Will Shaun Marsh be better than his father for Australia?

[Richard]

Geoff Marsh performed very well between 1985/86 when he debuted and 1988/89. It was only from 1989 onwards, ironically the very time his team took a turn for the better, that his performances dropped off.

He was a fine servant during a difficult time but could not contribute enormously to the upturn. From 1989 onwards he averaged just 30, having averaged 39 up to the Pakistan tour of 1988/89.

 

[NUFAN]

Anyone remember the catch he took to get out Ijaz Ahmed at the WACA?

That was awesome.

 

[Burgey]

Geoff Marsh performed very well between 1985/86 when he debuted and 1988/89. It was only from 1989 onwards, ironically the very time his team took a turn for the better, that his performances dropped off.

He was a fine servant during a difficult time but could not contribute enormously to the upturn. From 1989 onwards he averaged just 30, having averaged 39 up to the Pakistan tour of 1988/89.

Yeah, it was a shame he didn't keep performing enough to stay in the side and enjoy the up side after so many hard years.

 

[Jakester1288]

Like to see Shaun's apparent gifts matched with dad's powers of concerntration - would be special.

Right now I'd settle just for Geoff's catching in the corden TBH.

What struck me watching him and Ronchi the other day in the T20 was, once again, something we've done to death here - the power of modern bats. Seeing guys just play a drive with no follow through and watch it sail over the boundary is crazy.

On topic: he looks the goods, but has to prove himself int he longer forms of the game. I liked his approach to the T11 though - even in that slap-dash stuff he looked a calculating cricketer. Hopefully he kicks on.

T11? Was that just a typo where you meant T20?

 

[pasag]

T11? Was that just a typo where you meant T20?

The Twenty20 match against the West Indies the other night was reduced to 11 overs per side, which is what Burgey is referring to.

 

[Jakester1288]

The Twenty20 match against the West Indies the other night was reduced to 11 overs per side, which is what Burgey is referring to.

Oh that's right.

 

[Debris]

Oh that's right.

After living through the grim times of the mid-80s, Geoff became one of my favourite players. Very limited talent-wise but possibly the toughest player to play the game.

 

[Top_Cat]

After living through the grim times of the mid-80s, Geoff became one of my favourite players. Very limited talent-wise but possibly the toughest player to play the game.

Same, actually. Was my first cricket hero. Stil has one of the best cover drives I've seen.

 

[Manee]

T11? Was that just a typo where you meant T20?

 

[morgieb]

Geoff. Was better than people reckon he is, and Shaun is far too unproven at this stage.

 

[NUFAN]

Geoff. Was better than people reckon he is, and Shaun is far too unproven at this stage.

Will Shaun Marsh be better than his father for Australia?

Was the question..

 

[Richard]

I'd have hoped it was fairly obvious that the question wasn't "is Shaun Marsh (who is playing his maiden ODI innings as I type this) better than his dad now?"

Evidently not.

 

[Richard]

After living through the grim times of the mid-80s, Geoff became one of my favourite players. Very limited talent-wise but possibly the toughest player to play the game.

There's so many candidates I don't think any one person can ever be considered to be "the toughest" player to play.

 

[NUFAN]

Like father unlike son - Cricinfo staff..

The comparisons between Shaun Marsh and his father Geoff are unlikely to stop, but the son achieved things in his first one-day international that were out of his father's reach. The 2008 version of the game must sometimes be unrecogniseable to Geoff, who was part of Australia's resurgence through the limited-overs revolution in the 1980s before coaching the team in the 1990s.

Back in his playing days, Marsh was the designated tortoise, picking up singles and trying to end the innings with a century. If he did that, Australia were confident of winning. In 117 one-day games his strike-rate was 55.93, a figure which is frightening for contemporary players. They know they would be dropped if they scored so slowly for even a handful of games.

Geoff collected 13 off 43 balls in a solid debut 22 years ago. Today Shaun was much more compelling with 81 from 97 in a Man-of-the-Match performance that showed he is his own man. The only disappointment in a week that has included a Twenty20 International debut was he left without posting a century.

"I probably should have [got a hundred]," Marsh said after play. "It's fantastic to be over here and I still can't believe I'm here. To go well was really good and to get a win was even better."

There was no mistaking his attacking play, which brought up seven fours and a six after being honed in the Indian Premier League, but there remained slight confusion when he was preparing to collect his individual prize. The commentator Tony Cozier desperately wanted to call Shaun by his father's name. It is something he will be used to.

Ricky Ponting was in no doubt about the key performer in the 84-run victory. "Shaun Marsh, in his debut innings, played a beautiful innings," Ponting said. "He looked terrific right from the outset.

 

[river end]

Geoff Marsh performed very well between 1985/86 when he debuted and 1988/89. It was only from 1989 onwards, ironically the very time his team took a turn for the better, that his performances dropped off.

He was a fine servant during a difficult time but could not contribute enormously to the upturn. From 1989 onwards he averaged just 30, having averaged 39 up to the Pakistan tour of 1988/89.

Yes, up until the West Indies came to tour Australia in 1988/89 "Swampy" was clearly the first choice opener and I always felt he was capable of a regular big or decent score.

But the Windies were relentless with their attack of short pitched and short of a length bowling and, although courageous, he could never get going. (To be fair, his teammates couldn't really either). From then on more often than not, he just took the shine off the new ball.
Used to fend at the ball outside off stump too much, which was his downfall many times.

I still feel he was a batsman that underachieved a bit. He's someone I believe could have been as good as and/or statistically as good as Michael Atherton, averaging around 38 rather than 33.

The stereotype of him of course is that he had no shots. He actually started out for Western Australia in 1977 as more of a stroke maker and gradually as his career progressed he became more defensive and by the time he was well established in the Aust team he was considered as just a grafter.

He also suffered I believe, by playing on being the "team man" too much, to the detriment of his own game.
In fact, when he was dropped from the Aust test team in January 1992 he said something along the lines "I've never really been much of a stats man".

A previous post suggested that Marsh played a few too many test matches. But the team man ethic may have kept him there a bit longer. He wasn't really that bad for the time though. There was Haynes, Greenidge and Taylor who were better but then you had batsman like Wright, Athey and Ramiz Raja who weren't significantly better. Batsman didn't dominate like they do now.

Whether Shaun will be better? Hard to tell. Cricket is so different now to then that I may personally have difficulty deciding even if Shaun averages 45-50 in tests.

 

[Richard]

So Wayne Phillips was actually preferred to him in that Fifth Test in 1991/92, was he?

Seems odd to carry on with someone for so long then bring someone else in for a single Test at the end of a summer to replace them. Had always presumed Marsh missed that game with injury, as Tom Moody was then brought in as a sacrificial-lamb opener for the Sri Lanka tour of 1992 (which was a real shame, as he'd made an excellent start as a middle-order batsman but was never seen again after that opener's tour, being succeeded by his fellow, younger WAns Martyn and Langer).

 

[river end]

The other Wayne Phillips was preferred for the final test that series - an opener for Victoria for a number of years. They must have thought Marsh was past it, because the Adelaide and Perth tests were back-to-back ones - only a few days apart and it was on Marsh's home ground.
His last 5 innings yielded just 35 runs and they may not have wanted him getting runs in the 5th test to secure his place again - as he may not have been in the selector's plans for the next summer against WI.

As for Tom Moody, was one of those unfortunate players who like you said was brought in as a "sacrificial lamb", failed, (why he opened for Australia I'll never know - he's never even opened for Western Australia for any prolonged period of time or at all - as far as I remember or am aware) and then discarded. Though Moody had success in ODIs being an integral part of the Aust 1999 World Cup side.

 

[Richard]

Oddest thing about Moody is that previously when he'd played and done well (often replacing Marsh when he was injured in 1989/90) Boon had opened, a job he could do competantly.

Boon again moved back to the top of the order when Martyn (later replaced by Langer) came in in 1992/93, before going back to three as Slater became an instant hit in 1993.

But in 1992 in Sri Lanka Boon batted three while Moody opened.

One can only wonder how good Moody might have been had he batted in the middle in SL and scored once more. And also how different Martyn, Langer and even Slater's careers would have been as a result. As well as Boon's, of course.

There's any number of fascinating what-ifs for Australia between '89 and '06/07. Another of the best for mine is "what if Lehmann not Bevan had got first gig to replace Border in 1994/95?"

That could have had huge impacts on the careers of Lehmann, Bevan himself, Blewett, Ponting, and even Langer and Martyn.

 

[Top_Cat]

So Wayne Phillips was actually preferred to him in that Fifth Test in 1991/92, was he?

Seems odd to carry on with someone for so long then bring someone else in for a single Test at the end of a summer to replace them. Had always presumed Marsh missed that game with injury, as Tom Moody was then brought in as a sacrificial-lamb opener for the Sri Lanka tour of 1992 (which was a real shame, as he'd made an excellent start as a middle-order batsman but was never seen again after that opener's tour, being succeeded by his fellow, younger WAns Martyn and Langer).

Gosh, sounds like you just made an argument that Tom Moody's career was curtailed by a confidence-denting tour of SL where he had to open to get a place in a team. But, of course, confidence is meaningless in a Test career; you're either classy or not, right?

Moody was picked as an opener because he had a very straight technique and had opened in ODI's previously. The only reason he didn't open for WA was probably because they had a glut of openers to choose from with Marsh, Valetta, Wood and Lavender to choose from. He just never got going in SL and got a couple of shocking decisions against him (I remember two caught-behinds he didn't get air on, let alone wood) so was dropped. Could easily have gone the other way because he was in-form.

 

[Richard]

Gosh, sounds like you just made an argument that Tom Moody's career was curtailed by a confidence-denting tour of SL where he had to open to get a place in a team. But, of course, confidence is meaningless in a Test career; you're either classy or not, right?

I said his Test career was curtailed by a series of poor scores, which he did not get the chance to come back from, opening in Sri Lanka.

Moody was picked as an opener because he had a very straight technique and had opened in ODI's previously. The only reason he didn't open for WA was probably because they had a glut of openers to choose from with Marsh, Valetta, Wood and Lavender to choose from. He just never got going in SL and got a couple of shocking decisions against him (I remember two caught-behinds he didn't get air on, let alone wood) so was dropped. Could easily have gone the other way because he was in-form.

The point is, though, that he didn't have to open to get a place in the team - Boon had proven he was perfectly capable of opening in Tests and what's more had done so previously when Moody had come into the side in place of an opener.

It just makes no sense to me that Moody was shoehorned in to open. None whatsoever. Unless of course they actually wanted him to fail so they could pick Martyn and Langer who were more "exciting".