strategic rather than any issue with Marsh's previous back issue."
---------------------
sure, champ!

 

[Bucking Beads]

McDonald is just a bullshit artist. They think we don’t have a clue how this all works

 

[ABAB]

All you need to know for the New Year's Test | cricket.com.au

It's all on the line in Sydney, with both sides still able to take home the Border-Gavaskar Trophy

www.cricket.com.au

"The form of Tasmania allrounder Beau Webster has put pressure on Mitch Marsh, who is out of runs and out of luck but continuing to receive the backing of head coach Andrew McDonald, who said the allrounder's lack of bowling had been strategic rather than any issue with Marsh's previous back issue."
---------------------
sure, champ!

Maybe the reporter should have follow up with a question why Marsh is bowling only 115-125km.

 

[Young Redleg]

I remember the days when Shane Watson was considered a a meme but jeez he was a hell of a lot better than Mitch Marsh is

 

[StillAtLarge]

He’s gotta go. If Sydney is likely to be a turner, I’d consider batting McSweeney Connelly at 6 and giving him a bowl- he’s not a bad spin bowler.

efa

 

[MC Bad Genius]

I remember the days when Shane Watson was considered a a meme but jeez he was a hell of a lot better than Mitch Marsh is

It doesn't make for pretty reading:

Mitchell Marsh vs Shane Watson - Players Comparison

Compare Mitchell Marsh & Shane Watson - Stats, Achievements, Performance. Who excels in batting, bowling, fielding, and more

www.espncricinfo.com

Watson's batting average of 35.19 dwarfs Marsh's 28.53 and would be an even bigger difference if Watson could've gotten over his inability to convert (24 fifties to only 4 hundreds is ... unfortunate).

And his bowling was significantly better too - 75 @ 33.68 vs Mitch's 51 @ 40.41. The only place Mitch pips him is a better strike rate (68.20 to Watto's 73.20).

 

[Burtonsgottago]

I remember the days when Shane Watson was considered a a meme but jeez he was a hell of a lot better than Mitch Marsh is

Watson was twice the player Marsh is

 

[Iceman!]

I remember the days when Shane Watson was considered a a meme but jeez he was a hell of a lot better than Mitch Marsh is

Watson was a quality player at his best, definitely over criticized and a much better player than Marsh in tests

 

[Bucking Beads]

Watson was a quality player at his best, definitely over criticized and a much better player than Marsh in tests

We would trade 2 x marsh for 1 Watson in a heart beat