Mitchell Marsh vs Ben Stokes thread

[Black_Warrior]

If poor technique helps you score fastest double hundred against the number 1 team, then good riddance to technique I'd say.

 

[Spark]

If poor technique helps you score fastest double hundred against the number 1 team, then good riddance to technique I'd say.

Eh, the #1 team is a bit of a misnomer without Steyn or Philander.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Eh, the #1 team is a bit of a misnomer without Steyn or Philander.

Could argue it would be even with them given that batting line up.

 

[mr_mister]

they're not batting that great atm imo

 

[Spark]

Could argue it would be even with them given that batting line up.

Yeah I agree but as evidence of him having amazing technique as opposed to an amazing eye, it's not a great example. Dhoni is a great ball-striker too, after all.

 

[Blanco]

If poor technique helps you score fastest double hundred against the number 1 team, then good riddance to technique I'd say.

Great knock will not dispute that, but let's not get carried away there was no Steyn and Philander.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Yeah I agree but as evidence of him having amazing technique as opposed to an amazing eye, it's not a great example. Dhoni is a great ball-striker too, after all.

The ton against NZ last summer was a better way of showing how good he can be. Good attack put to sword in no time.

 

[91Jmay]

Stokes technique isn't bad at all. Puzzled by some of the comments here to be honest. He has a great defensive game, and gets out because of the way he plays more than anything.

 

[Black_Warrior]

Yeah I agree but as evidence of him having amazing technique as opposed to an amazing eye, it's not a great example. Dhoni is a great ball-striker too, after all.

Didn't use that as evidence of amazing technique. I was not disputing the criticism of Stokes' technique. I don't really understand technique all that well to comment on it. But if you score a test match double century, that's a pretty special thing for me. So for me Stokes is the better player.

Eh, the #1 team is a bit of a misnomer without Steyn or Philander.

You play the opposition you face. In the context of this thread, how many people think Mitchell Marsh would score a 250 against Morkel, Rabada, Morris and Piedt?

 

[Blanco]

Good first post Marsh did struggle in England with the bat though, and it seemed like it was a technical issue with sideways movement. Thoughts?

I would say it's more an Australian thing, nowadays most Australia batters struggle against swing.Did he play in England before this tour? I bet he didn't.

 

[Captain_Cook]

Stokes is better at all three disciplines at the moment. The first all-rounder since Kallis that looks like he could eventually average 40 with the bat and 30 with the ball.

Mitch has promise but he's yet to deliver with the bat (although he's yet to be unleashed on the home roads) or ball and having seen only a bit of him he reminds me of Watson. I guess he could become Australia's version of Hoggard but he's got to develop a lot.

 

[Spark]

Stokes is better at all three disciplines at the moment. The first all-rounder since Kallis that looks like he could eventually average 40 with the bat and 30 with the ball.

Mitch has promise but he's yet to deliver with the bat (although he's yet to be unleashed on the home roads) or ball and having seen only a bit of him he reminds me of Watson. I guess he could become Australia's version of Hoggard but he's got to develop a lot.

He isn't like Hoggard or Watson as a bowler at all, lol. He's a hit the deck bowler who gets extra bounce, and he's far exceeded both expectations and role requirements as a bowler.

 

[Captain_Cook]

He's a hit the deck bowler who gets extra bounce, and he's far exceeded both expectations and role requirements as a bowler.

Fair enough, I've only seen a little of him in England and against NZ. Is he a bit like Bresnan then or am I really taking the p*ss?

 

[CWB304]

A bit like the Ishant Sharma vs Stuart Broad thread c. 2011.....

 

[Rasimione]

I haven't seen Marsh enough times to have an opinion. Stokes on the other hand looks the goods. From what I've seen, he will be averaging 40 with the bat and 30 with the ball. Massive talent. Genuine all rounder.

 

[Zinzan]

Stokes is better at all three disciplines at the moment. The first all-rounder since Kallis that looks like he could eventually average 40 with the bat and 30 with the ball.

Lol, Stokes will NOT eventually average <30 with the ball. I'll even be surprised if he gets <35, although I wouldn't rule that out entirely.

 

[Pothas]

Very confident he will end up below 35.

 

[Howe_zat]

Ought to go under 35 at some point but could easily see his bowling tailing off when he gets older.

 

[wellAlbidarned]

Nah stokes will definitely average under 35 with the ball because like Kallis he's not a workhorse. He gets brought in to get a wicket and if he doesn't he gets taken off.

 

[Howe_zat]

Nah stokes will definitely average under 35 with the ball because like Kallis he's not a workhorse. He gets brought in to get a wicket and if he doesn't he gets taken off.

Unlike Kallis, Stokes seems to revel in being considered more important. His superior record batting in the top 6 has been talked about a lot - 42.8 at 6 compared to 19 at 7/8/9. But less obvious are his bowling averages at 1st change, 2nd change and 3rd change, which are 25.91, 38.7 and 72.44 respectively.

Maybe we should get him to open the batting and bowling.