With Michael Clarke and Mitch Marsh likely to join Australia’s next Test tour, of the West Indies in June, two of Australia’s current top-six could be facing the axe.
Rookie strokemaker Joe Burns, inconsistent West Australian Shaun Marsh and veteran all-rounder Shane Watson will all have their positions scrutinised by the selectors.
Based solely on their efforts in this Test at the SCG, all three deserved to be retained. That won’t happen though, unless both Clarke and the younger Marsh are unavailable for the first Test in Dominica.
If he’s fit for the Windies tour, Clarke is an automatic selection. Mitch Marsh, meanwhile, is so highly regarded by the selectors and has been so impressive in his brief Test career that he also could be recalled immediately.
The 23-year-old put Watson on notice with mature knocks in the UAE, followed by more expansive and exhilarating batting at Adelaide. He had also shown he can operate with the dependability and frugality, if not necessarily the potency, Australia seek from their fifth bowler.
Marsh’s hamstring injury in the second Test at Brisbane eased the pressure on Watson. Yet continued failures with the bat ensured that he entered this final Test in Sydney perhaps playing for his career.
Familiar criticism had emerged about his failure to make Test runs when Australia most need them. Watson often is subjected to unfair slurs, but he has earned this particular one. With the bat he recently has made a habit of struggling when the pressure is on and then cashing in when it is not.
On last year’s Ashes tour of England, he laboured while the series was alive, returning 136 runs at 23 over the first three Tests. Once England had retained the Ashes, he boosted his figures with impressive but effectively meaningless innings of 68 and 176 in the final two matches.
In the return series Down Under, Watson scraped together just 97 runs at 19 from his first five innings. By the time he finally made an impact, clattering 108 in the second innings at Perth, England were a broken side and Australia were all but guaranteed of regaining the urn.
This summer, he made just 141 runs at 23 across the first three Tests as Australia and India fought for possession of the Border-Gavaskar trophy. These figures do not tell the full story either. It must be noted that those three Tests were played on the flattest of decks against a toothless Indian attack. The circumstances could scarcely have been more amiable for an Australian Test batsman, yet Watson floundered, regularly gifting his wicket to the tourists.
To be fair to Watson, his bowling against India has been wonderful. Series figures of 4-222 do not accurately reflect the value he has offered to his side with 76.4 overs of typically accurate, clever and economical bowling.
Watson’s workload with the ball is the heaviest it has been for years. Only twice has he sent down more overs in a series – during the 2013 Ashes (although he bowled just 9.5 overs per innings then compared to 11 this summer) and when India toured Australia six years ago. That would suggest that the Australian coaches and medical team believe his body is in good shape. How long, though, will the selectors put up with his ineffectiveness when series are there to be won?
Mitch Marsh has shown enough in his four Tests to suggest that he should be able to least match Watson’s output with the bat, while performing a similar holding role with the ball.
Of course, it is quite possible that both all-rounders may be included in the team for the Windies and push forward together into the tour of England. Burns appears the man most vulnerable to being jettisoned, despite his valuable hauls of 58 and 66 in this Test. ‘Last in, first out’, goes the saying about sporting selection.
The sometimes unwarranted opportunities offered to Shaun Marsh in the past suggest he is a favourite of the Australian hierarchy. Having collected a solid 254 runs at 42 this series it is hard to see him being dropped ahead of Burns.
The young Queenslander may have to wait until Chris Rogers makes his scheduled post-Ashes retirement before he gets another crack at Test cricket, this time in his favoured spot at the top of the order.
With Watson seeming to have saved his spot once more thanks to a late-series resurgence, the final spot in Australia’s top six looks set to be fought for by the brothers Marsh.
DingoGray
Roar Guru
I think the argument likely to be pointless. I'll have a fair bet that both Clarke and M Marsh break down in the World Cup and we be discussing who the 2 reserves are for the Windies tour.
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
Yes I get your point, but my point is that if the best players are going to play their best in a position that Watson plays his best, then he's not good enough for that position. In the best 5 (Warner, Rogers, Watson, Clarke, Smith) he is the weakest link. That means it's up to him to perform where it suits them for him to play, not for the team to shuffle to suit him. I doubt they will have any problems finding a batsman who can average 35 in test cricket at 6. My point is that there likely is not anybody better than that. Due to his age you have to consider that M Marsh or J Burns average 35 for a year or two is better than Watson since he won't be around in a year or two. But anyway my point is you put your best batsmen where it suits them, then fill around them. Not the other way around.
JMW
Guest
16 to go boys and girls...dig deep, let's get that double ton!
JMW
Guest
I like it. Give SOK another go.
JMW
Guest
Good point Winston.
JMW
Guest
Yep, and by the way, Jeff Moss should have got a few more tests. Who wants to contribute to that thread? The biggest selection duds, players who were dudded a career?
JMW
Guest
Given Clarke has a biscuit back, I think Smith should remain test skipper and Pup can concentrate on his batting.
JMW
Guest
I'm on your page Bear, it's a game based on statistics. Selectors should be made accountable to the Australian public. We pay for the bloody game! I want to see them justify all of their selections by paying deference to the first class records of players. Enough of this searching for the next Dougie Walters (even he earned a spot at first class level) and pick on form and merit. They had a great reality tv show a few years back where the public picked the AFL local team. They won the flag. I reckon the public would always do so better job then the NSP!
JMW
Guest
Spot on Brian. I'd never put money on Lyon to bowl a team out on the last day. He's merely a serviceable tweaker. I'm still dirty that Hussey gave him the song. That was an obvious duty for the pugilist Warner. C'mon Roarers, let's get this one up to 200 posts!!
Don Freo
Guest
Yadav too?
Winston
Guest
But that's not it. It's not just about comparing him vs someone else at 3. It's comparing if you were to swap him with a guy in a different position, what is the net result of the gains and losses of the 2 combined by them moving positions? That can be easily worked out by looking at batting averages at different positions.
Old Creeker
Guest
I have this strange feeling that we need 20 wickets to win a test. With that in mind, and two quality all-rounders in the potential XI, Aus could name two front line spinners if it's a dry track (which the Windies have done in the past.) For example: Rogers Warner Watson Smith Clarke/S.Marsh M.Marsh Haddin Johnson Harris SOK Lyon Batting down to 10 (SOK is handy), a strong top, middle and lower order, 6 legitimate bowling options, components of reverse, spins both ways... even if the Pom's produce another dusty Lords, this XI would win more than it loses...
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
I think if he's going to be in the team, it's got to suit the better players. If somebody else can average 55 at 3, and Watson will struggle at 6, he needs to make way for somebody else. I just don't think that scenario is likey and I honestly believe 4 and 5 is where Smith and Clarke are wanted to be played, and happy to play there.
Winston
Guest
Based on recent performances it's pretty simple. If it's Watson vs M Marsh for the all rounder's spot, Watson wins because of his superior bowling. Next question is where should Watson bat. If we accept that he must be in the team, then he should bat at the position where he gets the most runs, without compromising someone else the spot. Eg, let's say Watson gets 35 at 3, or 10 at 6; some other batsman gets 55 at 3 or 45 at 6. On both scenarios, the other batsman is a better batsman than Watson, but it wouldn't make any sense to put Watson at 6 and the other guy at 3 because the marginal difference when adding it all up would mean you lose 15 runs off your total score. I think that's why he's still batting at 3. So let's leave him there. Next q is Joe Burns vs S Marsh. Surely has to be Burns?
Boris
Guest
Spot on John. What's the point of having a 'solid' middle order if the number 3 position is brittle? We burnt Khawaja throwing him in at 3 and now we want to do the same to Burns?!
Linedropout
Roar Pro
I'm very interested to know your First XI for the next Test, JMW.
Linedropout
Roar Pro
JMW - Bowling against arguably the most adept Test team against spin is always going to be a tough task; Rahane batted superbly on the final day. Don Freo - I'd almost add Ravi Ashwin to that list if SOK bowled.
JMW
Guest
Don, lol, you old sand groper you :P
ChrisLove
Guest
My 11 going to the Carribean ROGERS WARNER BURNS SMITH CLARKE/S MARSH M MARSH HADDIN JOHNSTON HARRIS HAZLEWOOD O'KEEF S Marsh only plays if Clarke is injured. Watson comes in for Mitch if injured. Watson has proven himself to NOT be a top order Batsman. He needs to be picked as an alrounder or not at all and Marsh is a longer term option that would also mean we arent left with another mass exodous (rogers/clarke/haddin/watson/harris/siddle) like we had a few years back. Burns deserves a crack. Coming out of Adelaide i thought Lyon had finally turned it on. The following three tests showed he isn't the gun spinner we need. Who's to say SOK given the same support couldn't deliver Lyon-adelaide performances on a more refular basis? I also want to see more overs out of Smith.
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
Of course. But while an average player can have decent stats, a good player won't have bad stats. If they were a good player, they would be scoring runs, and therefore have a decent average.