Seven questions from Mitch Marsh's Ashes innings

Mitchell Marsh was a controversial selection for the 2017-18 Ashes series on Australian soil. But the 26-year-old’s commendable performances have silenced some detractors and posed some interesting questions.

1. Who would’ve predicted Marsh’s performances?
Not me, certainly not Marsh scoring 181 in a Test match. And what’s more, stepping up when needed to help Australia win the game.

A lot of pro-Marsh people came out after the match and said to his critics ‘he showed you’. But can you blame us? He was averaging 21 after 21 Tests and was statistically speaking the worst number six in Test match history.

Marsh had played a crucial role in helping Australia win just one of those 21 Tests, the third Test against New Zealand in 2015. In other victories, his contribution tended to be negligible.

Marsh’s mediocrity with the bat was a key factor in our losses in the UAE in 2014, England in 2015 and Sri Lanka in 2016. No Australian Test cricketer in recent memory has got more chances without delivering than Marsh, so it stood to reason that he would fail again in Perth.

He started off as if keen to fulfil low expectations – he dropped a catch, bowled poorly. Then he played the innings of his life.

I never in a million years thought he had it in him. A handy 70? Sure. A couple of useful wickets? Absolutely. Maybe even a century – he was overdue, averaging almost 10 runs less at Test level than he gets domestically.

But 181? Nope.

2. Is this a new dawn? Or a massive fluke?
181 is a lot of runs. But Jason Gillespie once scored a Test double century. It was on a decent batting pitch, his home wicket, partnering one of the greatest batsmen in history who is in the form of his life, against a demoralised attack.

Still, the game was in crisis, Marsh was under a heap of pressure, and it was an English team. And it was a hell of a lot more runs than any other batsman scored in the Test except for Steve Smith.

But… Marsh’s first-class average has always been around 30.

He’s always looked like someone capable of scoring centuries in domestic games. (Remember those two centuries in the warm-up games on the 2015 Ashes?) He’s never looked like someone capable of doing it repeatedly. A batting average of 30 isn’t very good, and it’s been 30 a long time.

Can Marsh repeat it? Or at least maintain his early season Sheffield Shield form? The next two Tests will be crucial.

In my heart, I feel that it was a fluke – but in my heart I thought he’d never get 181 so what would I know?

(Photo by Philip Brown/Getty Images)

3. What about his bowling?
It was very underwhelming in the last Test. Hilton Cartwright-esque quality. You can’t tell me those overs couldn’t have been provided by David Warner, or Smith, or (if they’d been picked) Glenn Maxwell or Travis Head.

To be fair, Marsh has hardly bowled since he came back from injury. Yet it was the main reason he got back in the team. Marsh was recalled on some decent batting form and the memory of his solid part-time bowling contributions at Test level in the past. (And Darren Lehmann’s determination to show he wasn’t an idiot for championing Marsh all these years.)

I get the feeling it’ll take a while for his bowling to bounce back to what it was – but again, my feelings about Mitch Marsh are so confused now.

4. What changed?
There’s been a lot of talk about the work Marsh did on his technique over the winter. And maybe that was the magic bullet. Mind you, I seem to recall a bit of ‘I’ve been working on my technique a lot lately’ talk from him in previous years, which hasn’t pan out.

I’ve got a different theory.

It’s this – his batting got better because he stopped bowling. Marsh could finally focus on one thing and it allowed him to flourish.

Smith’s batting has flourished since he stopped bowling. Steve Waugh’s batting got better the less he bowled. Ditto Michael Clarke. The pressure to be a top-class spinner hasn’t been great for Glenn Maxwell’s batting.

Marsh’s bowling – the thing that kept him in the Test team despite going so badly with the bat – might have been the very thing that’s held back his batting all these years.

Or am I wrong?

We’re going to find out, and pretty quick, because Lehmann has made a point of insisting that Marsh do a lot of bowling. If I were Marsh, I’d be going ‘sure Boof’, but secretly spending most of my time practising batting. His future is as a specialist batter.

But then I never would’ve predicted that innings of 181, so what would I know?

(AAP Image/Dave Hunt)

5. What does this mean for the future?
I’m not optimistic for two reasons.

Firstly, it shows the Australian selection panel are still in love with the idea of an all-rounder – despite the fact it was having a specialist number six that saved Australia in both the first and second Test this summer.

This has caused us no end of trouble since 2009 because it means a player has a green light to underperform with the bat if they can bowl a few overs. For me, it’s the single biggest factor keeping us a third-rate Test nation overseas.

Everything’s fine now but I’ve got this awful feeling that the selectors won’t apply the same tough standards policy to Mitchell Marsh they applied to Peter Handscomb, Usman Khawaja, Shaun Marsh, Cartwright and Maxwell. And it will cost us down the track.

Secondly, the selectors will think they’re geniuses.

They are on a hot streak at the moment, with Bancroft, Paine, and the Marshes. There’s a lot of high-fiving going on. But I don’t trust these selectors.

This is still the same team that masterminded a 2-1 loss to India, and a 1-1 draw to Bangladesh. That showed no faith to Khawaja or Cartwright in India, or Steve O’Keefe and Shaun Marsh in Bangladesh or Maxwell, Matt Renshaw and Handscomb in Australia.

This is the same team selection that does silly things like calling Ed Cowan too old and then picking Shaun Marsh, and dropping O’Keefe due to form for the series in Bangladesh and then rushing him back to play in the second Test in that series.

A selection team that seems prejudiced against players whose techniques are a little strange (Handscomb, Maxwell) or who are too silent on the field (Peter Nevill), or are too slow (Jackson Bird, Chadd Sayers), or who are too lippy against the selection panel (Cowan, Cameron White).

Maybe I’m wrong. Maybe this is a turning point and the selectors have turned into geniuses. But can we win a few series overseas first before all the celebrations get out of control?

(AAP Image/David Mariuz)

6. Why do you hate Mitch Marsh?
I don’t hate him. Most of his critics don’t. He seems like a nice guy. He’s really talented. It’s a lazy cheap shot to dismiss critics of Marsh as ‘haters’.

What we do hate is the outrageous favouritism he’s received from the selectors over the years – especially when compared to other potential number sixes like Glenn Maxwell, Travis Head, David Hussey, Moises Henriques, Peter Handscomb, Callum Ferguson, Cameron White, Michael Klinger, Hilton Cartwright and George Bailey. None of them got a 21-Test trial period.

We hate the lack of consequence for his poor performance. We hate this theory that you need five bowlers when time and time again it’s shown that you don’t, but you do need six good batsmen.

If Marsh starts batting badly and gets dropped with the same speed Handscomb, Maxwell, Cartwright and Khawaja have been over the past 12 months, you’ll see a lot of that ‘hate’ go away.

181 goes some way to repaying the faith. But there’s still a lot of selector debt for him to pay off.

7. What do you want for the future?
A top six that is judged by the amount of runs they score. If someone can bowl a few overs as well, great – but that shouldn’t keep them in the team if they’re not scoring runs. It’ll mean more accountability.

Also, a little more faith for players going through bad patches. It’ll be worth it in the long run. That player will learn how to get themselves out of trouble – which in turn will help Australia’s ability to get out of trouble, which has been a major weakness.

And lastly, for Mitch Marsh to have a good Christmas. He’s deserved it. That innings was awesome.