Yes I agree. Hazlewood  needs some time with the great McGrath on how to bowl in unfavorable conditions.. specially on Asian sub continent decks. Mind you he has not toured there all that often. Remember he is still only four years into his career. He made his debut in the corresponding series in 2014. I am backing him for 15/18 wkts this series.

Then I want either Jyhe Richardson or Pattinson over Starc.

"I saw this morning the wicket will probably be more similar to the South Australia game, where it had a bit more green grass on it, nipped around a bit but it was one of those wickets where if you play well you can make runs but if you bowl well you can take wickets.

This is Marcus Harris commenting on the G deck this morning. Sounds like a good cricket wicket if it stays that way.

India have done a very good thing, they dropped Vijay and Rahul. Both are not good enough. Rahul is young enough to work on his game and improve to get another chance but Vijay should retire. Too old and his test career should be over. 
This means that Agarwal and Vihari will open. I am not sure opening with Vihari is a great idea but he did look very good in Perth.
However India have made almost the worst selection of the series in bringing back the dud Rohit Sharma. He should not be on the tour ahead of the likes of Kuran Nair let alone play a second test. Terrible decision by India.
Jadeja unsurprisingly comes in for Umesh Yadav as Ashwin is still injured.

However the worst selection decision of the series so far is that Mitch Marsh is going to play this test. I am sure the selectors want us to lose, they surely do not have so little idea about cricket. Or the Marsh family is bribing the selectors to keep Shaun and Mitch in the side. They both have no place anywhere near the team, both are failures.

Baggers do you drink and type? You do realise that you just called Glenn McGrath a dud.

Glen McGrath av no of wickets per innings 2.31, SR 51.9, 
Mitch Johnson av no of wickets per innings 2.24, SR 51.1

The only difference between the 2 were average
McGrath av 21.64
Johnson av 28.40
Difference 6.76

Run difference over an innings 6.76 X 2.3 = 15.54
Ok slight difference.
15.54 + 7.37 (McGrath's batting av) = 22.9 (Johnson's batting average).

Whatever discrepancy between bowling average was made up by Johnson's superior batting. Johnson was an equal overall valued cricketer to Glenn McGrath, no matter the discrepancy Johnson made up for it himself, he never relied on others to do the job for him.

How he took 300+ wickets, is no mystery to me, he bowled them, got them lbw and caught. What's the mystery?

That's your problem Baggers just because you don't like a bowling action or style of batting, you question ability.  Simply if any bowling or batting style works and gets the necessary results, then there is no problem with the individual performance.

I'll go even further and say Ryan Harris Av wickets per innings 2.17, SR 50.7, Bowling average 23.5 Batting av 21.53. If he was fully fit for his career McGrath wouldn't have made the side. Harris offered more as a cricketer than McGrath ever did. So if you call Johnson a dud so is McGrath.

You seem to get excited about Hazlewood's action, his line and length etc, etc, but guess what Baggers, it is simply not working and getting the required results unlike what Starc is getting. Results is all that matters, I don't care how they look getting the results. You want to show Starc the door, that's fine, I just hope Hazlewood's on the other side waiting to greet him.

And in saying that I agree Test Fan M Marsh has no results to warrant his continued selection. Even the excuse that another bowler is required to supplement an under performing bowling attack, is no excuse to weaken a batting line up, now down to potentially 5 specialist batsmen all of which do have serious questions on them regarding form, even Khawaja. You just don't weaken a batting line up, you drop the bowler/s and get someone else in.

I don't think that maths works. Glenn McGrath was a far superior bowler and cricketer for Australia over a very long period of time. Johnson hit some great heights but to try and compare as anything like equals is just wrong.

It's only wrong if someone calls another a dud with no justification. Personally I would never call a player that offered so much to an Australian cricket side as Johnson did a dud. The Maths works, its all about runs scored against, wickets taken and runs supplied. But Johnson's performance is the reason he won ICC player of the year not once but twice, the only bowler to ever do that, it's always been batsmen. He was doing so much on the field that it did not go unnoticed by a group of international judges from all over the cricket world. They were impressed by his performances, they never saw him as a dud, and if it weren't for injury, Johnson would have broken many records, and not by solely playing a lot of games. Anyone can break records if given enough games

Baggers do you drink and type? You do realise that you just called Glenn McGrath a dud.

Reckon you must be on something while you are typing Mike. McGrath was on another stratosphere to Johnson. The beanpole seamer breathed consistency.. something Johnson could only dream of. Yes he did win the Player of Year twice.. 80 wickets @ 27.07 in 17 Tests in 2009 ..just over 4 wkts a test is good but not outstanding so his competition must have been below par that calendar year.  He followed that with a woeful Ashes tour. The next five years he was in and out of form and in and out of the team.  Johnson proved what an enigma he is by almost single handedly dismantling the Poms and Saffers in 2014/15. Long time between drinks tho Mike. Undoubedly his greatest Test year as his  59 wkt @15.23 in eight matches attest. It he could have produced that type of dominance over his 70 odd tests I like you would be singing his praises. But he did not.. so he goes down as a bowler who had moments of brilliance mixed with more moments of mediocrity. 

If he'd figured out how to bowl like that earlier in his career he would have beaten Glenn McGrath's record. 

IF,IF,IF. Pigs have wings too Mike.

Its a true sttement I think

Johnsons average in the 2nd half of his career was sub 20 I believe. Could've been a goat

Johnson played 73 tests, so if we go 37 tests in the second half of career because it breaks with series and look at his average it is 27.92. Nowhere near under 20.

If we look at years played. He played from 8 Nov 2007 to 13 Nov 2015, 8 years. So if we break it in November 2011, later than go by number of tests as he played more each year early in his career than later, his average over 28 tests was 25.39, still nowhere near under 20.

Even if we just go by the last two years of his career, 8 Nov 2013 to 13 Nov 2015, containing his huge success against England and South Africa, his average is 23.61, which is very good, but still nowhere near under 20. That is because after he took 37 wickets at 13.97 in the Ashes, absolutely brilliant, and 22 wickets at 17.36 against South Africa he only average under 20 in one of his last 5 series. This was 8 wickets at 18.62 in the West Indies. 

So grazorblade Johnson most certainly did not average 20 in the second half of his career, or ever the last quarter of his career. In fact he only average under 20 in 5 of his 26 series he participated.

Glenn McGrath averaged under 20 in 15 of 43 series. And his average for the last half of his career, his last 62 tests, was 20.82, compared to 21.64 overall.

I love forums, and how they go off topic. My initial post was suggesting that the idea of blaming "flat" wickets for poor bowling performances was covering for the fact that the bowlers bowled poorly or were unable to adapt their technique to get wickets. I showed a video of Johnson bowling on a flat wicket, bowling aggressively and at the stumps. That is how you bowl on flat wickets.

Baggers realising that what I was saying is true, thus questioning a bowlers ability to perform on a variety of conditions, decided to divert the argument by putting on his blue tinted glasses with his blue cap, and showing a video of McGrath bowling on a green seaming pitch, which is the perfect conditions for him. That video has nothing to do with bowling on and blaming "flat" pitches. That's just Baggers reminiscing. And you have to forgive him NSW haven't produced many fast bowlers over the past 50 years, so he is fixated on McGrath and in his mind, line and length bowlers are the only decent bowlers. Who else has he got? Brett Lee, he was exciting to watch, but his stats were average at best you wouldn't use him to win an argument. Geoff Lawson? excitement plus there.

Then the argument diverts again with Johnson being called a dud. In no way am I saying G McGrath wasn't good, but instead I use him as a benchmark of what to expect from bowlers. When you have a bowler who contributes nothing else but bowling, you set the mark at McGrath. Other excellent bowlers who do not match that mark offset the poorer performance by their overall contribution to the game, by adding batting skill, thus matching the benchmark that McGrath set. They use their batting to supplement their bowling to ultimately contribute as much to the game as what McGrath did with his bowling alone. There are no duds, in this argument.

The ultimate argument is that M Starc offsets his "poorer" bowling stats, which honestly are not that bad, by using his additional skill of batting, to reach an overall contribution that is on par with what McGrath did alone with his bowling. He is a useful player to have in the side. Cummins currently performs similarly and time will tell what he will contribute overall. If his average were to blow out much more and say reach 30 av, then yes it may be more beneficial to try someone else.

But what about Hazlewood? who contributes nothing else to the game except bowling. To match the benchmark that McGrath set, which others do with the use of ability with the bat, then is it too much to expect him to match McGrath's ability with the ball to justify his continued selection? Isn't that the reason they used for the non-selection of Jackson Bird, claiming he had to improve his batting to be selected? Can someone please explain why that applied to Bird but doesn't apply to Hazlewood? I personally believe that there are numerous bowlers in Sheffield Shield that offer more overall to match that benchmark set by McGrath, and even if they end up with an average of 28 that only amounts to 2-3 runs per innings compared to Hazlewood which can be made up by a superior batting performance. Chris Tremain is one that immediately jumps to mind, averaging 23 with both bat and ball at FC level. Jhye Richardson (ball 23 bat 21). The excuse that Hazlewood is still learning no longer holds true. He is the 18th most experienced bowler in terms of tests played, many, many others never got that many opportunities to "learn", they had to perform right from the start.

What is this fixation you have Mike with bowlers who can hold a bat. Bowlers are chosen to bowl.. runs they score are a bonus. You are trying to paint Johnson and Starc as all rounders.  They are far from that. Yes they have contributed useful runs over the years.. a ton or two from Johnson and a 99 from memory from Starc. Johnson passed 50 12 times in 109 inn. Starc 9 in 74. Certainly not all round standard. Both are hitters with a decent eye. Even Hazlewood who is a real no 11 hit a useful 17 runs in last match. Ditto Thomson's 21 4th Test '82 almost won Australia the match.

Country O M R W 5w 10w Best Avg S/R E/R Australia 1310.2 259 4358 171 7 1 8/61 25.49 45.98 3.33 England 271.0 41 1081 31 1 0 5/69 34.87 52.45 3.99 India 263.4 46 842 21 1 0 5/64 40.10 75.33 3.19 New Zealand 77.1 20 277 12 1 1 6/73 23.08 38.58 3.59 South Africa 327.2 63 1037 41 2 1 7/68 25.29 47.90 3.17 Sri Lanka 101.4 18 313 6 0 0 2/48 52.17 101.67 3.08 United Arab Emirates 75.0 28 177 6 0 0 3/39 29.50 75.00 2.36 Wales 85.0 11 311 7 0 0 3/87 44.43 72.86 3.66 West Indies 155.4 28 496 18 0 0 4/41 27.56 51.89 3.19

What were you saying about Johnson's ability to perform on flat decks Mike. Flat decks in India and his record there is deplorable even worse in Sri Lanka.. UAE is not all that much better. No flat tracks in England.. moderate at best.  Sth Africa with its similar decks to here Windies and NZ were his other happy hunting grounds. Your assertion that Johnson was some sort of champion on flat pitches does not hold water.

Chris Tremain is one that immediately jumps to mind, averaging 23 with both bat and ball at FC level.

Steady on Mike. You just praised a bowler from gods country. You are aware Tremain was born and played much of his cricket in my state.. is a country lad. Dubbo from memory. Have always rated him. Was sorry to lose him. He does perform often on the flat MCG deck. Perhaps he could give Haze some pointers.

Nothing on any cricket sites about the state of todays deck. Why the big mystery?
May find this interesting tho..
http://www.espncricinfo.com/story/_/id/25610816/inside-mcg-pitch-reboot

Can Australia take a stranglehold on the Border/Gavaskar Trophy by winning here at Melbourne?  India's batting, specially their middle order is strong. We have yet to hit our straps with the bat except for spasmodic performances from a few. So the last thing we want is a flat batting friendly track.

For me the most interesting thing about the Indian batting is going to be the openers. On paper a player with a first class average of close to 60 and another with an average close to 50 looks good. But Vihari is not an opener, and even though he looked very good in Perth he only did score 48 runs across the two innings. Agarwal on debut in conditions foreign to him, how much depending on how the pitch plays, might struggle on debut. 
India's strength is Kohli and Pujara supported well by Rahane. Jadeja will strengthen the bottom 4, but Rohit Sharma is a dud and Pant has not convinced he can play a long proper test match innings.
Now I have said that Sharma and Pant will put on a 300 run partnership at close to a run a ball and set up a win.

One thing is a given at The Colosseum. Expect a big Melbourne crowd. Perthites did not turn up for the last match. Disappointing as this was Perth Stadium's debut Test match. 

Finch also is not an opener so we are even. Dont know much about Argawal. Talk about throwing him to the lions.  Should be able to handle the pressure as he is no kid at almost 28.. Evidently was somewhat of a child prodigy. Decent FC record but his conversion rate could be better.

What is starting time?

Good question. It seems to be 10:30 am Melbourne time.

Mitch Marsh's last outing at MCG does not exactly fill me with confidence.

1/82, 21, 0/20, 11

West Aust

v Victoria

Melbourne

7 Dec 2018

ah my bad thanks for the fact check

I'm quite worried by his bowling. Apparently he  has taken 6 wickets for an average of 60 odd during this season.

Is Stoinis selected in the same WA Shield teams when Marsh plays?

On Monday night I noticed James Faulkner played for the Hurricanes. He hasn't had a Shield appearance for a long time though.

How was your Chrissie DC.

He is a far better bowler than that. Stoinis' FC record is no better.. probably worse. If Marsh fails this summer and CA want to continue with an all rounder. I would be hoping Jack Wildermuth is considered. Reckon he has a big future. Great to see JF back.

Stoinis has only played 2 sheild games recently but they were 2 excellent games. Averaged 39 with the bat and 29 with the ball

I personally think an all rounder is crazy though. We frequently take 20 wickets a match. Probably as often as our golden generation.

We really struggle to consistently score 300+ innings. 6 batsmen for me choosing the best 1st class averages

I'm worried  about the physical  effort, particularly in Cummins' case, where he   has lost a lot of speed over the last year, required from our pace bowlers. It probably takes less our of Hazlewood and Starc bowling fast and being effective than Cummins.

In Asia last year Cummins was as lethal as Johnson at his peak on lifeless pitches. He had a smaller workload.

Given the output of some speculates batters, an all rounder, like Stoinis who is losing his WA Shield place to M Marsh, or preferring  to play LOC, can reduce their workload.

M Marsh is too big and heavy to bowl a lot of overs without injuring himself. Stoinis has an action where he bowls more within himself.

Great thanks!

Weren't they averaging 30 000?

It looked small in such a huge stadium.

Find that hard to believe. MCG  Boxing Day crowds, specially, are almost legendary.