Shaun Marsh must be wondering if he has recently killed a black cat with a broken mirror while walking under a ladder, so poor has his form been since returning to Test cricket team.
After being named in the Argus report as one of five personnel vital to returning the team to the top of world rankings in all three forms of the game, Marsh debuted against Sri Lanka at Pallekele and scored a superb 141, backing it up with an impressive 81 in his next Test.
Since then, however, Marsh succumbed to a back injury during the Newlands debacle against South Africa, and returned to the Test team to take on India.
Against the latter, his series reads 0, 3, 0, DNB, 11, and DNB, for a grand total of 14 runs in four innings across three matches. His Test batting average has dropped to 33.11.
Even under normal circumstances a run of dismissals like that (I don’t count the duck at Newlands because he had already injured his back) would see a player under threat to retain his position in the team. What makes Marsh’s situation untenable is that he returned to the Test side at the expense of Usman Khawaja.
In his three-Test stint (as Marsh’s injury replacement against the stronger bowling attacks of South Africa and New Zealand), Khawaja posted scores of 12, 65, 38, 0*, 7, and 23. It is worth noting that Khawaja’s score of 7 in the first innings at Bellerive is his only single figure dismissal in six Tests.
Perhaps even more telling is that recently dumped opener Phil Hughes (whose last four dismissals were all edged to second slip) posted scores of 10, 7, 4, and 20 before being shown the door. Hughes was sent away to work on his technique.
All four of Shaun Marsh’s dismissals have involved playing at balls he shouldn’t have, and either being caught in the arc between point and the wicketkeeper or dragging the ball back onto his stumps. Surely the same punishment must be dealt out to him.
There is a difference between showing a young batsman faith and patience and ignoring poor performance. I think Marsh will be retained for the final Test in Adelaide, but it will expose the new selection panel as sycophants playing favourites.
lou
Guest
Inverarity doesn't have any doubt about Punter. He has raved about how wonderful a person he is. Punter is going to England for the next Ashes series. I can't imagine why anyone thinks he is going to retire yet.
Red Kev
Guest
Because in the last four years he has averaged over 50 in a series 3 times - this series against India, the two test tour to India, and the 3 test series against Pakistan when he got the double-ton. Because on a cumulative basis Ponting has averaged below 40 for the last four years. You have to go all the way back to his 100th test (new years 2006) to bring his "recent test average" over 50. (Note Ponting's most recent 5 tests average over 50, however once past that threshold you have to increase the sample to 60 tests to get the average back up over 50 - since the end of the most recent Ashes Ponting averages 37, since the end of the Ashes in 2009 Ponting averages 39).
Jeff Dowsing
Guest
I think with Ponting & anyone his age that has a slump is to determine whether it's a matter of form or a terminal decline related to age. I think the Indian series has shown it's the former. For most of his long career he's averaged 55+ which puts him with the greats. I'd be loathed to just cast that aside now. I reckon he might have another 18-24 months. If Sachin & Dravid can, why not Punter? -- Comment left via The Roar's iPhone app. Download The Roar's iPhone App in the App Store here.
jamesb
Guest
I think its fair to say the selections of the Australian cricket side in the last 3 years have been less than ideal You gotta wonder, if they persisted with Phil Hughes in the 2009 Ashes for the whole series rather than 3 innings, than who knows Hughes might;ve been a different, more confident player by now will never know.
Red Kev
Guest
I saw that one. Clarke, Siddle, Watson and Hussey provide more than enough experience. Ponting and Haddin are superfluous. Had the selectors the fortitude to stick by their decisions Khawaja have had 11 tests by now (he and Marsh each have 6 tests experience with only 1 over-lapping) with a 12th to come in Adelaide. They could then politely ask Ponting to retire and bring on the other in the series against WI, SA and SL before heading away on tour to India and England. Instead they have chopped and changed and screwed the whole process up and are now holding onto Ponting well past the point he should have retired.
jamesb
Guest
I like this article from malcolm Knox from the SMH today He says something like "The Australian team is a snake shedding its skin. Before the old layer peels off completely, it has to hang around, not because it's still alive but because it's providing protection for the next layer. The trick, now, is for the old layer to let go when it's best for the body." basically saying, its nice to have Ponting, Hussey and Haddin around to help the new players. Once the young players are established, than its time for the old players to step aside. Ideally you want the Australian team to have a smooth transistion http://www.theage.com.au/sport/cricket/old-guard-sets-up-smooth-transit-to-the-new-20120115-1q1fa.html
Atawhai Drive
Roar Guru
Red Kev, anyone who can use a phrase such as "a certain felicity of style" is beyond criticism in my book. Cheers.
Atawhai Drive
Roar Guru
He certainly did bat for two days in Sydney. Clearly it took a lot out of him, given that he's the captain too. It would be good to see him move up to No 4 in the order.
Betty B
Guest
hasn't Cowan been lucky in this series? I recall a few appeals going his way - with DRS his record could look dismal. Marsh and Haddin too, are surely struggling. I hope the common thread that selection process is suspect, is wrong.
TomC
Guest
He's always struggled batting at no 4.
Red Kev
Roar Guru
Regarding an Australian Alastair Cook or Jonathan Trott ... didn't Clarke just prove he could bat for two days? Perhaps it is time to elevate him in the order.
Red Kev
Roar Guru
I don’t actually believe there is any corruption – the use of Geoff Marsh in my ranting is just a literary allusion to the boys’ club mentality that I do believe permeates selection. Apologies for exaggeration in the pursuit of a certain felicity of style (daddy’s boy has such a stinging connotation to it). Marsh came back in on the strength of his 141 on debut and an impressive unbeaten 99 in the BBL. Now you might think (and the selectors clearly did) that such as move is not a bad gamble to take. Obviously the gamble backfired and his performance since returning should be a cautionary tale for the selectors on returning players to the test team without any long-form cricket under their belts (can anybody say Shane Watson). The underlying problem I take issue with is that Marsh is not a very good first-class cricketer and is being giving chances beyond those afforded to younger, better players. And the only reasons visible for that are (a) that Mickey Arthur likes him; and (b) his name is in the Argus Report.
Atawhai Drive
Roar Guru
Can't see any evidence of Marsh being picked purely because of who his Dad is. Actually, that would imply corruption on the part of the selectors. Big call without any evidence. Clearly Arthur likes him, which is only a problem in the sense that Arthur is also a selector. The selectors didn't wait for Khawaja and they may not wait for Marsh either. I expect Watson to come in for him at Adelaide. What exactly are the Test selectors looking for? An Australian version of Alastair Cook or Jonathan Trott, someone with the ability and patience to bat for two days? Clearly we need some stability at the top of the order.
TomC
Guest
My mistake. Thanks Kev.
Red Kev
Guest
I'll stand by my hypothesis that Marsh is Marcus North 2.0, which is pretty much what that says, I only had a small number of innings to work with. It is opinion not fact.
Red Kev
Guest
55 sorry, mistake in calculations.
Disco
Roar Guru
Funny that top-scoring in the Johannesburg chase was so easily written off by the selectors.
Disco
Roar Guru
Or, if you're a selector, it will seemingly tell you that first-class cricket doesn't matter and that the team is chosen based on factors other than batting performance.
Red Kev
Guest
Actually he averages 57 in shield cricket, 47 in non-test-first-class cricket, and 45 in first class cricket overall (including tests). You have to know how to break up the stats.
TomC
Guest
You've lost me with this one, Kev. I think you're reading a lot of complicated psychoanalysis into a small set of figures.