With Shane Watson’s dismal performance in Cardiff, there have been calls for him to be replaced with Mitch Marsh – and with good reason.
Watson isn’t taking wickets, or scoring runs, which are what all-rounders are meant to do. One name that hasn’t been mentioned is James Faulkner.
He has been seen as more of a ODI or Twenty20 player, but he has good credentials to perhaps warrant a call-up for the secon Test, even though he isn’t in the squad.
The selectors may have made a mistake in not including him and here are the reasons why.
Firstly, let’s compare their overall traits. Marsh is a strong middle order batsman, and he can also bowl up to 135kp/h.Faulkner lacks the ability to get up to that pace, however he possesses a slower ball which can deceive even the best batsmen.
He is also a useful lower-order batsman who can hit the ball with power.
Now let’s look at the bowling. One of the main problems with the 1st Test for Australia was keeping the economy rate down, and with Faulkner’s bag of tricks, he would be a good choice to try to slow England down if the runs were flowing.
Marsh has more pace, however Australia aren’t exactly short on that, with Mitchell Johnson, Josh Hazelwood, Mitchell Starc (if he’s fit) and Ryan Harris’s replacement, Pat Cummins, providing a pace attack that on its day is impossible to beat.
We can now look at the batting side of things. Marsh is a middle order batsman with plenty of skill and in my opinion, he is a better batsman than Faulkner.
However, Faulkner can get quick runs on the board well and bats lower down the order. Australia’s short tail would mean he could bat as low as 9, which would mean England’s bowlers have to work even harder to knock Australia over than they do now.
Overall, they are both great all-rounders, and I believe that Mitch Marsh should be called in for the next Test. I can’t help wondering if Faulkner would have an impact on the series had he been selected in the squad.
The only thing that is certain is that Shane Watson’s time in the team, not only for this Ashes series but his whole career, is almost up.
There is no shortage of successors who can improve the team and win us games for years to come.
Don Freo
Guest
Marsh has no energy? What are you watching. He's a dynamo, super-popular and a natural and proven leader.
twodogs
Guest
Faulkner is as good an all rounder as I've ever seen. Something special and would also add 'energy' to the team. Marsh does not have as much of this 'energy' and Watson none. Marshs' inclusion would certainly add to the team though. I have a feeling that if you scratch the surface a little, there's still some dirt with Clarke and Watson so, subconciously sabotaging each other. Warner said Watson was 'doing all the right things' (bar scoring runs and taking wickets!) so success must be just around the corner! Unfortunately, the cure for agrophobia is also 'just around the corner' but the agrophobic is too scared to get there!
Harvey Wilson
Roar Rookie
Didn't Faulkner get done for DUI or something, that will hurt his chances.
Broken-hearted Toy
Guest
Faulks can't do much sitting on the naughty step.
UncleRon
Guest
Much as I would agree with you on potential and probably overall ability, Jimmy has just been done for DUI so he has to put his head down and do some penance. Faulkner is definitely the better bowler and there's only a fingernail between them on first-class batting averages but Marsh does have to be ranked higher with good Test form. If Faulkner was to come into the team, and it probably would only be if the series is lost or in desperate circumstances, it might have to be accompanied by Nevill replacing Haddin, with the unusual step of batting a debut keeper at 6. While he has a pretty decent first-class average of 44 Nevill is a dour type (strike rate 47) and might be better suited there before the hitters, Faulkner and Johnson. That makes 6, 7 and 8 look a bit stronger. But I don't think it will happen until the fourth Test, by which time we could be gone.