- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
Drop Joe Burns, banish Usman Khawaja, lynch Mitch Marsh – the overreactions are coming thick and swift in the wake of Australia going down 2-0 in the Test series in Sri Lanka.
It is understandable that Australian fans would be gutted and furious with the consecutive spineless displays by the Australian batsmen at Kandy and Galle. But there is little to be gained from panicked decisions at the selection table.
Many people on social media and sports websites like The Roar have stated with absolute certainty that the team would benefit from dropping one or more of Khawaja, Burns and Marsh for the third Test. Do these fans believe Australia have wonderful cricketers, with proven track records in Asia, just waiting on the sidelines for their chance?
Is that the reason that Australia have lost so badly in Sri Lanka – that they didn’t pick the right side? Hardly. Even their two best batsmen, Steve Smith and David Warner have struggled, despite both having batted well against Pakistan in the UAE during their last Test series in Asia.
Well managed cricket teams do not panic in the wake of a pair of defeats. Badly managed sides do. Australia used to panic all the time. In their darkest days of the past 25 years – between 2010 and 2013 – it was impossible to predict what the Australian Test XI would look in two matches’ time.
Not only was the personnel liable to change significantly, but even the players who survived the cull were likely to be stuffed into a new role. So ludicrous was the chopping and changing of the team that, at one point in 2013, six different players were tried at number three in the space of six Tests.
Glenn Maxwell, Ed Cowan, Phil Hughes, Michael Clarke, David Warner and Shane Watson all had a crack at first drop amid this strategic madness. Only months earlier, it had been Rob Quiney who had been tasked with batting three, and only months later it was Alex Doolan who occupied the position.
The chronic instability in the team between 2010 and 2013 surely must have bred paranoia among the players and affected their ability to play with confidence and a clarity of mind.
In this context, consider the case of Mitchell Starc, who has been phenomenal in the two Tests in Sri Lanka. No single Australian player of the past five years was messed around by the selectors worse than Starc.
Unbelievably, the paceman’s first 14 Tests were spread across 11 different stints in the Australian team. Time after time after time he was brought into the line-up for just one Test and then immediately rested, rotated, dropped, call it what you like.
Meanwhile, pundits and fans routinely criticised Starc for lacking consistency and accuracy.
How, exactly, is a young express paceman expected to operate with “consistency” and “accuracy” when they are never given even the slightest chance to establish themselves in the Test format?
When finally Starc was offered an extended run in the team, four years after his Test debut, he duly flourished. Starting with the fourth Test against India in January last year, Starc has been selected for every match for which he has been available.
In that period he has quickly become one of the elite bowlers in Test cricket, snaring 63 wickets at an average of 22 from 13 Tests, nine of which have been played outside of Australia. Starc is the embodiment of what can happen when you give talented players sufficient time to prove themselves.
As he has run amok in Sri Lanka, Burns and Khawaja have flopped. Neither has looked to have a clear plan of attack against spin, with Khawaja looking particularly flummoxed, even when the ball has not been turning. They have been the two worst performers among Australia’s top six.
But to dump either of them, on the basis of two poor games, would be reactionary and short sighted. In Khawaja’s six Tests prior to this series he made 713 runs at 102, including four tons from just eight innings. The most recent of those hundreds was a pivotal 140 made against the Kiwis at Wellington after Australia had crashed to 2-5 on a green seaming pitch.
Burns, meanwhile, entered this series in Sri Lanka having dominated in his last Test, against New Zealand in Christchurch. The opener’s 170 in the first dig set that Test up for Australia and he then made a crucial 65 in the second innings as Australia chased down 201 to win the series 2-0.
After 11 Tests, Burns has made 872 runs at 42, including three centuries. Meanwhile, England are sticking fat with opener Alex Hales who from ten Tests has made only 555 runs at 29 with zero tons. Dumping Burns or Khawaja now would be a panicked decision.
Particularly when you consider that their replacement would be a 33-year-old in Shaun Marsh who has a worse Test record than both of them. There is more justification in considering the position of Marsh’s brother Mitch.
The all-rounder has now gone 24 Test innings since making his last and only half century. Marsh actually has looked OK with the blade in Sri Lanka, but has found a way to waste starts of 31, 27, 25 and 18. The question is whether Australia would be improved for the third Test were Marsh replaced by fellow all-rounder Moises Henriques?
The 29-year-old New South Welshman is not nearly as effective with the ball as Marsh and his first-class batting record is no better than that of the 25-year-old Sandgroper. Henriques made a pair of fifties on Test debut in India, followed by scores of 5, 0, 0 and 2 before he was dropped.
Australia should resist the urge to make major changes to their team for the third Test. Burns and Khawaja, in particular, do not deserve to be dumped off the back of two poor Tests. Hasty decisions will only hurt Australia beyond this series.