Bowler Maxwell under fire for leaking runs

If Arthur wants to criticise Maxwell and not Lyon then he is an idiot. Lyon got tonked as well. The ball he's talking himself up that got Tendulkar, I've seen a thousand better balls bowled by better bowlers than Lyon not get Tendulkar out. So the old fellas played around one, big deal. They made 572 runs in reply to our 380. The other two wickets - Kohli was going the tonk and the other wicket was a bowler, all at a run rate of 4.57. On top of that Ashwin got 7 wickets bowling offspin in the previous innings. In fact I wpropose Maxwell was better. Arthur, if you are going to use Maxwell as cannon fodder to support Lyon's cause, then there's no doubt you should be replaced by Boof post haste. In fact get rid of him, and bring in Boof now. What does a South African know about the Ashes anyway? The same lot who want us to give up boxing day after we welcomed them back in.

If Gilchrist could not bat at 6, then there is no way known Wade should be. Having just one batsman with any clue ahead of him in the order should be even more reason to pick him at 7. Incidentally, if we have 4 openers in this side and can't beat our way out of a wet paper bag, why not pick 4 keepers? Haddin and Paine can bat better than Watson and Cowan!

No Brendon. Merely an opinion like yours. The best thing about this site is that everyone can express themselves equally. You don't agree with mine, that's fine with me. Others do ,but that is immaterial. Some posters will agree with you. Same deal. Conversely, I couldn't give a rat's what your opinion is. But please could you find out who said that he is a "one in a generation player." I'm intrigued.

What are you on about? Everyone's entitled to an opinion, if you don't like maybe best to stay away from an opinion website. You say no one has said Maxwell is the beat thing since sliced bread......ummm someone said (not sure who it was) that Maxwell's a once in a generation player, he's been picked in front of O'Keefe and they dropped Lyon for him, what else do you need. I'm not even sure who your rant was directed at, everyone bar yourself it seems.

well said, plus i dont get this arguement that india were going the tonk. Look at maxwells wickets, none of them were really rash strokes other then dhoni's and he played that same shot that he got out to about 10 times against lyon and they all sailed over the boundary for six, its his shot. He tried it once against maxwell and maxwell decieved him..... Plus he boasts the wickets of dhoni vigay jadeja and kohli so essentially he picked up 4 of there top 7. Not bad for a hack when nobody else came close to getting the top order out other then pattinson. I think a lot of people are missing the point that he was the only one who looked like taking wickets. He could of had 7 if wade and cowan didn't drop 3 chances off him while he was on 4 for as well. Anyway rant over. The guys got potential, just don't base it on what you've seen in ODI's. His shield average of 43 shows he's a different player in longer form cricket then he is in shorter forms.

Anybody who knows anything about statistics knows that a sample of one, which is all we have for Maxwell at Test level, is as good as useless. Shane Warne's 1/150 in his first test against India just confirms this. Statistics, such as averages, become more reliable the more samples they are based on. Even Maxwell's Sheffield Shield stats for this season (Ave. 25.4, Econ. 2.9, S/R 52.5) are quite reasonable and better than either Lyon or Doherty. I think its a worry that both Doherty and Lyon are in the bottom three bowlers for both average and strike rate this season. Lyon was, of course, bowling in the Tests where his stats were much better: Ave. 32.2, Econ. 2.88, S/R 66.8. The bottom line is should Maxwell's 4/127 off 26 overs get him another chance. I'm no fan of Maxwell's but his first match returns were reasonable and from what I saw he troubled India's batsmen more than Lyon did. The biggest argument is that he didn't actually take any wickets until after India were well in front and their batsmen were looking to push home the advantage but I can some Indian batsmen having some difficulties with him early on. A miss timed pull shot just over mid-wickets head is clearest in my foggy memory. All things considered I think he is worth giving another go. If you want to block up one end bring on Henriques, at the moment that appears to be the best his bowling can do. I don't expect the NSP to do so though, they have invested a lot of time into Lyon and I expect Lyon will come back in for the next test and since Lyon and Maxwell are both right arm offies they wont play together. More of the zany world of NSP selections, why take a right arm off-spinning all-rounder to be the support bowler for your preferred spinner who is a right arm off-spin bowler?

if clarke fails the way we are going we won't get 150.

Like we said, statistics can be used any way you like to support an argument. And who are THEY who said that "Maxi" is the next best thing since sliced bread. Nobody that I can see. All he did was get reasonable bowling figures in his debut. So why concentrate on his batting. Wasn't he selected as the 2nd spinner? And what about all the Roarers who picked Hughes in their team for the first 2 tests. Don't hear too much from them. When Aus were going through their golden era, the selectors were stupid ,the coach was an idiot and the "young blokes should have been given a go." So what has changed. We have lost 2 test matches, that's what. This side is a reasonable side, NOT a great side. Much better sides than this have had their arses wiped in India. Can't wait till all the cockroaches come out of the filth to pick on Clarke's carcass when he has a bad run of outs. And there are many,many hundreds who can't wait for that to happen.

Totally agree with you. A good example is Cowan sure he hasn't continued on from his starts but he has valued his wicket which means someone like Warner has a steady partner batting out an over or changing strike depending on who is fareing best. In that way a more defensive player can also sheild one coming in by taking more of the strike and not playing rashly untill the shine comes off the ball or the bowlers get tired. Another good example was Danny Morrison for new Zealand when he was batting at number 9 (Watson used to be 10) he had the World record for Ducks for a while but it wasn't because he was useless it was because he was a rock. He would play out entire overs without giving away his wicket and I don't recall him playing many cross batted shots at all. In fact he had many of his 0s were not outs which he also had a huge number of. He was New Zealands nightwatchman for a longtime not a task to someone who only lasts a few deliveries.

Arthur is an idiot. HIs mumbld ramblings are straight out of CYA and GenZ "stroking the ego" 101. The support staff and team are now all sycophants, and its showing. As to "Maxi" (FFS now they are likening him to the biggest best yacht or even Russell Crowe in Gladiator), bla bla bla leaking runs? What about being completely useless, both he and Doherty picked up their wickets when India were going the tonk. Better to look at their figures when the score was 1/350.

I find Arthur a bit confusing re his statements on spinners. He recently said he's been disappointed by Lyon this summer. Fair enough. Yet he also says Lyon has a great future. I don't believe Arthur means that. Sounds like he wants to drop Lyon and find the next Paul Harris.

His batting was terrible especially his dismissal to the Ashwin's doosra or carrot ball as they call i

He should be under fire, he gave away too many runs and when the damage was done and Indians were trying to get quick runs he picked up his wickets. He should not be in the test team.

considering Maxwell isnt even first choice spinner for Victoria, in some games not even second choice in some games. he was expensive but yet took wickets and created opportunities. Doherty went for 131 & hardly looked threatening, lyon went for 215 in one innings in the first test. Australian cricket is going the way of the west indies did in the 90s, once a great team, slowly falling from grace, trying to hold on to that reputation, chopping and changing the side every game trying to find that winning combination, instead of having a long term plan, of a building a team

It’s a point that I have been meaning to make for some time. You often see people argue that a player who they have never seen play first class cricket (TV or live) should be in the team. They always use pure statistics to back up their case. These same people will then dismiss statistics when it comes to calling for someone to be dropped.

'Maxi'?

Under fire for leaking runs? How about being under fire for not making them and being generally overhyped for his only single bit of ability (i.e. the horizontal slog).

Yes he mightn't be of test quality, but 4/127 in his first test looks a bit better than 1/150 by Shane Warne in his debut. Funnily it was also against India at the SCG and India only had to bat once as well. And no I am not comparing them at all. It's just that so many Roarers keep quoting statistics to support their argument, but disregard the same when it doesn't suit. He may never play another test in his life and so be it but 4 wickets in a debut test is something that all bowlers would accept. And there is always a proviso if someone we don't like is a bit successful. Batsmen going the tonk etc. Still not bad for a t.rd.

Maybe if he grew a Merv-mo? Oh wait that is the other thread.

he isn't test match quality,a t20 specialist who got his wickets when they went for the tonk