Darren Lehmann’s seeming lack of respect for specialist Test openers is baffling. The Australian coach this week all but declared that any batsman in the Australian Test side was capable of opening.
This may be the case against the West Indies, so lacklustre were their quicks in the first Test massacre at Hobart.
But Australia’s next series is against the quality new ball pair of Trent Boult and Tim Southee in New Zealand, where the pitches may well be difficult, seaming decks like those on which Australia’s batsmen floundered in England.
Using a makeshift opener in such circumstances would be ridiculous. In discussing the immediate future of incumbent opener Joe Burns, Lehmann argued either injured first drop Usman Khawaja or current number five Shaun Marsh could do Burns’ job against the new ball.
“I would be comfortable with Khawaja opening the batting, but the captain might not want that, so we have to work that out,” Lehmann told media.
“Shaun’s probably more comfortable [batting in the middle order] but if we need him to play and we need an opener then he can do that job as well.
“It gets down to the make-up of the side, what we go with. If he’s in that and he has to open then you’d rather that than not playing.”
Khawaja has only a couple of first-class innings to his name as an opener. Ditto for Marsh, whose biggest struggles in Test cricket have been opposed to the moving ball.
Khawaja may be able to make the adjustment to opening, but he will have to do so despite a complete lack of experience.
Marsh, though, is not at all suited to opening the batting – he has hard hands, a propensity for sparring at deliveries outside off stump and feeds the slips cordon more than any other Australian batsman.
Marsh patently is better suited to the middle order and his captain Steve Smith indicated that this week. Fortunately it is Smith who decides Australia’s batting order and not Lehmann, although the coach undoubtedly will have some sway.
One of Marsh, Burns or Khawaja look set to miss out on the Boxing Day Test against the West Indies. Expected to be fit in time for that Test, Khawaja is coming off the back of two tons against New Zealand. Marsh’s case is compelling too, having made a crucial 49 in a tough chase at Adelaide before cruising to 182 at Hobart.
Burns, meanwhile, has had a lean couple of Tests but since returning to the team has made 298 runs at 43, while also averaging 87 for the first wicket with Warner. They are very solid numbers for a rookie opener.
Australia are in a rebuilding period and dropping a young player like Burns when he has been above average sends an awful message to incoming rookies that they are expendable.
I wrote last month that Burns and Khawaja should be given all six Tests this season to afford them a proper chance to prove themselves in Tests.
Burns has had four Tests, averaging 43, and now looks like being dropped. That would be a hammer blow to the confidence of one of the young batsmen Australia hope can carry them into a successful new generation.
If Burns was being edged out by a specialist opening batsman in prolific form there at least would be a modicum of logic to him being dropped.
But to accommodate a makeshift opener? C’mon selectors you should be wiser than that. Such a move would be unfair not only to Burns but also to Khawaja.
The graceful left-hander finally made his mark as a Test batsman against the Kiwis. He is a specialist number three and made the most of the opportunity he was offered to bat in that role. To now shunt him up the order into an alien position is not in his interests.
It’s also not to the benefit of Smith, who indicated after the Ashes he did not want to bat at three and seemed all too happy for Khawaja to fill that spot so he could slide back down to four.
So, just to accommodate Marsh, Burns’ career would be dealt a major blow, and Khawaja and Smith both would have to bat out of position.
That is a major upheaval. All to find a spot for a batsman who has a proven track record in Tests of following big scores, like the one at Hobart, with a string of failures.
What are you thinking, Lehmann?
eee
Guest
One opens the batting at the gabba one bats middle order at the wacca ... I know where I would rather bat
matth
Guest
so who do you drop?
Adsa
Guest
Drop Siddle, and let M Marsh be the third quick. Burns, Uzi and Shaun all play.
Worlds Biggest
Guest
Dropping Burns and switching Marsh to open would be madness, Burns is young and on the up, stick with him for the long haul. It has to come down to S Marsh and Usie, this is a tough call as both are in form. I like Usie's potential and would pick him if fit.
Don Freo
Guest
Boonie was a #3 at Tassie. JL was a #3. Keith Stackpole was a number 4. Simon Katich was a 4 or 5. Ussie has opened plenty and so has Shaun. Give them their head. Burns is as much a middle order boy as he is an opener.
danno
Guest
I'd rate the 49 S Marsh scored against a quality NZ attack with the swinging ball a better knock than his hundred, he hasn't put a foot wrong. Dropping him in this form would make no sense.
Don Freo
Guest
Hmmm. That would be good if all that happened. Although, I'd like you to keep your house.
Don Freo
Guest
Hard to agree with any of that.
Don Freo
Guest
What series was that? When? Any relevance to anything...apart from the fact it can be discarded becsuse it was so long ago?
Max
Guest
...or the two fifties he got in Sydney. Or his entire first class career. "The first innings in Hobart" is just about the only metric where Marsh wins out; an innings that was no better than Burns' in Brisbane.
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
Those statistics are not very different... It's only a no brainer if you've already made your mind up... On paper, Burns has a slightly better average and is younger. On recent form Burns performed well in one test but struggled after that. Marsh top scored one innings and scored 180 in the next from 3 cracks. I think Marsh if selected will only let us down again soon enough, but unlike many times in the past, we can't say he has no claim for selection. He's in reasonable recent test form right now.
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
Not really because when both Burns and Marsh had opportunities in the same games, Marsh performed better. The way every Australian batsman performed I think even wobbly old Marsh may have done ok in Brisbane and Perth. Retaining Burns would be saying the only test that matter is Brisbane.
gaz
Guest
I'm one of Shaun Marsh's biggest fans but I don't think Burns should have to make way. He should be given the whole summer and is a long term prospect for the opening role. There is still doubt about Ussie being fit so we'll see. Really stoked for SOS that he's done well and if does miss out unluckily, he'd be next cab off the rank if form or injury happens to the middle order.
Jameswm
Guest
"Mitch’s bowling is now right up with the best" The best all rounders you mean? Let's not get carried away.
Max
Guest
Keeping Marsh would be like saying "the only game that matters was the last one." Burns and Khawaja both scored more runs against a much better attack in their first 2 tests this summer than Marsh did. All of Australia's main batsman have big scores in the last 4 tests. They should all remain in the pecking order as they appeared at the Gabba for the start of the summer. The only selection conundrum is 'which Marsh?' If you want an all rounder it's case closed.
Kev
Guest
It's very easy to drop him. Marsh made runs against a WI side that got thumped by a CA XI side and as a result, there should be a great big whopping asterisk next to it. You can't read too much into form and performances when the opposition is so weak.
Paul D
Roar Guru
I thought it was about winning test matches. It's the Australian test team, not Greg Chappell's development squad.
Sam
Guest
Don't really think the issue is the Windies games, it’s about having a stable XI and allowing the up and coming players (Burns, Khawaja) a decent go in their nature batting positions in preparation for tougher tours.
Craig Swanson
Guest
Mitch's bowling is now right up with the best. Needs runs. They will come if he was moved down to seven where he can play his natural attacking game.
Paul D
Roar Guru
Ultimately I think the debates about selection this summer lack a bit of sting – whichever XI we put out is going to handily thrash the Windies either way, so it’s all a bit of anticlimax to grizzle back and forth about who should be in the side. Does it matter whether we win by an innings and 180 runs, or an innings and 140 runs? Ho hum.