Australia vs New Zealand - ODI Series

[Dexter]

FMD I turned it off and missed the last 14 overs. I'm not sure how Stoinis sees the ball with those goofy eyes of his.

 

[Unbreakable]

FMD I turned it off and missed the last 14 overs. I'm not sure how Stoinis sees the ball with those goofy eyes of his.

He always looks like he puffed a fat joint before going out to bat. But hey, whatever works!

 

[ZTop]

Stoinis ugh. Sproj is going to punch a wall.

Hahah gunna eat your words

 

[1910]

This is a good time to bring up the fact that Stoinis averages 36 in FC w/ 4x 100's & 16x 50's..

I'd be getting him on the plane to India, I rate him so much higher than Mitch Marsh it's not funny. Marsh is probably a better bowler, but we're playing in India, neither of them are going to be bowling more than 10-15 overs an innings regardless.

Predictable.

He bats at three for Victoria in the Shield. 36 from your three; not great.

 

[Unbreakable]

Predictable.

He bats at three for Victoria in the Shield. 36 from your three; not great.

Predictable that you would find some obscurity to complain about, where he bats at shield level has no barring on what he can do with bat & ball. I said he's a better (batting) version of Mitchell Marsh, which if you'll recall, is exactly what we wanted out of a number 6 to replace Watson, someone who can average mid to high 30's (ideally ~40 odd) and hold up an end with decent pace bowling. We were obviously hoping Marsh would develop some form of batting, but he hasn't (FC average of 29, Test average of 23).

Unless of course you can name a batting all rounder who has a higher FC average and can also bowl pace in the mid to high 130's, I don't see how Stoinis wouldn't be an extremely viable candidate to replace Mitch Marsh on the India tour, especially considering we already have several all-rounders who bowl spin.

 

[Sproj]

Plus the last two years, Stoinis has averaged over 40 with the bat in FC. Man I feel sick supporting this Prima Donna.

 

[1910]

Predictable that you would find some obscurity to complain about, where he bats at shield level has no barring on what he can do with bat & ball. I said he's a better (batting) version of Mitchell Marsh, which if you'll recall, is exactly what we wanted out of a number 6 to replace Watson, someone who can average mid to high 30's (ideally ~40 odd) and hold up an end with decent pace bowling. We were obviously hoping Marsh would develop some form of batting, but he hasn't (FC average of 29, Test average of 23).

Unless of course you can name a batting all rounder who has a higher FC average and can also bowl pace in the mid to high 130's, I don't see how Stoinis wouldn't be an extremely viable candidate to replace Mitch Marsh on the India tour, especially considering we already have several all-rounders who bowl spin.

Obscurity- where someone bats when discussing a batting line up for a Test? Right well Renshaw at 8 then- nothing wrong with that. Makes perfect sense.

The predictable part was someone doing well at ODI or 20/20 and then you gushing over them and saying I have always loved them I loved them even before I met them.

Other obscure fact is he hardly bowls for Victoria in the Shield; 19 wickets and 876 runs against from the last three years. That's in a back to back Shield winning side and they don't use him- he is a batsman at three.

8 overs an innings this season, 6 the year before and 6 the year before that.

 

[1910]

Plus the last two years, Stoinis has averaged over 40 with the bat in FC. Man I feel sick supporting this Prima Donna.

Last two years have easily been his best with the bat- certainly not ball at Shield level. But if he is doing well at three for Victoria the last two years (not this season) why would you move him and make him bowl also?

 

[Sproj]

Last two years have easily been his best with the bat- certainly not ball at Shield level. But if he is doing well at three for Victoria the last two years (not this season) why would you move him and make him bowl also?

To be fair, I am openly not in love with the bloke, I want to punch him in the face but he is doing a lot of things to get himself noticed. Would I pick him in the test side? Certainly not but I just don't like him.

I also rate Cartwright higher but that is based mostly on Hilton's potential. I also think (and this is purely my opinion) that Wildermuth has the most potential of all our upcoming all rounders.

That said, while I want to see Mitch Marsh succeed, he is just so imposing, the reality is that his FC and Test record are pretty average unfortunately. That leaves Henriques and Stoinis really and Henriques has rightly or wrongly fallen out of favour.

So factor all that in and the context of just how good that innings yesterday was (albeit ODI and not FC) and I can understand calls for him to be considered for the test squad, particularly if he backs it up even remotely next game.

His bowling has improved, he has gotten quicker and more accurate of late and he not only arrested the (all to common) collapse yesterday, he then carried the tail on his back like I've rarely ever seen in any format before and would have won it single-handedly if Hazlewood was more match aware. Pretty good qualities to have in a test number 6.

 

[Battler]

It was a brilliant innings, but a sort of stars aligned perfectly scenario (like Faulkner against England in that Brisbane ODI where he saved us from certain defeat). Stoinis is performing alright with the bat in FC cricket of late, but he would get humbled big time in India.

I can't believe Mitch Marsh is going on tour; he's batting worse than a tail ender of late, and his bowling, with a test average of 37 or something close to it, is extremely overrated.

 

[1910]

To be fair, I am openly not in love with the bloke, I want to punch him in the face but he is doing a lot of things to get himself noticed. Would I pick him in the test side? Certainly not but I just don't like him.

I also rate Cartwright higher but that is based mostly on Hilton's potential. I also think (and this is purely my opinion) that Wildermuth has the most potential of all our upcoming all rounders.

That said, while I want to see Mitch Marsh succeed, he is just so imposing, the reality is that h.
is FC and Test record are pretty average unfortunately. That leaves Henriques and Stoinis really and Henriques has rightly or wrongly fallen out of favour.

So factor all that in and the context of just how good that innings yesterday was (albeit ODI and not FC) and I can understand calls for him to be considered for the test squad, particularly if he backs it up even remotely next game.

His bowling has improved, he has gotten quicker and more accurate of late and he not only arrested the (all to common) collapse yesterday, he then carried the tail on his back like I've rarely ever seen in any format before and would have won it single-handedly if Hazlewood was more match aware. Pretty good qualities to have in a test number 6.

Let's not let one innings in ODI lose sight of the bigger picture here.

He's 27- he's not a rookie 20 year old.
He's played Shield Cricket for eight years. Debut at the 'Gabba caught off Harris in 2009.
He's averaged four games a year in those eight years- that's not even half a season.
He's been to two states trying to get a run.
He's averaging 14 this season from 87 runs.

I am trying to be fair; but does any of that scream rush me into a Test side? It could be a great launching pad for him, it could be his Roy in 2003 moment. But it isn't yet.

Last two years before this current one have been good, and his innings yesterday was great. But those two factors don't mean you get squeezed into a Test side.

 

[1910]

I'm still yet to see a convincing innings from Lynn in ODIs to suggest he warrants a spot in the ODI team full time. He had a golden opportunity in his first match but threw it away with a slog shot when it wasn't needed.

Roy never scored a one day 100 for Queensland from 85 games.

 

[mitch222]

Roy never scored a one day 100 for Queensland from 85 games.

Roy was picked for his all rounder abilities not a top order batsmen

 

[Unbreakable]

The predictable part was someone doing well at ODI or 20/20 and then you gushing over them and saying I have always loved them I loved them even before I met them.

Never change 1910, why do you always resort to lies and hyperbole when I try and gave a civil discussion with you? You're welcome to go back and check the Aus vs India thread where I suggested we add him to the ODI squad, well before anyone in the media suggested it.

 

[Sproj]

Anyway, its Stoinis, why are we arguing over him? He is just too beautiful.

 

[1910]

Never change 1910, why do you always resort to lies and hyperbole when I try and gave a civil discussion with you? You're welcome to go back and check the Aus vs India thread where I suggested we add him to the ODI squad, well before anyone in the media suggested it.

You mean this statement?

Handscomb has been brought in to replace Lynn. They'll name a replacement for Mitch Marsh today. You'd assume it'd be a pace bowling all-round like Hilton Cartwright or Marcus Stoinis.

You didn't even commit to him! That's not rock solid selection policy. Now he's Test match material but yesterday played no part.

 

[Unbreakable]

You didn't even commit to him! That's not rock solid selection policy. Now he's Test match material but yesterday played no part.

Who said he was Test match material? I said he should replace Mitch Marsh on the India tour because it's going to be better to have a "Batting" pace all-rounder than a "Bowling" pace all-rounder.. It's an extremely likely scenario that Mitch Marsh or whoever replaces him will not even get a game, we're going to be playing the spinning all-rounders or specialist batsmen.

In the unlikely scenario that was suffer an injury or two whilst on tour, who would you rather have come in at 5 or 6 for us, a guy who bats top of the order in FC and averages 36, or a guy who's been handed everything in his life on a silver platter and has virtually never made runs at any 4 or 5 day level? I know my answer.