Georgie Parker: Home-grown criticism for Mitch Marsh ignores a man who played with pride and guts

I’ve never understood the dislike of Mitch Marsh. Honestly, what isn’t to like about the guy?

He is a very good cricketer and sure, he is sometimes up and down with his form, but who isn’t? That shouldn’t divide the nation like he does.

His effort is unquestionable, has never had any scandals (unless you count putting your foot on the World Cup trophy after a few beers), wears his heart on his sleeve, is kind to those who he plays with and against, likes to celebrate, yet still, for some reason, so many people aggressively resented him.

The only thing I can put it down to is Mitch Marsh has been a victim of his name. Australians are particularly hot on nepotism and our tall poppy syndrome is as contagious as it comes.

As soon as anyone believes someone hasn’t arrived at the destination by themselves, well, that’s them done. Good luck to you. Society will push you in to that hole and kick away the ladder.

I posted on X (formerly twitter), in July after Mitch hit a 118 in his return to Test cricket at the Ashes, and it read, “I really like Mitch Marsh. I think he’s a victim of his very famous name. Was selected (because of his name) when maybe he shouldn’t have been, but in turn not selected because of those selections. Can’t ever knock his effort and passion for Australia though.”

And, after his Allan Border Medal win, I reflected and think most of that is right, except the name bit. Why did I feel I needed to put that in? I don’t know the ins and outs of selections (and, lets be honest, neither do you), but what I do know is there is no way players are being selected by their family name alone, particularly not at international level.

What I do know though, is he has always been judged heavily by the public because of his name.

Selections will always be a talking point (Western Australia knows that all too well over the past few weeks), but there seemed to be more venom and disdain any time Mitch Marsh was named.

He was the perfect scapegoat for people to take aim at if they thought someone else should be selected, and his last name was the low hanging fruit people grabbed at.

Ultimately, it was the difference in opinion of the selectors that led the country to have a personal hatred to him before he even stood at the crease.

So, while I don’t know Mitch, this is my perception of him over the years as just a mega-fan of the gam and hopefully, he won’t feel the need to say the pretty heartbreaking comment “most of Australia hate me … I keep trying, hopefully I win them over one day” again.

I’ve seen him as a player who has got every single ounce of ability from himself, an absolute coach’s dream and something so many of us aren’t able to dig deep enough for.

The courage he showed in turning up, even when he felt the country he was representing was against him, is nothing short of inspiring.

His reputation amongst colleagues within the media industry is outstanding, and he is well known for giving more than he was ever required to do.

He’s only ever seemed grounded even when he had every opportunity or reason to be entitled or become jaded. And finally, he’s a good cricketer over three formats, and has been a great servant to the game of cricket.

He finally won over those who didn’t believe, and while Mitch has handled the general attacks over the course of his career admirably and thrown away all the ugly comment like a water off a ducks back, this is a general reminder that athletes are human, Mitch is a human, and it shouldn’t have taken a World Cup-winning performance and an Ashes century to make us treat him like one.

What I admire most about him is that every single time he has been hated on by us as country, he still represented us with pride and guts.