With the line-up for this week’s first Test against Pakistan still to be confirmed, forgotten allrounder James Faulkner must be wondering if he’s developed an air of invisibility in the presence of national selectors.
With all the talk centred on a likely Test debut for short-form specialist Mitchell Marsh, the forgotten Faulkner sits at the back of the classroom, arms flailing, amid hopes of breaking the one-Test-wonder shackles.
Unfortunately for Marsh, his early days mirror those of injury-prone brother Shaun, meaning if he’s not about to return from injury then he’s a quick single from finding one.
Already on the comeback trail from an injured hamstring sustained on this tour, Test selection would place unnecessary pressure on Marsh’s body with a home summer and World Cup on the horizon, not to mention the risk of leaving the team short under trying Middle Eastern conditions.
Five days in 40-plus degree temperatures on a bogus hammy is no place to be blooding one of the country’s best talents.
While hammering white balls into the Swan River attracts the glamour, charging in off the long run late on day four with the enemy closing wins the medals.
Earmarked as a future replacement for Shane Watson, Marsh’s Test selection this week would be the perfect step to duplicating Watson’s path to endless ice buckets and summers on the couch cursing the Nine commentary team.
Regardless of Marsh’s health, Faulkner fits the bill as best available long-form pace bowling allrounder in the squad.
The Tasmanian’s bowling is match hardened for the red-ball game, with almost triple the amount of overs compared to Marsh across roughly the same number of appearances, indicating the left armer’s resilience to multiple spells.
Mitch Marsh’s day is not upon us. Here’s hoping the powers that be provide the desired program for a long and sustainable career across all forms.
John Uhr-Henry
Guest
It seems like I have produced a red herring naming about Faulkner but I can go back 55 years ago when I was playing great cricket in Tasmania as a Hobart born player and never got a look in...Its only been since the Ponting era and perhaps a couple of other Tasmanian cricketers that Tasmanian`s have been given a go,..In those days if you didn`t come from NSW or VIC. you didn`t get a look in. A few of our writers have rightly named some Tasmanian`s who have not been kept out owing to their talents,but I am going back to when Tasmania was not even represented in the Sheffield competition and although we were as good as any other likely test standard players a red line was drawn through all theTassy players. It all went back to when Tasmania was admitted to the Sheffield shield and we won a few commonwealth trophies that a change of policy took place. I can remember when a young David Boon beat the West Indies in the Prime Ministers game in Canberra off his own bat that the selectors started to take notice of Tamanian`s talents.
Broken-hearted Toy
Guest
I would have liked to have seen Luke Butterworth tried in test cricket. They gave Trent Copekand a shot and Butterworth was at least as good as him at his peak.
Broken-hearted Toy
Guest
Joel, you better pick your threads if you want informed opinion on the Roar.
Joel
Roar Rookie
Not as petulant as you are ignorant Don. You have no perspective on any argument but your own. I came to this forum hoping for intelligent conversation about a game that I am obviously passionate about. So when someone makes a statement like "because he is a Tasmanian and will ever be lucky to be included in the big time." I would expect that there was some basis for the comment. I asked for proof, and was provided none. Your opinion is that Luke Butterworth deserved to play, my opinion differs from yours and that is fair enough. Your opinion is as valid as anyone else's, as is mine. It still doesn't get to the point though. I gave a list of players that have played for Tasmania and Australia. Not one name, but nine. I have provided some form of proof to suggest that the original statement was not reasonable. All I have asked is proof, and i'm willing to admit that i'm wrong should you provide some. If you have any, i'm all ears :)
Don Freo
Guest
You have decided that was the discussion...not John. John is not complaining about now. Broaden your mind, young man. I'll leave this little conversation now...you've become petulant. Happy to engage in cricket conversation. You started so well.
Joel
Roar Rookie
My point to John is that the suggestion of unfair treatment in selection is unfair based on the players that have been selected in the last few years. You entered yourself into that conversation by throwing a single name that you think should have been selected but wasn't.. to which I entirely disagree with you that he was anywhere near good enough. So what the hell are you on about Don?
Don Freo
Guest
I'm not talking about any harsh treatment...go figure!!!
Joel
Roar Rookie
I just gave you a list of Tasmanian players that have played tests for Aus in the last 3 or 4 years. What harsh treatment are you talking about Don?
Don Freo
Guest
His career has ended now...that might be why you don't see him. John is talking about the history of Tassie's treatment...and is suggesting it is continuing now. That's what you don't get. I suspect you are out of your depth with argument. You might be better sticking with opinion rather than argument. That hasn't been too bad.
Joel
Roar Rookie
Once again you are overlooking the point to suit your own ends Don. Butterworth was never really considered on the selection table.. Now why is that? If he is as good as you claim to think he is, why hasn't he been around the fringes? And where is he at the moment? I don't see him a a team card anywhere... In the meantime, in the last few years Tasmania have had Ed Cowan, Ben Hilfenhaus, Alex Doolan, George Bailey, Jackson Bird, Xavier Doherty, Tim Paine, James Faulkner and of course Ricky Ponting represent Australia in test matches. It's not like the selectors missed many.. there's most of a team there. Our friend John here seems to think the Tasmanians are hard done by on the selection table. I was asking for proof..and you throw me Luke Butterworth? You can do better than that.
Don Freo
Guest
Henriques, Abbott...anyone wearing blue. Butterworth has missed now but gee he has played some fantastic match winning innings and has been the only genuine swing bowler in Oz for much of his career. Once again, Joel, you need to check your comprehension. It is not a case of who should have missed out...that is silly selection argument stuff. It is a question of who was good enough to represent Oz...but missed out.
Matth
Guest
Whether because of confidence or lack of game time, Faulkner has been terrible of late.
Joel
Roar Rookie
Who got selected ahead of Luke Butterworth that didn't deserve to be?
Joel
Roar Rookie
I don't think the selectors have done Faulkner any favours by keeping him in the squad on standby. His recent results are most likely because of a lack of game time. He hasn't done a lot of bowling in games lately. Needs to get back in form.
Quitwhinging
Guest
Geez the Faulkner fanclub not happy, seems they missed all the dross he bowled in the warmup game
Rellum
Roar Guru
Falukner is there in case Marsh can't play the first test. If Marsh isn't fit then Faulkner will play.
Jason Hosken
Roar Guru
Not many would be playing today if the warm up was the only guide.
DingoGray
Roar Guru
None 0/57 off 8 overs in the warm up game may have just closed the book on Faulks selection.
Don Freo
Guest
Luke Butterworth
Jason Hosken
Roar Guru
Tend to agree. Overall the batting still looks fragile, not convinced an allrounder is needed in place of a batsman. I guess they a worried about getting through the overs in the heat.