Starc, Marsh injuries give Australian selectors a second chance to get it right

As per your playing XI, batting line-up looks weak, particularly Warner is not in good form, we are not sure how Khawaja will perform, etc.

That batting line up looks like a dream for India. We'd be lucky to score 100 if Smith doesn't get runs and tail starts at 6. No thanks.

Was going to say exactly this. You can't discount an innings because he didn't get out when he should have, and simultaneously write off an innings where he was out incorrectly. Cricket stats are only ever counted on the score you walk off the ground with. When are people going to get over this obsession with discounting innings (usually on for a player they don't like) because there was a missed chance? If you combed through the innings of all the iconic cricket superstars, even Bradman I'm sure, you'd find plenty of dropped catches. If you reduced Tendulkar's total runs to end each innings whenever a catch was dropped or stumping missed, I don't imagine he'd be even close to his recorded 15924 test runs.

The only changes to the team that played the second Test will be injury forced. This article (as usual) is laughable. Should have a "Ha!" next to it.

In Khawaja we do have our long term number 3 but for that we need to leave him in

Khawaja averaged more then 80 in the summer , taking him out was absurd

Knowing the selectors, they will want to keep it as unchanged as possible. On form, the only player who we could justify dumping was Mitchell Marsh. Okay, so Matthew Wade too but there is no backup keeper - unless you want Handscomb to play as a keeper and then bring Khawaja in. But Wade has improved since he arrived in India, with both bat and gloves, so I suspect they'll keep him. So that means that the only two that are likely to go are the "injured" Mitchells, Marsh and Starc. I put "injured" in inverted commas since neither of them did anything to injure themselves. Marsh was for some reason kept in the team in spite of an injury (lol what?) while Starc must have rolled over the wrong way in his sleep or something. I think more realistically Marsh was dumped, while Starc is having a rest. Like for like replacements are clearly Stoinis and Cummins, but there are some big issues with both. Stoinis isn't really in form, other than a one-off ODI masterclass, and his overall record suggests he probably isn't test quality, while Cummins is a twig who feels like he can snap at any time. If they don't go with Stoinis then the two most likely are Maxwell, who has a great Indian bowling record, or Khawaja, who is in fantastic batting form, just that the selectors are worried about his ability in India. Instead of Cummins they could go with the forgotten man Bird, who is in reasonably good form and at least looks unlikely to break down in India, something that Cummins is a big risk of doing. There is also a chance that Lyon could be rested, given how dramatically his form dropped between the 1st and 2nd innings of the 2nd test. He looks overworked and a rest could be good for him. If he is rested, then Swepson will be favourite to replace him, with the surprise factor potentially helping him. I can't see them going with Agar, though Agar does have experience behind him, and, by his low standards, is in form. From what I've seen in the media, it looks like Maxwell will be playing alongside Cummins, and Lyon will be given a go, hopefully with enough rest since the 2nd test. Mind you, the only reason we had 5 bowlers was because Starc would lose form so dramatically if he was overbowled, and, with Starc out of the team, we could justify going back to 4 bowlers, and bringing Khawaja in. But it doesn't look like they are going to do this: My tips: Matt Renshaw David Warner Shaun Marsh Steve Smith Peter Handscomb Glenn Maxwell Matthew Wade (wk) Pat Cummins Steve O'Keefe Josh Hazlewood Nathan Lyon

Yep , David , a pretty reasonable cricketer in his time would be horrified if he was given this team. He's getting the reaction he wants.

Down playing the loss of Starc and barring up over Cummins is completely ridiculous ! We are all excited by Cummins return but the enormity of Starcs loss is nothing short of a disaster for our chances on tour . Starc is currently the premier strike bowler in world cricket throw in outstanding lower oder batting you have one of the first guys picked in any current world 11 !

Wow I really don't know where to start? There's as much warped logic here as there is stupefying syntax. "Original wrongs." Wrong as a noun, is an unjust, dishonest or immoral act. Nobody was "wronged" when the selectors preferred Wade over Nevill, M Marsh over Stoinis, or S Marsh over Khawaja. Nevill had his chance and failed, Khawaja was hopeless in Sri Lanka and Stoinis was never beating down the door. To call them "wrongs" is to get your definitions for adjectives and nouns mixed. It may have been *wrong* of the selectors to pick em, but that doesn't make them wrongs. Even a competent writer would know this, let alone a so called expert. Also, *original* wrongs? That implies there have been so many wrongs, you need to contextualize them. But have there been? Have we had original wrongs and more recent wrongs and historical wrongs and unoriginal wrongs, which were plagiarized from other wrongmongers? Hm????. In a world where wrongs need adjectives, the wrongdoing would be rife, but that’s hardly been the case. And then there’s these: "Starc is a loss, no doubt about that." Gee, thanks for clearing that up. Some of us were still *in doubt* about his undisputed status as one of the worlds best bowlers. "But the emergence of Pat Cummins from over-protective cotton wool." So cotton wool comes in a descriptive "over-protective" grading now? Are you aware of other grades you can buy over the counter? Maybe “overly shock proof” or “overly super insulating”? And lesser grades like, “low impact” or “not so uneconomically over-protective.” Cotton wool is cotton wool, David. To suggest that we’ve wrapped Cummins in the wrong grade is you at your ridiculous worst (and there’s something we *can* grade: your ridiculousness!) Finally Handscomb to replace Wade as keeper? I think everyone else has covered how hare brained that is already.

The first two tracks were probably as difficult as it can get for a keeper on a subcontinent wicket and keeping that in mind (pun intended), Wade has done surprisingly well. Definitely much better than many of us feared. We all expected Wade to keep woefully on tracks similar to the England-India series, but in fact Wade has kept quite competently on very difficult tracks. And his batting has shown sparks of skill and commitment to fight it out. 2 tests into the series, I think Wade has exceeded expectations thus far.

That was limited overs cricket

Agreed, make our batting stronger and get Khawaja in

Great article and yes Khawaja should never have been dropped, he was the backbone of the batting in the tests in our summer

That's what I always say to myself, but I, like so many others I suspect, keep coming back for the perverse pleasure of being riled by the sheer idiocy.

Except for Usman the Writers team is in order. He cannot manage in slow turning pitches.. Bring in Agar the all-rounder to have more spin options.

Wouldn't have thought Wade has done too much wrong really....his keeping has been better than a lot of peoiple thought it was going to be. Agree that Cummins comes straight in.

I am quite sure if that is the playing XI Australia field for the Ranchi Test, the Indian side will be licking their lips in anticipation. If the first two Tests have shown one thing, that is very simply the need to play an extra batsman in the XI. India messed it up big time by going into the Pune Test with five bowlers and changed things at Bengaluru by dropping a bowler and bringing in the extra batsman. For Australia to then go into this match with five and a half or six bowlers (depending on how well one considers Stoini's bowling), would be quite a shocker. Even with all the criticism about the Aussie selectors, I sincerely doubt they will dish that gift out to the hosts. Personally, I will play a pure batsman for Mitchell Marsh on a similar pitch. Khawaja or Maxwell. And no, I won't look at Maxwell's bowling to decide whether he makes it, just his batting - who do I think is the better batsman on these surfaces, Khawaja or Maxwell and once I have a confident answer, I will pick that batsman. Whatever else he offers, it's a bonus but should not come into the equation while deciding my number six. Starc's replacement - again, will be one of Bird or Cummins and that again should be based on what the captain thinks will be Australia's best chance to pick up 20 wickets. Lyon's injury could be a deciding factor too. If he's fit, he plays. If the selectors think he is 50-50, we saw what happened in the second innings in Bengaluru where he struggled to pick up wickets despite such a brutal surface. Will be a tough call, but might want to re-look at his selection if fitness is a problem.

Hopefully, our selectors just aren't this silly. However, I'm not putting my house on it.

I am no Shaun Marsh fan but I concede his value on the subcontinent. Yes, he was dropped on his way to his 66, but he wasn't out in the second innings until Smith's poor communication saw him not challenge the umpire's error. By the way, I see David didn't discard Smith's 109 despite being dropped four times and having a stumping chance muffed as well. Basically, Shaun Marsh, Steve Smith and David Warner have, apart from missed chances aiding them, scored similar runs. This "Warner is due" is particularly amusing. He averages 24 in India from 12 innings so he really isn't due for runs until he returns home to the grounds where he averages almost 60.