Nobody is seriously suggesting it, just to highlight how bad Marsh is - Starc's test record is better...
Add to that Marsh's horrific 1st class record, I just don't understand why anyone argues he should be in the test team, or even considered
Like I said, if you select someone based on pure potential, you can kind of understand it. With that line of thinking there is some sort of justification. It's simply just a shit selection.
Wade, on the other hand..it makes no sense. It's made even worse by the fact that keepers need to you know..keep. It's different to selecting a guy at 6 who can bowl and hope he comes good with the bat eventually.
Choosing a keeper for your side is just different. You simply have to keep to a reasonable standard in international cricket. There is no "picking on potential" if your keeping isn't up to scratch. You can't be carried. There's no one to shoulder your load. You affect bowling/fielding morale. A couple of shit matches immediately calls into question your place in the side as keeper, regardless of batting form, as it should.
Wade was selected when our primary spinner needed all the help he could get, just before an Indian tour. He's since averaged 10 in mostly dream conditions to bat and looks no better a keeper than he was when he was dropped following the previous Indian tour for his "keeping." Not just cause he's missed chances, but because he's constantly making regulation takes look like they exploded off the pitch. You don't get the sense that he's going through a bad patch with his glovework. He just looks like he's keeping as well as he can.
That's what makes Wade's selection a class of its own.