If maxwell and the marsh brothers are back in there cannot be enough quality in the state game, or the selectors have got a bit mixed up. There does seem some odd decisions made selection wise lately for Australia.
Coming off the back of a couple of series wins they may well do better than us in India. A lot rests of Warner and smith thou for runs
On the money
@ppccopener ! If the Indians work out Smith and Warner early, we are in trouble!
I can't understand why they gave Cartwright a game in Sydney, without bothering to take him to India.
Think ahead and put in a guy you want to take on tour.
I'm ok with them dropping players back to state cricket to build their technique. But they have to knock on the door to get back in.
From memory, Matt Hayden made over 1000 runs in three consecutive seasons before being put back into the test team.
After the 2005 Ashes, Michael Clarke got dropped but runs and a double century at state level and heavy runs in ODI's kept him in contention. It was only Watson's injury that got him into the team for the 2006/7 Ashes. Once back though, he made two hundreds in two games and the rest is history as they say.
These guys need consistency. Maxwell has one good innings for Australia in 10. Sure on that day he is a match winner, but you can't be in an international team at the prospect of being a hero, but ending up being a zero most of the time.
Shaun Marsh can't stay fit.
Sorry, why was Mitch Marsh in the team in the first place? As someone that likes to call themselves an all-rounder, i support there being one in the team. But the selectors need to set a criteria and stick to it.
An all-rounder must be able to be picked on one discipline alone. Meaning they should be able to be picked in the team as either a batsmen or a bowler and just happen to do the other pretty well. Mitchell Marsh doesn't fit this criteria.
Author
Topic: India vs Australia Test series (Read 104083 times)