Australian Cricket Season 2018-2019

[drron]

Oh yes. In his hey day he was fabulous. But he hung around when he should have left.

But there was still a lot more reason for hope with Mark Waugh compared to the Marshes.

 

[JohnK]

On another note SMarsh makes two barely passably decent scores in a Shield match and is now said to be set for 4 Tests against India. Gimme strength.

MMarsh is also set after yesterday's 2 wickets and 21 runs?

 

[rock86]

Put it in context. As per above.

But there was still a lot more reason for hope with Mark Waugh compared to the Marshes.

I understand his hanging around for too long is to be used as a comparison, but I don't agree with the comparison and have a similar view as drron.

Mark Waugh had proven his ability throughout his test career by producing results and benefited from that goodwill towards the end. However, the Marsh brothers have shown that they can not consistently perform at test level and as such should not get any benefit - yet they are continually picked on 'potential ability' when the cold hard statistics are polar opposite.

 

[drron]

Ah Pushka now I know why you a bit against Mark Waugh-when dropped he was replaced by Darren Lehmann--incidentally ahead of a young Michael Clarke.
Waugh was dropped in October 2001.A year before in the Ashes in England he scored 2 centuries so his hanging around was a lot shorter than the Marsh brothers.
Comparing Mark Waugh and Darren Lehmann in their last 15 innings.
Waugh-524 runs,last 10-286,last 5-128.
Lehmann-429,249,117.
So on your standards good ole Darren also hung around too long.

 

[Pushka]

Ah Pushka now I know why you a bit against Mark Waugh-when dropped he was replaced by Darren Lehmann--incidentally ahead of a young Michael Clarke.
Waugh was dropped in October 2001.A year before in the Ashes in England he scored 2 centuries so his hanging around was a lot shorter than the Marsh brothers.
Comparing Mark Waugh and Darren Lehmann in their last 15 innings.
Waugh-524 runs,last 10-286,last 5-128.
Lehmann-429,249,117.
So on your standards good ole Darren also hung around too long.

I was never a Lehmann fan drron! Too blokey for me
So, next theory?

It's pretty much common knowledge that NSW dominated the selections in recent years but the Marsh brothers selection is plain weird, they must have photos.

In MrP's time the very worst sledgers (and worse) came from NSW.

 

[zenyattamondatta]

.A year before in the Ashes in England he scored 2 centuries so his hanging around was a lot shorter than the Marsh brothers.

Each of whom scored two Ashes centuries less than a year ago.

 

[drron]

Each of whom scored two Ashes centuries less than a year ago.

As did Mark Waugh immediately before his last year.
Now since those centuries S.Marsh's last 10 innings have yielded 88 runs.Last 5-21.
M Marsh last 10-104,last 5-30.
Both a lot worse than Mark Waugh's last 5 and 10 innings.

 

[VPS]

Well I'm embarrassed about what has happened to Australian cricket so I think our chairman should be too

'I'm not embarrassed' says CA chairman
Peever said he remained proud to be CA chairman despite the damning report, saying the organisation was committed to moving the game forward.

"No [I am not embarrassed]. Not at all. Because I'm … associated with something that is so important to Australia and that I feel very, very committed to," he said.

"I think there are certainly elements of the report, as I said, that we need to work on and there are 42 recommendations which we have committed to. One we have said we won't do. The rest are work in progress and in the case of several, there is a little bit of not 'what' but 'how'.

"I'm not embarrassed. I'm not embarrassed at all. We're very committed to moving the game forward and using this review as a platform to do that."

 

[Pushka]

Well I'm embarrassed about what has happened to Australian cricket so I think our chairman should be too

'I'm not embarrassed' says CA chairman
Peever said he remained proud to be CA chairman despite the damning report, saying the organisation was committed to moving the game forward.

"No [I am not embarrassed]. Not at all. Because I'm … associated with something that is so important to Australia and that I feel very, very committed to," he said.

"I think there are certainly elements of the report, as I said, that we need to work on and there are 42 recommendations which we have committed to. One we have said we won't do. The rest are work in progress and in the case of several, there is a little bit of not 'what' but 'how'.

"I'm not embarrassed. I'm not embarrassed at all. We're very committed to moving the game forward and using this review as a platform to do that."

We found it curious (being polite) that the report was not released to state CE’s until after they’d voted last week for the CA Chairman.

 

[JohnK]

Each of whom scored two Ashes centuries less than a year ago.

And Voges has a 61.9 test average to go with his First class average of 46.4 over 200+ tests.

England was really weak last Ashes. Pushover some may say. India will be a better test but then they don't play that well in Australia anyway. Interesting test series coming up and we need our best 11 on the field.

 

[rock86]

We found it curious (being polite) that the report was not released to state CE’s until after they’d voted last week for the CA Chairman.

You are most certainly being polite @Pushka describing it as such, it was nothing more then a sinister move for Peever to continue for his power hungry ego rather then the good of Australian cricket.

If CA are largely dismissive of this report's recommendations (ie. only implement the recommendations that has no effect on their governance structure), I would hope the States use their constituted power and absolve the board and start afresh - very doubtful though.

 

[Pushka]

You are most certainly being polite @Pushka describing it as such, it was nothing more then a sinister move for Peever to continue for his power hungry ego rather then the good of Australian cricket.

If CA are largely dismissive of this report's recommendations (ie. only implement the recommendations that has no effect on their governance structure), I would hope the States use their constituted power and absolve the board and start afresh - very doubtful though.

Well in reality the state CE’s should have called a halt to the vote right then and there but they didn’t. So they are culpable too. Which only goes to show that it’s a bit rotten all the way through. We do personally know quite a few SACA committee members. Not sure if it was the President/Chaiman or the CE’s who voted last week.

Leigh Sales interview was good but at the end of the day they are just hoping that it all just drops off everyone’s radar. But in reality the cricket season has just begun and it will be cricketus seasonus horribilus.

 

[RooFlyer]

We found it curious (being polite) that the report was not released to state CE’s until after they’d voted last week for the CA Chairman.

Is it known when CA received the report? If it was before the vote for Chairman was taken, and the electors hadn't seen it, or been properly briefed on the contents, than that's a bigger scandal than the ball tampering one, I reckon. Time for the Government to hint that Cricket Australia is jeopardising its tax-free status if it doesn't clean up its (corporate) act.

I've always had more sympathy for Smith and Bancroft in the ball tampering saga than many here; in the light of the report, I am firmly of the view that they have adequately served their 'time' (financially, reputationally and personally) and should be brought back into the fold, and the eject button be pushed for the Chairman and possible the rest of the Board.

 

[VPS]

Is it known when CA received the report? If it was before the vote for Chairman was taken, and the electors hadn't seen it, or been properly briefed on the contents, than that's a bigger scandal than the ball tampering one, I reckon. Time for the Government to hint that Cricket Australia is jeopardising its tax-free status if it doesn't clean up its (corporate) act.

I've always had more sympathy for Smith and Bancroft in the ball tampering saga than many here; in the light of the report, I am firmly of the view that they have adequately served their 'time' (financially, reputationally and personally) and should be brought back into the fold, and the eject button be pushed for the Chairman and possible the rest of the Board.

I think Bancroft was very hard done by and think Smith was silly so tend to agree. What are you thoughts on Warner?

 

[RooFlyer]

I think Bancroft was very hard done by and think Smith was silly so tend to agree. What are you thoughts on Warner?

Never been a fan. I know it would be hard to officially separate him out in the tampering affair, but if they could have they should have.

I think Smith was more than silly - he was culpable as, I understand, he knew what was planned beforehand, - but if ever there was demonstrated remorse ( well before the punishment) and a huge burden taken, I think you have it there.

 

[Scarlett]

Shaun Marsh seals Test spot with another top knock

NO!! SM is a great Sheffied Shield player but he cannot translate this to Test cricket. He should not be in the Test team!!

Unfortunately, the selectors can only work with what they have available. He’s a guy playing Shield cricket and averages (only just) above 40. The list of batsmen that can say that is very small at this moment... (which is very sad for Australian cricket).

The fact that SM gets picked is symptomatic of where Aus cricket is at the moment. The same poor predicament that saw Shane Watson being selected repeatedly: there’s just no one better.
(and definitely not flash in the pan types that get selected on hope that they’ll develop into a Test cricketer, but rather batsman who have demonstrated performance over at least three seasons in the Shield and average over 40: see Handscomb, Renshaw, Lasagne etc - batting averages below 40 in Shield cricket does not a Test standard batsman show)

 

[rock86]

Unfortunately, the selectors can only work with what they have available. He’s a guy playing Shield cricket and averages (only just) above 40. The list of batsmen that can say that is very small at this moment... (which is very sad for Australian cricket).

The fact that SM gets picked is symptomatic of where Aus cricket is at the moment. The same poor predicament that saw Shane Watson being selected repeatedly: there’s just no one better.
(and definitely not flash in the pan types that get selected on hope that they’ll develop into a Test cricketer, but rather batsman who have demonstrated performance over at least three seasons in the Shield and average over 40: see Handscomb, Renshaw, Lasagne etc - batting averages below 40 in Shield cricket does not a Test standard batsman show)

Maybe that is the case with SMarsh, but definitely not with his brother. There are quantifiably better all-rounders available, if the selectors want to continue on that route, yet he is continually picked for some unfounded reason.

 

[Pushka]

Is it known when CA received the report? If it was before the vote for Chairman was taken, and the electors hadn't seen it, or been properly briefed on the contents, than that's a bigger scandal than the ball tampering one, I reckon. Time for the Government to hint that Cricket Australia is jeopardising its tax-free status if it doesn't clean up its (corporate) act.

I've always had more sympathy for Smith and Bancroft in the ball tampering saga than many here; in the light of the report, I am firmly of the view that they have adequately served their 'time' (financially, reputationally and personally) and should be brought back into the fold, and the eject button be pushed for the Chairman and possible the rest of the Board.

They received it a few weeks ago and didn’t release it.

I think Smith and Bancroft looked like idiots when they fronted the media just after the event. Thought it was funny and had no idea of the gravity of what had just happened. Lehman should not have let that happen as he would have known it was serious.

 

[drron]

We definitely need Smith and Bancroft back in the batting line up.should be no place for the Marshs then.
As for an all rounder what about Wildermuth from QLD.2017/18 shield season-551 runs from 11 matches and 59 wickets,
M marsh better with the bat 441 from 6 matches but only 6 wickets in 6 matches.

Though Wildermuth is coming back from injury and in the QLD side as a batsman so far this season.

 

[Quickstatus]

Waiting for Cricket Australia leadership to resign. If its a cultural problem, then the top needs to go as well.