TOPIC:

swan42 wrote:

Peter North wrote:

swan42 wrote:

Peter North wrote: Just watched the S.Marsh dismissal if he reviewed it he would of been still in shocking decision by the umpire missing by a fair way and apparently S.Smith told Marsh to go meaning refer it, Marsh took it as your out go, very bad misunderstanding right there, at 2 for 67 that could well be the series.

PN is either player allowed to refer it or must it be the batsman affected by the decision?

Don't know to tbh but I reckon if it was the other way round Virat Kholi wouldn't of hesitated reviewing it .

I did see on the ABC News that it appeared that Smith was trying to get external help to determine if he should appeal.

The Umpire saw that Smith had glanced towards the pavilion and ruled that he could not refer it and sent him on his way. Fair enough until that arrogant knob Kohli decided to stick his nose into what was none of his business and make a scene while Smith was walking off. The batsman can seek advice from his partner but ultimately it is his decision whether or not to refer the decision.
Speaking of Kohli I notice that he souvenired a stump to commemorate his match winning innings of 15 and 12. Hopefully he will be a bit lighter in the pocket as well to commemorate his petulant outbursts in this game and his show of dissent with his second innings dismissal.

mikeh wrote:

swan42 wrote:

Peter North wrote:

swan42 wrote:

Peter North wrote: Just watched the S.Marsh dismissal if he reviewed it he would of been still in shocking decision by the umpire missing by a fair way and apparently S.Smith told Marsh to go meaning refer it, Marsh took it as your out go, very bad misunderstanding right there, at 2 for 67 that could well be the series.

PN is either player allowed to refer it or must it be the batsman affected by the decision?

Don't know to tbh but I reckon if it was the other way round Virat Kholi wouldn't of hesitated reviewing it .

I did see on the ABC News that it appeared that Smith was trying to get external help to determine if he should appeal.

The Umpire saw that Smith had glanced towards the pavilion and ruled that he could not refer it and sent him on his way. Fair enough until that arrogant knob Kohli decided to stick his nose into what was none of his business and make a scene while Smith was walking off. The batsman can seek advice from his partner but ultimately it is his decision whether or not to refer the decision.
Speaking of Kohli I notice that he souvenired a stump to commemorate his match winning innings of 15 and 12. Hopefully he will be a bit lighter in the pocket as well to commemorate his petulant outbursts in this game and his show of dissent with his second innings dismissal.

From what I have read a significant number might be lighter in pocket.

swan42 wrote: Mitch Marsh should be packing his bags to head back to WA for the last shield match. Assuredly, he will be made the scapegoat.

I'm not trying to be funny here but given the form of the WA team at the moment, who would you drop for Marsh and how do you consider that Mitch's presence would improve the Warriors team?
My feeling is that Australia need to bring in another batsman (Khawaja) for the next test and back their 4 front line bowlers, rather than selecting another spare parts player such as Maxwell.

mikeh: You are 100 per cent correct. The man should stay in India

mikeh wrote:

swan42 wrote: Mitch Marsh should be packing his bags to head back to WA for the last shield match. Assuredly, he will be made the scapegoat.

I'm not trying to be funny here but given the form of the WA team at the moment, who would you drop for Marsh and how do you consider that Mitch's presence would improve the Warriors team?
My feeling is that Australia need to bring in another batsman (Khawaja) for the next test and back their 4 front line bowlers, rather than bringing in another spare parts player such as Maxwell.

It was tongue in cheek mikeh. Obviously he will be dropped but he will stay in India. Is Agar still alive?

So A/M, why is Khawaja in India if he is not regarded as a selection prospect?. He scored a lot of runs in the home summer and continued to be selected despite his fielding problems. Now he appears out of favour because there is a perception he cannot play on spinning tracks. Then why take him to India at all. Maybe instead they should have used the tour to introduce Travis Head to test cricket. He is a better fieldsman and a useful part time bowler

swan42 wrote:

mikeh wrote:

swan42 wrote: Mitch Marsh should be packing his bags to head back to WA for the last shield match. Assuredly, he will be made the scapegoat.

I'm not trying to be funny here but given the form of the WA team at the moment, who would you drop for Marsh and how do you consider that Mitch's presence would improve the Warriors team?
My feeling is that Australia need to bring in another batsman (Khawaja) for the next test and back their 4 front line bowlers, rather than bringing in another spare parts player such as Maxwell.

It was tongue in cheek mikeh. Obviously he will be dropped but he will stay in India. Is Agar still alive?

Good question Swan42. Agar could probably come home and slot into the WA team without being missed too much. Barring an injury to Lyon or O'Keefe, I think his chances of selection and those of Swepson are minimal.

I don't remember 'boof' being a great fieldsman.

Phil Tufnell would be one of the worst fieldsman I ever saw at International level and that didn't stop him from playing 42 tests for England. One of his captains said that the best thing about Tufnell bowling was that he didn't have to worry about where to hide him in the field

Anchor: you may very well be right; but even so, Lehmann has moved on someone easilly in our top six batsmen in an era where Australia does not have a lot of depth in the line up for a spurious reason.