I hope he plays and scores a big hundred. The selectors obsession with Marsh needs to be killed.

I can only criticise Marsh for poor shots and erratic performance.

I can criticise the selectors for a lot more:

1. Youth or experience? Make up your mind
2. Batsman or all rounder at 6?
3. Why drop an incumbent for someone who has done just as well in the Shield?
4.Why pick players with extensive injury histories?
5.Why pick players I.e. Paine who aren’t even playing for their state in their position?
6. Why influence Shield team declarations or bowling or batting orders?
7.Why persist with a boys club instead of performance based selections?
8. Why pick potential and style over performance?
9. Why continuously chop and change the no.6 spot? Is this now the new spinner slot like after Warne retired? Will we chop and change for years before we realise that there is no Hail Mary Hussey replacement?

Maxwell scoring a big hundred would be the best thing to happen to Australian Cricket since we stopped dropping Lyon after 1 bad game.

Again some really puzzling captaincy from smith. First off taking Lyon away from the end where he gets 9 of 12 wickets so (presumably) Sok can bowl to the right handler and not lyon? Then when Sok starts, he starts with a defensive field with only 2 catchers?

You’d hope not, given the first two are at the Gabba and Adelaide. He has an excellent record at those grounds, it’s only really sydney and Perth where he struggles. But I know what you mean, we were talking about dropping him in India after one bad test. Good to see the selectors have by and large stuck with him.

Definitely! I’m in favour of playing a more specialist keeper who averages 5-10 less than a keeper batsman, as I believe you make up those runs quite easily with a good keeper. Keepers should, unless they are genuine tailenders, be selected for keeping. Batting should be what seperate two keepers, not keeping seperating two batsmen.

I fully admit the numbers are hypothetical. The assumption I put through was that the keeper would be 30-35% better at keeping than the batter keeper, and vice versa.

As for the quantification of dropped catches, yes they could be more, they could be less. I went with the average runs per wicket over the past 10 years, and went with what I saw of matthew wade and dropped catches and byes.

This was an on the fly analysis done in my lunchbreak. It might be worth writing an article with more in depth analysis with solid figures.

I fully admit the numbers are hypothetical. The assumption I put through was that the keeper would be 30-35% better at keeping than the batter keeper, and vice versa.

As for the quantification of dropped catches, yes they could be more, they could be less. I went with the average runs per wicket over the past 10 years, and went with what I saw of matthew wade and dropped catches and byes.

This was an on the fly analysis done in my lunchbreak. It might be worth writing an article with more in depth analysis with solid figures.

I’ll say this. Handscomb had no idea he was keeping in the first match, he was essentially an injury replacement, and consequently performed very badly. In the second match he kept he had been training for a few days, and did a reasonable job.

Take an example of two different keepers, one averages ~38, the other ~30. Let us assume the following:

The average runs per wicket in the past 10 years is 32. Each keeper will bat twice per test, and runs per test is 70% of their average. There are no not outs. 12 matches are played in the year.

The keeper averaging 38 is your former opening batsmen who took the gloves because he wasn’t quite good enough with the bat, but was an alright keeper. He drops a chance once every 2 games, and takes a half chance every 3. He can’t stand up to the quick bowlers, does alright keeping to spin, but makes a lot of basic mistakes, i.e. slow to get back to the wickets for run outs, doesn’t move with the ball etc. He averages 20 byes per test.

The keeper averaging 30 has never been stellar with the bat, but can stand up to bowlers who bowl up to 135, lets through very little byes, drops a chance once every 4 games, and takes a half chance every game. He is also quick with stumpings on spinners, and good with getting back to the stumps for run outs. He lets through an average of 15 byes per test.

Now let’s do some maths.

For the Batsman keeper:
Runs per year= 638 + 6 half chances a year (6*16= 96) = 734 runs as a gross positive per year.

Now we deduct the errors. 240 byes per year- 192 in dropped chances means the Net positive per year= 306 runs.

For the Keeper
Runs per year= 504 + 12 half chances (12*16=192) =696 gross runs per year as a positive.

Now we deduct errors. 180 Byes per year – 96 in dropped catches = 420 net positive runs a year.

The actual keeper is 37% more effective.

Granted, most of these are assumptions, but you can see that it’s not all about runs scored when you factor in things like half chances taken, byes conceded and catches dropped. That’s not even to mention the extra confidence given to bowlers with a better keeper.

It boggles the mind that Wade continues to be selected. I guess being a member of the boys club is more important than actual results. It says a lot that his greatest contribution to the team since being recalled is noooice garry. Is that enough to keep him there? It’s embarrassing when he’s sledging Bangladesh but hasn’t scored any runs or taken any spectacular dismissals.

I would throw my hat in with Alex Carey. From what I’ve heard he is the most technically correct keeper currently playing. It doesn’t matter if he averages 25-30. Our tail is very strong with Stars, Cummins both being decent batsmen, and Lyon and Hazelwood can stick around. Also, every chance missed is -30 runs, and I think wade has probably had 3 or 4 matches where he’s ended up with a positive run tally.

Exactly. Warner looked all at sea, was so frazzled he didn’t even review his decision, 2 in 2 balls is pretty poor umpiring though.

The less said about Khawaja and that “Run” he thought was there, the better. Both of them are obviously very muddled in their mindset, they don’t know whether to defend or attack. They’re being indecisive, Warner tried some horrible strokes, but got out defending…

Congratulations to the both of them!

I hope CA extends an offer to both teams to come tour here as soon as possible. I think also that instead of playing against 2nd XI county teams when going to England, we could play a 2-3 test series against Ireland every time we go for the Ashes, that’d be much better prep, and give Ireland some needed exposure!

Same as for when we tour the UAE, tests against Afghanistan as opposed to a nothing warmup game.

Sorry, got cut off.

Line up of

1. Warner
2. Renshaw
3. Smith/Khawaja
4. Smith/Khawaja
5. Handscomb/ Maxwell
6. Wade (Or another, better keeper, or Handscomb as keeper and Maxwell at 5)
7. Pattinson
8. Starc
9. Cummins
10. Hazelwood
11. Lyon

There’s some fair competition for the allrounders’ spot at the moment! You have in your list Cartwright, Turner and Henriques, all of whom are capable of playing as allrounders in the team, especially given their batting form!

Maxwell I think is in for at least a few home tests, but it’s so hard to tell with how the selectors have treated him. He makes one not even bad comment about Wade, and he’s been absolutely reamed by Smith and Lehmann for it. He may well find that he’s out of the team for the Gabba, with some sort of excuse being the need to play a pace bowling allrounder. I do think Maxwell should be given an extended run at 6, but again I just don’t think he’s going to be looked on favourably by team management.

That is a major thing going against maxwell and Turner. Both spin it the same way as Lyon does. Unless SOK takes over Lyon (A mistake in my view, Lyon was far more consistent than SOK, 3 tests where he picked up at least a 4 wicket haul, and the only test he didnt he had a badly injured finger) the all rounder spot is likely to go to a pace bowler, or someone who spins it away from the bat.

There’s the potential to field a very interesting line up if Pattinson is as good with the bat as people say he is.

Could go something like this

1. Warner (Potentially replaced in subcontinent)
2. Renshaw
3. Smith/Khawaja

Wade and maxwell. This should be interesting.

What’s par to chase on this pitch? 200 would be difficult I think

I’ve heard that about a lot of all rounders. Just in the past 5 years Watson, MMarsh, Faulkner (Who should really get at least a few more tests) Agar and Maxwell have all been touted as having the potential to be great all rounders. Turner, and all of them really, need to put in a few good seasons of shield cricket averaging around 40-45 with the bat and less than 35 with the ball. Then I will believe that maybe they could be test quality.

The reality is that since WWII I would say that there have been 5 or 6 really quality allrounders, and only one current player is to me an awesome all rounder and that’d be Shakib Al Hasan.

It is frankly unbelievable how little support Lyon has in some sections of the community. 2 tests ago he took an 8for and now we want to drop him? Get real here, the only reason to drop him is if his finger is injured. That was also a big reason for his lack of success in Ranchi, which you left out of your article. A raw and bloody finger still led to 4 chances being dropped or given not out.

Let’s be serious here, how many other players would be dropped 2 tests after taking an 8 for? How many batsmen would get dropped 2 tests after making a 250? Very few, so why do we want to do that to Lyon? If his finger is injured, sure, rest him, but not drop him.

Hopefully Renshaw, Smith, Marsh and Maxwell can last until the final session. We don’t want to try set India a target, just last until the last session with no more than 6 down. Bat time, not runs.

What was smith doing with his bowlers? Sok and Lyon weren’t very effective, nor was hazlewood. Maxwell criminally underbowled, Cummins with 39 overs from one first class match? I wouldn’t be surprised if he breaks down again, that’s a big load for any fast bowler, let alone cummins. Where was maxwell? Smith really must have something against him, and his bowling. He himself should have come on for 5-6 overs as well, same with Warner. 200+ overs and only 4 bowled by the all rounder. Smith leads by example with the bat, but he leaves a lot to be desired on the field.

A draw is as good as a win here, if we bring the series to Dharamasala all square then pressure is on India. I believe the pitch there is more fast bowler friendly, perhaps a chance for 3 pacers to play?

Anyone know who the next man in would be? SOK or Cummins?

It’s Beer O’Clock!

So far there’s been a bit of turn, and maybe at most 5 balls have bounced a bit, but for the most part this pitch is very low and slow. Very little in it for the bowlers, but I expect the pitch will break up by day 4.

Looks really can be deceiving, I thought this might be the worst pitch for batting so far, but it really is just quite flat at the moment.

Will be very interesting to see how the pitch plays. I reckon Warner should go out all guns blazing in the first session, try and maximise the best of the conditions.

If it’s playing badly from the start then hopefully he can find a way to rotate the strike and combat Ashwin’s leg stump line.

Never been so happy to have won a toss. Also good call on Maxi ahead of Stoinis!

Wow, this is great stuff from Starc, the 2 best batsmen gone in the space of 3 balls!

It makes me nervous when Wade is within 100m of a cricket ball.

Is O’Keefe bowling over or around the wicket? It will be interesting to see how long it takes for the pitch to start deteriorating after the rolling.