-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
Cricket
- Thread starter mb64
- Start date
It did. It made for one of the best series of all time but I remember clearly silently pleading with Steve Waugh not to enforce the follow-on that game. Bowlers and fielders who have already spent a day in the field have to go straight back out and do it again. They're tired, the opposition batsmen are not (and they've had a practice hit) and as we saw, once the team is in the field for a second day in a row, things unravel. Especially if you only have four bowlers. The follow-on is all but dead unless you skittle a team in 50 overs or less and bowling conditions are favourable.CC TIGER said:
This a seriously good bowling attack we have. Rapt for Pat Cummins to not only get back from all his issues, but show his worth. A rare poor call by Leysy to question him a year or so back.
Day/night Tests. Welcome to the new age. They are ace.
spook said:
Bowling conditions weren't just favourable, they were super-favourable. It doesn't worry me and and doesn't matter now, we won. But I reckon our bowlers would have loved to have bowled in those conditions, (and our batsmen would have loved to avoid batting in them) good nights rest, knock em over first thing. Its not like they would have had to spend a day and half in the field at Mumbai.
I understand and accept the thinking for not following-on as a general rule, but this was the exception that proves it.
Agreed, snakey. If you were gonna do it, this was the time. They are very protective of the bowlers these days; the decision was made with the series in mind as much as the match, methinks. Lose one of our quicks and it's a fair drop-off to Bird.
spook said:
Maxwell will probably play in Sydney, after spending a couple of weeks playing 20/20.
I wonder if he has ever played more than five 4/5day games in a row.
I'm not really a fan of Maxwell, but he is seriously stiff to miss out this time. He needs to get some of those photos that the Marsh brothers have.spook said:
Surely no Australian cricketer has ever been given more opportunities than the Marsh brothers.
What do you do if you're Maxwell? Made runs on the hardest continent in the world,then asked to go back and make runs at shield level. Then proceeds to make runs at Shield level.
They give a spot to Shaun Marsh who hadn't performed well at the lower levels. (This proved to be a good selection though thus far) but selectors are uncomfortable with having a number 6 that can't bowl.
Maxwell coming off 278 and 96 in his last two games, and can bowl.
So they pick Mitch Marsh. He has made a 141* in his last two games, but afforded 3 times as many tests as Maxwell, and could only put together two 50's to Maxwell's 1 century. Which Maxwell made In India.
How could you watch someone have opportunities handed to them again and again?
Despite banging the door down.
Despite showing you can make runs at the highest level.
Why would you bother?
They give a spot to Shaun Marsh who hadn't performed well at the lower levels. (This proved to be a good selection though thus far) but selectors are uncomfortable with having a number 6 that can't bowl.
Maxwell coming off 278 and 96 in his last two games, and can bowl.
So they pick Mitch Marsh. He has made a 141* in his last two games, but afforded 3 times as many tests as Maxwell, and could only put together two 50's to Maxwell's 1 century. Which Maxwell made In India.
How could you watch someone have opportunities handed to them again and again?
Despite banging the door down.
Despite showing you can make runs at the highest level.
Why would you bother?
tigersnake said:
I don't think the amount of swing and seam could have been predicted based on what had transpired to that point. I'm sure if Smith had of known how much the ball was going to hoop they would have enforced it.
I don't mind the M Marsh selection - his bowling is very handy and he is batting better than ever at Shield level. He's just turned 26.
He's capable of averaging low 30's with both bat and ball.
Query over his body of course but has the ability.
He's capable of averaging low 30's with both bat and ball.
Query over his body of course but has the ability.
TT33 said:
Chalk and cheese Maxwell is a baseballer who happens to wear cricket gear, little to no defence, little to no footwork, Hodge was as fine a batsman as we have had a shield level over many years solid on all types of decks in all conditions, good footwork and a solid solid technique
Capable yes.
But he doesn't.
You shouldn't select the national team on capabilities. It must be on performances.
Maxwell has a fine technique. Use his feet well, going well back or right forward. And he's more talented than anyone bar Smith (maybe even him).Mappa said:
The selectors might be challenging him to produce a mammoth Shield season. Won't hurt him in the long run. Given his relative lack of first-class experience, if they go this way I hope they leave him out of the ODIs to stay in the Shield.
poppa x said:
He has played 21 Tests. He averages just under 22 with bat and 37 with ball. He is 26. I have little doubt these figures will improve. I like the idea of having a 4th seamer capable of more than just 4 or 5 overs. He can bowl some serious speed and has shown a knack of being a partnership breaker. He definitely needs to do better with the bat but his shield form is very good and he would be in the conversation on that basis alone - hopefully it translates to the test level - but to say he is not putting up performances is wrong.