No surprises as Australia make just one change to Test squad for New Zealand series

In reality, the issue with Mitch Marsh is more his batting is such that if you are going to include him you feel like you may as well just include a specialist bowler who can bat a bit, as they will probably offer as much with the bat as Marsh. By including Marsh at the expense of a batsman you are significantly weakening the batting, basically sacrificing a batsman for an extra bowler, so if you are going to do that, may as well go all the way and select a proper bowler.

I realise Mitchell played in the second Test, Mark.I left out the word "his"when talking about "his first test". I still think he did well and wouldn't be out of place in the touring squad.

Mitchell didn’t play in the first test, he played in the second due to De Grandhomme’s injury. If de Grandhomme for the Australia tests is fit he is the main NZ all rounder, and Mitchell doesn’t come into consideration.

To follow up on the spinner problem. Hohns suggested today that an extra player could be bought into the squad if Sydney looks like being a spinners wicket. As the article said, no spinner features in the top 15 wicket-takers in shield cricket. SOK and Swepson's 10 wickets each are tops. And Agar has three wickets @ an average of 136. Maybe as the article suggests they rely on Labs and Smith to do the job.

There's no batting concussion sub named. Outrageous this was overlooked. I'm outraged. Outraged I tells ya.

Yep, he did well but I think that’s what’s called a statistical outlier. In any situation, the probability will be greater that Cummins, Starc or Hazlewood will will take a wicket. The chances Marsh will take wickets often enough aren’t good enough to offset the low probability he will score significant runs.

SOK is a decent spinner. There was a significant thought on that last tour of India where it's the rare occasion of several tests in a row of having 2 spinners, that it might have been a bit of a bowl-off between him and Lyon for the primary spinner spot, and after SOK rolled through India in the first game, Lyon largely outbowled him for the rest of the series to keep the spot. SOK has unfortunately shot himself in the foot a bit with off-field issues also. SOK has certainly been, year on year, the best spinner in the country by first class stats. I think he's underrated largely because people like spinners who turn the ball a bit more. But also, there's the chance that his FC stats are also better in large part because he gets to play a lot more games in better conditions for spinners compared to spinners from other parts of the country. I also think that a "second spinner" tends to have an advantage in terms of overall test average, in that they generally only play in conditions that are good for spinners (where 2 spinners are required), while the main spinner has to put up with playing in much less spin friendly conditions also. SOK could certainly be a decent second spinner at the SCG. But I still think that the balance of the team would be much better served by just using Labushagne as the second spinner and keeping the three quicks, than ditching a quick for a spinner and then deciding you need to ditch a batsman for an allrounder because you still want a third pace option.

Not sure all our spinners are second rate. I have always thought Steve O'Keefe is a very good spinner, and is extremely underrated. On certain pitches (SCG) he would be very useful for Australia. His actual figures are superior to Lyon in just about every facet of the game. Test average of 29.40 (Lyon 32.36). F/C average 24.58 (Lyon 34.56). And no, I am not putting Lyon down in any way, as he is arguably in the top three or four spinners who have played for Australia. On those probable spinning pitches (SCG/MCG) where an extra spinner would be handy, he would have to be considered.

Hopefully we can just do without for the time being happily relying on Marnus to basically be the fifth bowler. Anything else just looks to weaken the team. Maybe in time Cameron Green will become that guy. The fact that he has initially been selected purely as a bowler, but then when his back injury happens he's able to be selected purely as a batsman suggests, at least at first class level (which is different to test level) he seems like a real possibility as being a genuine allrounder - ie someone who could make the team on either his batting or bowling alone - since he has already done exactly that. But he's still way too young and raw. Would want a couple more seasons in him, let his body settle and get past the phase where injuries affect his bowling a lot, and let him continue to improve. Most of the talk I've heard about an allrounder for this summer has been around the thought that if they want a second specialist spinner for the SCG they would likely want to bring in an allrounder also. With the dearth of quality spinners around, I reckon we'd be better off just having Labushagne be that second spinner and having 3 specialist quicks, than weakening both the batting and the bowling by dropping one of our top quicks for a second-rate specialist spinner and then dropping one of our batsmen for a second-rate "all-rounder".

That was 2 games ago (and 2 weeks ago). He's good to go.

If it really popped out, he ain't playing on Saturday..

James Pattinson would have to be a good chance to play at the MCG in the 2nd test on his home ground. Over the last couple of years on the flat wicket there Stark and Hazelwood have not looked very effective at all. Last year only Cummings looked like taking a wicket against India. I think Patto will be more effective a the MCG than either Starc or Hazelwood. His record there being his home ground is better than either Hazelwood or Starc. If Patto plays a test this summer that will be probably his only chance. Even though I am sure he would bowled well with Pink Ball in either Adelaide or Perth if given the chance. Hopefully there is till more test cricket left in patto when his opportunity comes.

I am not a great MMarsh fan, but he did take figures of 5/46 and 2/40 in his only test for nearly 12 months. Pretty good figures really. And yes his batting was only 17 and 24. However if we are looking for an allrounder he would come into calculations. The only other I can think of is Stoinus. Any other suggestions?

Surely they can squeeze a Marsh or two into the squad, even if injured?

On a flat wicket like Adelaide when the quicks are flagging and getting nothing, someone like Marnus looks far more likely to snare a wicket than a medium like Marsh. If conditions improved Marsh’s chances of getting a wicket you’d want to have the frontline quicks back on rather than Marsh anyway.

So the selectors wait until he is ready. He will let them know I suppose.

What is the point of selecting someone who obviously does not want to be in the team? How could that be of any benefit to him or Australian cricket?

Keep selecting him.

Will Pocovski has been selected a couple of times but has unfortunately withdrawn due to issues around his mental health. What are the selectors supposed to do, march him out at gunpoint?

Another good WA boy...began at Scarborough while his dad was coaching in WA.