With the Ashes won and the whitewash out of play, Australia’s Test selectors can now look ahead to the South Africa Test tour, with the 1st Test starting on 1 March.
The upcoming four-Test series is Australia’s first series of more than three Tests against South Africa since their reinstatement to world cricket in 1991; a long time coming after several entertaining and hard-fought series over the past 25 years.
This is the first of three articles, each of which will address selection questions.
3. Who should open the batting with David Warner?
4. Who should bat at 6, aka does the XI require an allrounder?
5. Who is Australia’s fourth best, fully fit, pace bowler?
The Ashes has helped settle two important questions at least for the next series or two.
1. Who should be the wicketkeeper?
Tim Paine has done enough during The Ashes to be retained for South Africa.
2. Is Shaun Marsh too old or not good enough to be in the Test team?
No, not on current form, which is career-best. He should be selected.
Each of the unresolved questions appear to have three or four candidates ahead of the rest, and it’s quite likely that two of each of these candidates can be included in the tour party.
The squad is unlikely to include a second spinner, given Lyon’s form, and that one wasn’t taken on the 2013-14 tour.
The selectors will likely get to watch only one more Shield round (8-11 February) before naming a 16-man squad.
Form is hard to assess on a one Shield game sample size. I’m sure the selectors will look at January’s ODI performances (for Australia reps such as Mitch Marsh), and, dangerously, BBL games to judge a player’s form.
Instead of the BBL and ODIs, the selectors would be better off using career statistics, and considering anticipated conditions, along with FC and Test statistics from the first half of the summer.
The contenders
Joe Burns has a Test average of 38 and averaged 57 across ten Sheffield Shield innings this summer. He has batted himself back into contention as a Test opener and is versatile, having batted in the middle order for state and country.
He is more attacking than Cameron Bancroft and Matt Renshaw, which includes turning the strike over more, scoring 17 per cent more runs per 100 balls from 1s, 2s, and 3s, than Bancroft and Renshaw.
While Bancroft had the superior early Shield form and deservedly won selection for The Ashes, it’s fair to say he hasn’t quite lived up to hopes, averaging 29.8 through 4 matches.
Excluding his blameless run-out in Adelaide, his average rises to an unconvincing 33.8, however he has made several promising starts and looked composed throughout.
Technique-wise, he tends to fall over a bit, trapping him LBW twice. This may be even more of an issue in less bouncy or swinging conditions, like those in England, but at least Bancroft is playing regular county cricket and is young enough to improve this.
Whether he is able to improve between now and South Africa is more doubtful.
To be fair on Bancroft, England’s opening bowlers are a strong duo, with James Anderson ranked the ICCs No. 1 Test bowler, and Stuart Broad still a top 15 bowler, despite mediocre 2017 form. With these quality opening bowers, England have a stronger attack than, say, the Pakistan bowlers which Renshaw plundered for 71 and 184 last summer.
England’s third, fourth, and fifth bowlers have been a weak point aside from Craig Overton’s pre-injury performance and Chris Woakes under lights in Adelaide.
Joe Burns’ highest Test score is 170, made in Christchurch, against the Kiwis’ Neil Wagner (now ranked 7th by ICC), Trent Boult (12th) and Tim Southee (16th). In context, it’s a hugely impressive performance against a quality pace attack in foreign conditions.
His maiden Test century, in his first match as an opener, was a second innings knock against New Zealand at the ‘Gabba. These were friendly home conditions but amply demonstrated the ability to bat with David Warner, sharing in 161-run and 237-run opening stands in that match.
Burns provides a right-left combination with David Warner, as does Bancroft.
Renshaw must surely have slipped to third in the pecking order to partner Warner. He will hopefully re-discover form and confidence in the second half of the Shield season.
Youngsters like Jake Weatherald (averaging 45.7 this season) and Marcus Harris (45.9) have performed well this summer but are not Test-ready.
| Joe Burns | Cameron Bancroft | Matt Renshaw | Ed Cowan | |
| Innings as Test opener | 19 | 7 | 18 | 29 |
| Runs as Test opener | 727 | 179 | 623 | 963 |
| Average as Test opener | 38.26 | 29.83 | 36.64 | 33.2 |
| Strike rate as Test opener | 56.9 | 40.5 | 43.8 | 41.2 |
| Innings per 50+ as Test opener | 3.8 | 7 | 4.5 | 4.14 |
| Runs from 4s and 6s/100 balls | 32.2 | 19.5 | 22.6 | 20.2 |
| Runs from 1s, 2s, 3s / 100 balls | 24.6 | 21 | 21.2 | 21 |
| FC average 2017/18 (inc. Test) | 57.11 | 62.1 | 16.66 | 46.33 |
| Career FC average | 40.05 | 39.26 | 35 | 42.26 |
| FC inns per 50+ | 3.3 | 4.4 | 5 | 3.6 |
Left field options
The other opener who deserves consideration is Ed Cowan. It’s extremely unlikely that the selectors will pick him, but given Tim Paine was picked for the Ashes, nothing can be ruled out. Cowan has Test match experience and averages a respectable 42 in First Class cricket, higher than all other Shield openers.
His age (35) counts against him, but has proved no barrier to recalling Shaun Marsh (34) for the Ashes, nor Chris Rogers (played his second Test at 35) and Adam Voges (debuted at 35) who all performed well in recent years.
If Cowan is granted the opportunity to open and scores a century for NSW in their next Shield match, while others struggle, then it becomes remotely feasible.
I haven’t considered promoting Usman Khawaja or Shaun Marsh to open. Nor do I think dropping Khawaja is a sensible option.
Khawaja must be locked in at three for the South Africa series despite a disappointing Ashes because he has proven over several years to be our third best batsmen in Test cricket (by average and total runs) and generally deals with pace bowling very effectively – this is not a tour to the subcontinent.
Two Ashes fifties from six innings is not a terrible return, but you feel he needs to make a good score at the SCG for his own confidence, otherwise, there’s one more Shield game to lock himself in.
Sadly, there is a dearth of proven long-form batsmen in Australian cricket and Khawaja has shown in the last three years to be a class above Shield cricket, though faltering against good spinners.
Given South Africa has four pace bowlers in the top 15 of the ICC rankings and a spinner in the top 20, there will be no sterner examination of a player’s technique.
The opening partnership will be crucial to Australia’s chances in this series.
As such, I would select Joe Burns and Cameron Bancroft in the touring squad and unless Bancroft makes a significant score beforehand, even in a tour game, then Burns should be in the first Test XI in South Africa, despite his dual failures in Hobart during 2016.
Saurebh Gandle
Roar Guru
I think Shaun Marsh could do that job and someone like Glenn Maxwell can come in at No.6 ,which provides the spin option as well.
John Erichsen
Roar Guru
Don, if you truly think that Bancroft is in good touch and just unlucky, you are more deluded than many already believe. A straight delivery, on a pitch doing next to nothing, is now causing him grief. Nobody in their right mind could believe Bancroft was a success this series. That's what domestic cricket is for. If that isn't the case, why was Renshaw dropped for the start of this series? Australia will need Bancroft in good form for the South African series, or they will need him replaced by someone who is. That expectation is the very thing that saw Bancroft receive his test cap and Renshaw before him. I won't be surprised or unhappy if selectors give Bancroft more time to prove himself but if they are consistent, he is in big trouble. If they do persevere with Bancroft, he will need good runs in South Africa and early in the series, because our selectors seem to respond to a losing team quite ruthlessly.
Don Freo
Guest
If you think Bancroft has been 'out of touch' with those mid 20s scores and the consequent solid opening, you are not watching. You must be just reading the scores. A duck after 7 balls says nothing about 'touch'. I am staggered at how many Aussie fans want to drop someone. That's not how development works.
John Erichsen
Roar Guru
I am not convinced Steve Waugh was really considered a batting all-rounder early in his career. He debuted for NSW in Dec '84 batting at nine and bowling medium pacers. He batted at eight in the Shield final that year. When selected to debut for Australia,a year later, Waugh was batting at six for NSW, below Greg Matthews and bowling first change. Apart from that, when has Mitch Marsh's bowling average in test cricket been 27. Never, as far as i recall. 30.83 is his best, after 8 tests (48.75 after the five tests we were using as a measure for Bancroft). Waugh's was 21.7 after his first five test matches. That may be why selectors gave him some extra time. Waugh batted at seven 19 times in his early career, so there is nothing like the pressure to make big scores that Bancroft experiences at the top of the order. Perhaps, opening the batting is just too important a position to give a young, under-performing player looking more and more out of touch with each innings more time. I see some validity in the Steve Waugh argument and concede that, like Waugh, Bancroft could move down the order and bat at seven. Does Cameron bowl at all?
Bearfax
Roar Guru
Valid points there John, but his efforts with the ball weren't that great either and he was regularly only used for a few overs. Granted he had an all rounder role, initially, but it doesn't change the fact that he was brought in a as batting all rounder, not a bowling all rounder, and he should therefore be judged far more on his batting performances. Understand though I'm not knocking the selectors for keeping him in the team, despite his poor performances with the bat. Rather I'm commending them for sticking with him which I am now saying they should do with the young openers. If his bowling had been like Mitch Marsh's at around 27, your argument would be on firmer ground. But his average with is bowling after 16 tests over 2 years was 37.5.
John Erichsen
Roar Guru
Steve Waugh wasn't in the side to open the batting, but rather as an all-rounder, debuting at six and then dropping below Matthews to seven. Waugh's place in the side wasn't to be a specialist batsman, but rather to make contributions with bat and ball. In his debut test at the MCG, Waugh bowled 11 overs in the first innings, (2/36). He bowled 7 overs at the SCG, in his second test, 4 overs in a washed out test in NZ for his third test, 23 overs in the first innings of his 4th test (4/56) and 9 overs in his 5th test. It's a poor comparison, between these two young openers and Steve Waugh, given how different their roles in their teams were. Surely, some of the reason, selectors persevered with Waugh through those early tests, is that he offered them something with his bowling. Find a young opener for a better comparison. Hayden, he debuted at age 23? Nope, he played a single test filling in for an Injured Mark Taylor and suffered broken hand from the first ball he faced from Allan Donald. Selected again two years later, a 25 yr old Hayden scored a century against the West Indies then was dropped again a few tests later after under-performing in South Africa. He kept churning out domestic runs for Queensland and in county cricket and the rest is history. I am struggling to find a young Australian opener who after significant perseverance without being dropped, turned into a really good player. I can find Rick Darling, who debuted at 21 during the WSC days, scored runs in his first test (65 & 56), made less than 30 in each of his next 8 innings. He finished his test career, having payed 14 tests and averaging 26.81. I do agree that we should expect experienced players to transition more quickly into the test arena. However, I don't believe that means we shouldn't drop younger players who are under-performing. It means, we don't write them off as a future test option. Older players who don't step up perhaps don't get that luxury.
Geoff from Bruce Stadium
Guest
Burns for me too. Burns is in great form with the bat in all forms of cricket. He will be confident which is more than I can say for Bancroft and Renshaw. Only other contenders I can see are Finch and possibly Weatherald from South Australia. Burns has a double hundred, another 100, an 80 and a 70 in Shield cricket. Finch has scored three 50s and a couple of 40s in Shield this season and Weatherald has scored two 100s and a 70.
Geoff from Bruce Stadium
Guest
You're right Steve - it's pointless taking Agar to Sth Africa if he won't play test cricket. We are not talking sub-continent here. Better to take some depth in the fast bowling department.
Graeme
Guest
Makes sense to me Bearfax. Your point "we can afford to give him more time to work on his game at the top level, while we’re winning" is valid. I suppose in saying that, against SA we could be turning the wins into losses pretty quickly if the bugs don't get ironed out. Bancroft and Renshaw both need some one on one coaching.
Bearfax
Roar Guru
In defence of Renshaw and Bancroft, Steve Waugh in his first 5 tests had scores of 13, 5, 8, 0, 11, 74, 1, 1 ,0 for an average of 12.6. In his first 21 tests he was averaging 25.9. He wasn't dropped once during that period. We all know that he finally broke the shackles and turned into one of our finest batsmen, but he learned his test skills during that struggling period. Older batsmen should be able to face test cricket quickly given their experience and therefore I feel you only give them a short period to prove themselves. Young batsmen on the rise you should show much more latitude. Let them toughen in front of the best bowlers in the World.
Graeme
Guest
I believe Renshaw and Bancroft are the future of Australian cricket. I hope they both get to bat together as openers.
Graeme
Guest
You stick up for the bloke and it bites you every time! After today I think Cameron Bancroft has checked out of the test team for now. Hopefully for he and Renshaw not terminally exiled.
Bearfax
Roar Guru
Surely the monkey is of Ussie's back...again. So many supporters it seems view him as ongoing suspect. He's always having to prove himself yet is consistently No 3 batsman in the country. As for openers, I'm concerned we are again not going to allow a young player like Bancroft, and Renshaw before him, to find his feet. We can afford to give him more time to work on his game at the top level, while we're winning
John Erichsen
Roar Guru
Bancroft has always been strong through the leg side but his current method seems to exaggerate the across the ball swing path. If its causing him troubles on these docile pitches, he won't enjoy South Africa.
John Erichsen
Roar Guru
Mike Hussey was 30 when he made his debut. Worked ok, as I recall.
John Erichsen
Roar Guru
A full five test series at home, on pretty docile pitches should be ample for a batsman, to cement his spot. If performances suggest he hasn't, then its ok to consider a better option. If Bancroft was to dropped after the Sydney test, he only has himself to blame. Burns was dropped after two bad tests in Sri Lanka (although his 29 at Pallekele is higher than Bancroft's 2nd best this Ashes series) and a double failure on the juicy pitch at Bellerieve. Prior to those three, very difficult pitches for an opening batsman, Burns had scored 170 & 65 in the test in NZ. Now that's harsh! For me, this series seems to confirm the saying that "form is temporary, but class is permanent". Both Bancroft and Cook's series have expressed this, but from opposite sides of the coin. Then, of course, there is Smith...
John Erichsen
Roar Guru
It was very disappointing to see Bancroft out for a duck today. It certainly hurts his claims for retention. Batting in partnership with Warner, Burns was first out 58% of the time. Bancroft 83%. Burns was dismissed under 10 as opener in 58% of his test innings. Bancroft 42%. I don't undervalue surviving and taking shine off the ball as an opener. Bancroft, like Renshaw before him, has this in his game. Sadly, Bancroft's form has slipped since the start of the series. Even accounting for the run out, an average of 24 at home on pretty flat pitches is poor. It will be interesting to see how much faith the selectors have in him, if he fails again in the 2nd innings. Recent selector behaviour doesn't look good for Cameron. Khawaja, however, will have cemented his trip to South Africa, with his 76*(at present).
Don Freo
Guest
And I'm still advocating the Victorian over WA's Bosisto. Where's the WA bias?
Bunney
Roar Rookie
100% on the age issue Steve. Late 20's - 30 is generally acknowledged as when a batsman will be in his prime which Burns is displaying right now. I don't think Burns has the necessary skill to be a gun 100 test match player, but he could be an excellent addition to the team over the next 3 - 4 years, which is approximately 50 tests worth and a very good career.
Bunney
Roar Rookie
Bancroft needs to improve more than just his concentration. He has a big glaring technical issue in that he hasn't been moving his front foot properly (not pointing where he's trying to hit it) which results in him being unbalanced and leaving a larger than ball sized gap between bat and pad. Got bowled through it again today. This is why I'm far from certain Bancroft has - at this point in time - what it takes.