Mitchell Starc omission stirs up debate

“Given his (Starc) match-clinching efforts against Sri Lanka in the first Test in Hobart, something of a career breakthrough, and the fact he had played only the two Tests in succession, he assumed his selection for Boxing Day was a mere formality,” Barrett wrote in his column for the Sydney Morning Herald.

Mitchell Starc

“Only on Sunday evening was it confirmed to the left-arm quick that what he had read was right: his over numbers were in the risk category; that, if he bowled in Melbourne, there was a tangible danger that he might break down with an injury,” he added.

“The whole episode looked more farcical when the non-injured Starc was ruled out, while semi-fit captain Michael Clarke, trying to overcome a hamstring strain, was given as much time as he needed to play,” he further wrote.

    Leave a Reply