The Australian cricket non-official thread!

bigrob2307 said:
I dont entirely get this new DRS. If Given out ball must be completely missing to be given not out but if given not out ball only has to just be hitting any part rather than completely hitting?
Click to expand...
That's how I interpret it. Interesting to see people in the media that wanted some of these changes made now complaining about them.
 
Saw a reply of marsh getting out and that is the one that stumped me.

I didnt mind the old way.

Smith being given out halfway down the pitch was pathetic. No reward for being aggressive and using your feet if this is the road they take
 
bigrob2307 said:
Saw a reply of marsh getting out and that is the one that stumped me.

I didnt mind the old way.

Smith being given out halfway down the pitch was pathetic. No reward for being aggressive and using your feet if this is the road they take
Click to expand...
Certainly concerning to see umpires seriously considering LBWs to players advancing down the pitch.

The technology went wrong in the Marsh DRS, and I say that with full confidence. Watching that ball bowled itself, there is no way it was hitting the stumps with the amount of visible swing. Clearly the technology didn't pick up on the swing which is a bit of an issue.
 
The technology for ball tracking is a "guess-timate" and not without fault, which is why I don't believe it should be used. The DRS in its entirety is flawed anyway. A classic example came with JP Duminy's dismissal in South Africa's second innings. Hot spot showed nothing, but snicko revealed a "spike". Ideally, the items of technology used to determine a dismissal shouldn't conflict with each other!

The only aspect of the DRS that is without dispute are the tramlines that show whether a ball pitched in line with the stumps or not. The ball tracking/hawkeye used to determine LBW - for spin bowling in particular - is an absurdity. It was when it was first used as a television gimmick, and it still is now.
 
On the Hawkeye discussion above: it is not correct that the ball has to only just be hitting the stumps to overturn a not out decision. At least half of the ball has to projected to be in the zone bordered by the bails and the outside of the off and leg stumps. Previously, half of the ball had to be projected to be in the zone bordered by the bails and the middle of the off and leg stumps. Hence it is more likely to be "hitting" and less likely to be "umpire's call" than before. Under the old rule it would have been umpire's call and Marsh would have been saved, but the new rule has cost him. This article explains the rule change well: http://www.thecricketmonthly.com/story/1058822/television-killed-the-umpiring-star

I'd assume Burns would replace S Marsh, with Marsh to reclaim his spot as soon as he is fully fit, no matter what Burns does. M Marsh will definitely get at least one more Test as said by selectors. Hopefully he can make a big score and keep up his good bowling form!
 
To me Mitch has had more then enough chances to cement his spot in the side, it's a 3 test series we can't afford to wait until after another loss to decide on his future.

Time for him to go back to shield and develop his game there, not at test level
 
Mitchell Marsh has been dropped from the Australian team, a week after Mark Waugh publicly declared that he would play the three Test matches.

Anyway, I could spend an hour talking about our selectors! For now, congratulations to Callum Ferguson and Joe Mennie, Test debutants today. @Keatoboy, bloody South Australians win two Shield games and they reckon they own the joint!! :-)
 
The Mad Hatter said:
Joe Mennie isn't even a third change bowler. FMD, our playing stocks are so, so very thin.
Click to expand...
I don't think it will be long before he and Chadd Sayers are amongst our frontline fast bowlers in the Test team. Happy for Joe Mennie to get an opportunity - 161 First Class wickets at 26.88 is a bloody good record. I prefer to see experience and consistency rewarded as opposed to throwing a young lamb to the slaughter.
 
Very disappointed with the dropping of Mitch Marsh after the selectors' comments last week. That's one way to ruin his confidence.
 
Matty76 said:
I don't think it will be long before he and Chadd Sayers are amongst our frontline fast bowlers in the Test team. Happy for Joe Mennie to get an opportunity - 161 First Class wickets at 26.88 is a bloody good record. I prefer to see experience and consistency rewarded as opposed to throwing a young lamb to the slaughter.
Click to expand...

It'd be awesome to see Cummins and Pattinson in there with Starc and Hazlewood.

I have great concerns for our bowling stocks fitness.
 
Scotty_WCE said:
Very disappointed with the dropping of Mitch Marsh after the selectors' comments last week. That's one way to ruin his confidence.
Click to expand...
Perhaps I'm stupid (and enough evidence exists to support the premise!!) but would it not simply be a matter of swapping the batting positions of Peter Nevill and Mitchell Marsh? We have see Nev stuck with the tail as far back as in Adelaide against New Zealand last season and he is more of an industrious, steady batsman than one who can thrash bowling with the tail batting around him. I am astounded - particularly as they want the kid to do his share of bowling too - that this hasn't happened.
 
I don't think the selectors have any idea.

I sometimes get the feeling Mark Waugh hasn't seen a first class game. Like, ever. Even when he was playing.
 
Matty76 said:
Perhaps I'm stupid (and enough evidence exists to support the premise!!) but would it not simply be a matter of swapping the batting positions of Peter Nevill and Mitchell Marsh? We have see Nev stuck with the tail as far back as in Adelaide against New Zealand last season and he is more of an industrious, steady batsman than one who can thrash bowling with the tail batting around him. I am astounded - particularly as they want the kid to do his share of bowling too - that this hasn't happened.
Click to expand...
Completely agree - that swap probably should have happened during the Perth Test at the latest. Would suit both players better.
Parrapaul said:
I think marsh's record speaks for itself, 17 test innings without a 50.

He's lucky to last as long as he has
Click to expand...
Not quite true - he scored one 4 innings ago versus Sri Lanka. And I wasn't debating whether or not he is deserving of his spot; I was saying that after the comments the selectors made last week about Marsh definitely having at least one more Test, it is very poor to then drop him immediately.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom