Virat Kohli

[Mr Red]

Are the roosters signing him too??

 

[Crush]

Shaun Marsh. 6 straight test inns dismissed for less than 10 runs.
Thats our number 4.
He needs runs next test or he's gone. Again.

 

[TomRedVRiver]

Shaun Marsh. 6 straight test inns dismissed for less than 10 runs.
Thats our number 4.
He needs runs next test or he's gone. Again.

The frustrating thing is when you have a look at his Shield scores this season, he's been absolutely killing it. Based on his current form in that competition it would be crazy to ignore him... And there's no doubt that when he's at full flight he looks fantastic, but unfortunately he just can't seem to translate that to international cricket. It's a shame really.

Will Pucovski is our man though. He made his return to Shield cricket yesterday. In a year or two he will be our number 4/5. Might even make the ashes squad. I can see him averaging 45+

 

[Saint_JimmyG]

Shaun Marsh. 6 straight test inns dismissed for less than 10 runs.
Thats our number 4.
He needs runs next test or he's gone. Again.

It was only a couple of games ago, he scored a century against South Africa. Marsh was fantastic in the Ashes, too.

I wish people would stop using him as a scapegoat, and instead ask why technically flawed batsmen (Handscomb) are being recycled again.

 

[Saint_JimmyG]

Muzby isn't a moderator here.

Poor assumptions.

No, isn’t Muzby the “Village Idiot” around these parts?

He must’ve received a lot of Encouragement Awards during his younger years.

 

[Crush]

It was only a couple of games ago, he scored a century against South Africa. Marsh was fantastic in the Ashes, too.

I wish people would stop using him as a scapegoat, and instead ask why technically flawed batsmen (Handscomb) are being recycled again.

Lol. What a load of rubbish. Marsh has great technique, just can't make runs. Averages 35 after 34 tests.
Handscombs unorthodoxed technique got him 32 more runs than S.Marsh yesterday and he averages 9 runs more per inns.
S. MARSH has to go, enough is enough.

 

[Saint_JimmyG]

Lol. What a load of rubbish. Marsh has great technique, just can't make runs. Averages 35 after 34 tests.
Handscombs unorthodoxed technique got him 32 more runs than S.Marsh yesterday and he averages 9 runs more per inns.
S. MARSH has to go, enough is enough.

A few things here:

1. I didn’t know “unorthodox technically” was a synonym for technically flawed.

2. 12 of Handscomb’s innings yesterday was the result of hitting out wildly in a single over, and hoping for the best.

3. it was India’s first look at Handscomb and it’ll will be much better for the experience.

For much of the time, India bowled a fraction too short, when Handscomb’s proclivity to stand far too deep in his crease (including a ridiculously high bat lift) should’ve demanded yorkers at every opportunity.

It’s not rocket science.

 

[Crush]

A few things here:

1. I didn’t know “unorthodox technically” was a synonym for technically flawed.

2. 12 of Handscomb’s innings yesterday was the result of hitting out wildly in a single over, and hoping for the best.

3. it was India’s first look at Handscomb and it’ll will be much better for the experience.

For much of the time, India bowled a fraction too short, when Handscomb’s proclivity to stand far too deep in his crease (including a ridiculously high bat lift) should’ve demanded yorkers at every opportunity.

It’s not rocket science.

Why is Marsh's technique letting him down? Oh that's right, he's a nervous starter.
How we accept our number 4 averages only 35 is beyond me.
Having said that though, Marsh doesn't deserve any criticism directly, he's out there doing his best for his country. Its the selectors that need to make the hard call.
And also, I want Marsh to do well. I'm not one of those death-riders that wants someone to fail to make a point.
I would love nothing more than a massive series for Marsh. I just don't think he should be there in the first place.

 

[Saint_JimmyG]

Why is Marsh's technique letting him down? Oh that's right, he's a nervous starter.
How we accept our number 4 averages only 35 is beyond me.
Having said that though, Marsh doesn't deserve any criticism directly, he's out there doing his best for his country. Its the selectors that need to make the hard call.
And also, I want Marsh to do well. I'm not one of those death-riders that wants someone to fail to make a point.
I would love nothing more than a massive series for Marsh. I just don't think he should be there in the first place.

Marsh’s nervousness isn’t technique, it’s psychological. Also, if you look at his stats (and I’m pretty sure this is correct), he does a lot better at no. five.

I’d pick:

1. Harris
2. Renshaw
3. Khawaja
4. Finch
5. Shaun Marsh
6. Head (I didn’t think he was up to this level, but you cannot drop him after yesterday)
7. Paine

Plus the usual bowlers.

12th man depending on conditions and the state of the series: Mitchell Marsh/Glen Maxwell.

 

[Crush]

Marsh’s nervousness isn’t technique, it’s psychological. Also, if you look at his stats (and I’m pretty sure this is correct), he does a lot better at no. five.

I’d pick:

1. Harris
2. Renshaw
3. Khawaja
4. Finch
5. Shaun Marsh
6. Head (I didn’t think he was up to this level, but you cannot drop him after yesterday)
7. Paine

Plus the usual bowlers.

12th man depending on conditions and the state of the series: Mitchell Marsh/Glen Maxwell.

The problem with Renshaw unfortunately is that he is in horrible form in shield. I think they were willing him to make some runs leading up to this test but he just kept getting out cheaply. I do agree with you though that we need specialist openers.
I don't mind Finch down the order but would have him lower, at 6.
Renshaw
Harris
Khawaja
Handscomb
Head
Finch
Paine
Bowlers

That is still a weak batting lineup but better than what we have atm IMO

 

[gitano]

Shaun Marsh. 6 straight test inns dismissed for less than 10 runs.
Thats our number 4.
He needs runs next test or he's gone. Again.

Warm up game specialist.

Probably the worst starter of recognised batsmen in world cricket

 

[gitano]

A few things here:

1. I didn’t know “unorthodox technically” was a synonym for technically flawed.

2. 12 of Handscomb’s innings yesterday was the result of hitting out wildly in a single over, and hoping for the best.

3. it was India’s first look at Handscomb and it’ll will be much better for the experience.

For much of the time, India bowled a fraction too short, when Handscomb’s proclivity to stand far too deep in his crease (including a ridiculously high bat lift) should’ve demanded yorkers at every opportunity.

It’s not rocket science.

1. Plenty of great sportsmen have had an ugly technique. Doesn't mean shit.

2. Irrelevant. Neither are proving up to it.

3. So the world number 1 test side, and superpower of world cricket, didn't even look up any footage of Handscomb before this test? Seems legit.

 

[Saint_JimmyG]

1. Plenty of great sportsmen have had an ugly technique. Doesn't mean shit.

2. Irrelevant. Neither are proving up to it.

3. So the world number 1 test side, and superpower of world cricket, didn't even look up any footage of Handscomb before this test? Seems legit.

1.On Cricket 360 the tonight, Shane Warne summed up things succinctly when he said Handscomb’s unorthodoxy restricts him as “one dimensional”.

I’ll go with his opinion.

2, I don’t understand what is irrelevant?

3. I appreciate India would’ve looked at Handscomb on video intently but studying a batsman’s flaws on film and putting into place tactics (in foreign conditions) to restrict him are two separate things.

 

[Dragon for life]

Agree mate, he is one massive D##head, some Aussies don’t like Warner, but Kohli is 100 times more of a drop kick, spoilt brat and immature than Warner.

Can’t stand him, one of the the biggest smart arses in the sports world, much worse than some of our own immature spoilt brat male tennis players.

Nah you’ve gone too far with the comparison of our d**khead tennis players. They are such an embarrassment to Australian sport. Hang on, I have to count my millions. Jeez imagine how much I could count if I had an ounce of Leyton Hewitts ticker.

 

[jeffdragon]

Instead of blocking the spinner
Why not smash him out of the attack
Kolhi and his man are a bunch of sooks and corrupt.
We dont wont to play in Brisbane and not a night test.
The cricket hierarchy should tell them where to go.

 

[Saint_JimmyG]

Instead of blocking the spinner
Why not smash him out of the attack
Kolhi and his man are a bunch of sooks and corrupt.
We dont wont to play in Brisbane and not a night test.
The cricket hierarchy should tell them where to go.

I’m surprised India allowed Perth to be included in the itinerary.

Australia will draw even there.

Just flick Handscomb for an allrounder.

Simple.

 

[Crush]

Instead of blocking the spinner
Why not smash him out of the attack
Kolhi and his man are a bunch of sooks and corrupt.
We dont wont to play in Brisbane and not a night test.
The cricket hierarchy should tell them where to go.

Cricket Australia has the right to dictate where, when and how they play when in Australia. If cricket Australia demanded that they play a pink ball test it would have happened. Blame Cricket Australia for not standing up to the Indians I say.

 

[gitano]

1.On Cricket 360 the tonight, Shane Warne summed up things succinctly when he said Handscomb’s unorthodoxy restricts him as “one dimensional”.

I’ll go with his opinion.

2, I don’t understand what is irrelevant?

3. I appreciate India would’ve looked at Handscomb on video intently but studying a batsman’s flaws on film and putting into place tactics (in foreign conditions) to restrict him are two separate things.

Point 3 and Point 1 contradict each other, meaning I win this little debate.

So he is obviously one dimensional but
India couldn't devise a plan for him or execute?
Probably says the technique is ok. Don't get caught up in the this technique is good, this one isn't mindset. You'll get muchos egg across your face across many sports.

The ball doesn't know what the bat or batsman does before it gets hit.

 

[Saint_JimmyG]

Point 3 and Point 1 contradict each other, meaning I win this little debate.

So he is obviously one dimensional but
India couldn't devise a plan for him or execute?
Probably says the technique is ok. Don't get caught up in the this technique is good, this one isn't mindset. You'll get muchos egg across your face across many sports.

The ball doesn't know what the bat or batsman does before it gets hit.

If you feel you’ve won something, we’ll done.

Points one and three don’t contradict each other though.