Page 12 of 12

Re: Ashes

Posted: Mon Sep 16, 2019 2:39 am
by Lunarlord34
Hopefully Wade can find a bit of consistency during the home summer, 2 surperp ton's however the rest of his series was pretty poor batting wise. However it does show that when he gets set, he makes the most of it at least. And ffs, can we just try other all-rounders instead of Marsh? He bowled superbly, but he averages about the same as Starc. So Marsh maybe as a bowler, but I don't see him in our best bowlers. But let's give Stonis a crack, he hasn't had 30 odd tests worth of chances (or any for that matter). Henriues was only given 4 tests worth of chances, but I doubt they would give him another one. Cartwright was given 2 test matches (both singular chances).

Not sure if any are better than the other, but giving anyone else as long a run as Marsh would help in finding that out.

Re: Ashes

Posted: Mon Sep 16, 2019 4:09 am
by liquefry
bumpuss wrote:I like Curran, good to see him selected. Good bowler and handy batsmen (better than Marsh :lol: )

agreed :)

Re: Ashes

Posted: Mon Sep 16, 2019 4:13 am
by liquefry
Lunarlord34 wrote:Hopefully Wade can find a bit of consistency during the home summer, 2 surperp ton's however the rest of his series was pretty poor batting wise. However it does show that when he gets set, he makes the most of it at least.


the problem I have with Wade is that he seems to be from the old school 'mental disintegration' sledging camp and I think we'd be better off stamping that out of the game.

Lunarlord34 wrote:And ffs, can we just try other all-rounders instead of Marsh?


All our bowlers can actually score a few runs, I think we'd be better off focussing on batsmen who can bat! A batting allrounder is a bonus not a target.

Re: Ashes

Posted: Mon Sep 16, 2019 4:28 am
by Lunarlord34
liquefry wrote:
Lunarlord34 wrote:And ffs, can we just try other all-rounders instead of Marsh?


All our bowlers can actually score a few runs, I think we'd be better off focussing on batsmen who can bat! A batting allrounder is a bonus not a target.

I mean yeah of course, but if we want to try all-rounders then can we try someone not called Mitch Marsh? Had enough chances and someone else should be given a shot. Personally, I would rather have the specialist bat. Especially since we have some handy part-time spinners in Smith + Labuschange (probably spelled that wrong lol). Even Head if he plays can bowl a little. Though I suppose selectors are more looking for that 4th seamers option.

Re: Ashes

Posted: Mon Sep 16, 2019 1:16 pm
by MOD-tonk6464
I agree Liquefry and Lunar. Mitch Marsh bowled well but when you are selected in the top 6 and as only the fifth bowler, you need to be very good with the bat - averaging around 40 or better IMO. M. Marsh's batting average of 25 from 32 Tests just doesn't cut it. I think we'd be better off selecting 6 batsmen if we don't have a test quality allrounder. In any case, Lab bowls some pretty handy leggies whilst Smith and Head can be useful with the ball too.

Wade batted well. Two centuries in an Ashes test series is a good performance from him. We really need to work on our batting though. Many of our batsmen were very poor. Thank goodness for Steve Smith. The series would have been very different without him.

It was disappointing to lose the final test but congrats to England on the win. The Ashes are still ours though. ;)