A dogged ton by inexperienced opener Rory Burns put England into a solid position last night on day two of the first Ashes Test.
The 28-year-old was no certainty to keep his spot for this series after having a very poor start to his Test career, averaging just 22 from seven matches.
But England kept the faith and were duly rewarded yesterday when the left-hander prodded and nudged and clipped and sliced his way to 125 not out, leading England to 4/267 at stumps.
Just like first-day centurion Steve Smith, Burns has an odd technique – a curious method that has served him nicely in county cricket.
Yesterday, for the first time, it worked at the highest level.
What stood out more than Burns’ ungainly style, though, was his temperament. By stumps, his gritty knock had all but ensured England would not concede a first-innings lead, which appears even more important than normal given the dry nature of the pitch and the increasingly variable bounce witnessed yesterday.
Australia’s attack was not at its best. But they toiled, only to be blunted by patient batting and a dearth of luck at times. Root and Burns ground away, slowly increasing their rate of scoring without taking greater risks. It was the kind of circumspect batting that often is rewarded on sleepy pitches such as this.
For the bowling side, when a deck is this unresponsive, the key is patience. If you’re creating chances and half-chances at fairly regular intervals, then stay the course. Australia did just that for pretty much the whole day, seeming to create an ‘oh nearly’ moment once every three or four overs.
There was a Nathan Lyon LBW that should have been out, a James Pattinson ball that clunked into Joe Root’s stumps yet somehow didn’t dislodge the bail, a couple of potential run-out chances, several deliveries that narrowly missed the stumps, and a constant flow of edges through the cordon, many at catching height.
That Burns remained unflustered throughout all of this was a testament to his composure. Fortune wasn’t running Australia’s way and he wasn’t about to gift them anything.
Rory Burns celebrates his maiden Test match century. (Photo by Ryan Pierse/Getty Images)
Burns was particularly impressive in his handling of Lyon. On a pitch offering enough purchase to make the off-spinner a threat, the left-hander consistently got either well forward or well back, making it harder for Lyon to settle on a length.
Then, after tea, Australia’s luck changed along with the ball. The Aussies convinced the umpires that the 60-over old Dukes ball they possessed was out of shape.
While that weathered ball barely swung all day, its replacement immediately began hooping. James Pattinson was the first to use it and sent down a succession of big out-swingers to Joe Denly. Then Denly made the mistake of playing for the swing and was trapped in front by one that seamed back.
This replacement ball continued to offer generous lateral movement both through the air and off the seam until Jos Buttler was caught in the cordon poking at a Pat Cummins delivery. Suddenly, England had lost 3/40 and Australia were on the charge.
But this advance was halted by Burns and in-form all-rounder Ben Stokes, fresh from a starring role in England’s World Cup triumph.
Pattinson (2/54 from 17 overs) and Peter Siddle (1/43 from 21 overs) were solid, the former hunting wickets with vigour and troubling the batsmen more than any other bowler, while the latter was as frugal as always.
Cummins (1/65) and Lyon (0/79) – the two stars of the attack – have had many better days. Lyon tended to lose patience against Burns, regularly changing his line and length rather than trusting himself to stick to a plan.
Cummins, meanwhile, looked short of rhythm until later in the day when he started to look more like his old self.
On a sleepy pitch that gave the bowlers minimal assistance, the Aussie attack needed to be clinical to grind England down. But they couldn’t manage that.
They will need to today or England may well build a sizeable lead.
Jeff
Roar Rookie
Exactly. What would you rather, a batsman who averages an extra 10 runs an innings or a bowler who can break a partnership (as per England's lower order last night) or bowl through a line-up in favourable conditions (e.g. a turning pitch today - i.e. Labuschagne)
Pierro
Roar Rookie
Sobers and Kallis arguably two of the best of all time . You can't put stokes or marsh in the same company but doesn't mean they can't be critical in the english ashes on some pitches.
Jeff
Roar Rookie
Agreed re right conditions. But the discussion was NEVER have an allrounder unless of the quality of Sobers or Kallis. Crazy.
Pierro
Roar Rookie
It was key to australias victories in 2015 at lords and oval but need to assess the pitch careful 2 to 3 days out or even the day before and name the team on the morning .
Pierro
Roar Rookie
Its getting rowdy here. A critical period for Australia. If they can make it to lunch they will break Englands spirit substantially . Smith a little bit lose with one shot of Stokes . Smith is going to have a bowl with that rough around leg. Labuachasgne looking like a huge miss to me now
Jeff
Roar Rookie
Yes, I thought a lot of the discussion on here re allrounders being over rated and only needing to go in to a match with 3 quicks and 1 spinner was nonsensical. What you want is a team that can draw on flexibility/options to adjust to conditions (wicket or match) as the game progresses across 5 days.
Pierro
Roar Rookie
Same I'm interested if Wade can do well , really he may not get a better chance from what I'm seeing with this wicket . Only the spin is coming on and turning more but its a batting wicket for the most part. To that effect we may have missed a beat not having Labas spin and his batting as well . For me that was the only mistake with the team here by larger and co . Spin may well win the match and having laba may be a big miss
Jeff
Roar Rookie
Paine is safe for the series because he is captain. Anyway, only Wade could replace him and he has only kept in 4x FC matches in two years. I'm quite interested to see how Wade goes. In my view he must start patient and leave the ball. Especially if it's still Smith he is batting with. He needs to read match conditions and not be aggressive and that is probably the one thing that counts against him in his two year quest to put on a mountain of runs to get into the Test side.
Pierro
Roar Rookie
Ali is struggling a bit you have to wonder what this would be like if they started Leech
Pierro
Roar Rookie
Its true Jeff, they were my starting five and I would not have gone any other way here. Bancroft looked nervous but perhaps at Lords in a different wicket he may get more settled. Wade is the question mark at the moment, so is Paine in my head but as captain he probably can not be unseated
Jeff
Roar Rookie
Oh yes. I don't know - Bancroft is a specialist opener is geared towards leaving then grafting runs until conditions improve. I think at 5 and 6 you want a more fluent stroke-maker to score to all parts of the ground a decent strike rate. I don't have an issue with Smith at 3. Some think your best batsman should play at 3 anyway. The other thought is don't expose your best bat too early but rather let your top 3 wear the ball down (by strokeplay or by leaving it) and therefore let you best batsman "loose" when the ball is a bit older and the bowlers more tired. I'm actually quite happy with the top 5 at the moment - both players selected and their current batting positions.
Pierro
Roar Rookie
Yes jeff, they should not get lured outside off too much only for the next ball to target the stumps with more speed or a change of directions/spin
Jeff
Roar Rookie
Yes although the bounce is already looking a real problem today - so many keeping low. LBW could be the key mode of dismissal today.
Pierro
Roar Rookie
What about no straight swap , by relieving the pressure on bancroft and taking him down the order or even warner for that matter in first innings and promoting khawaja. I suppose the risk is promoting smith to 3 but it may provide more stability at the top which we really need to assert some first innings leads and authority in matches. You see what I'm getting at
Pierro
Roar Rookie
Its very true Im all for them playing at lords. Who knows maybe the english will prepare a super green wicket after this brown tinge . Its hard to make a case for Harris on english pitches in front of warner and harris right now and Im not one for binning batsmen on one test although I truly believe Wade has to make runs on this pitch today as its not a green pitch and looks conducive to batting even though spin is coming on. Wade was surely a borderline selection in the first place. Head is slowly earning his stripes in this test on english soil . Lets see what pitch is produced at lords with archer bowling at them before I get I get too more judgmental. Just if either fails in both innings there which I hope they will not then we have to ask the question on whether to shuffle khwaja up if he performs again to provide more stability at the top and look at giving harris a go up north.
Jeff
Roar Rookie
Yes certainly we need Warner to score some more runs - or "bigger" runs perhaps - to the point where he is the difference or close to the difference - in a Test. That said, for non-England based openers, it's a very difficult task. Take this Test for example. How much speculation was there on this site in the days leading up to Day 1 about what the pitch would do? Even up to the first ball being bowled really. So the openers (Warner/Bancroft) are effectively coming in "blind" as to how the wicket and the ball will perform in the first innings and then additionally having to face fresh and fired up opening bowlers, with a brand new rock. Because of this, a number 4 to 6 should always have a much better average than an opener in my opinion.
Jeff
Roar Rookie
IF you were going to replace Warner, then i think it's a straight swap for Harris and keep UK at 3. No point playing both Harris and Usman out of position, not that there's a big difference in the types of balls or bowlers faced by either batting position (unless the openers are putting on 50 to 100). The thing with Khawaja, remember he was actually dropped on 11 yesterday. That wasn't an opportunity (i.e. a second chance) offered to Warner/Bancroft. If he didn't get that second chance we'd probably be talking about Usman failing also. Yes, Rogers was one out-of -the-box in terms of a true professional with almost a decade of County cricket behind him by the time of the 2015 series.
Pierro
Roar Rookie
Heres the latest State attack on Warner. He now averages 33.29 in England and is yet to score a century in the country after nine Tests. The good news for Warner is the next Test of this campaign is at Lord’s – the ground he has fared best at in Test cricket in England, with scores of 83 and 38 from his one match at the venue.
Pierro
Roar Rookie
Under consideration and appreciated the thought and note. Just not seeing it in Warners batting with the red ball. He has been a year out. I suppose one innings he proved he could dog it out was ealier on in World cup he didn't bat pretty but he hung in there slowly to make a century. On to Lords ill re read your note again shortly. Perhaps the more pertinent point as well is who is there to replace him. Ive got less confidence in harris and burns on moving wickets in england against top quality bowling. I keep thinking maybe Khwaja should open with him. He looked solid and elegant for his 40 and batted well in India opening in one dayers which may seem irrelevant. Bancroft and Warner deserve their chance at Lords. Im just wondering if bancroft would be better down in wades position to take some pressure of him. If Khawaja can get off to 40 plus at the top its huge in this series . Was just looking at the 2015 and later half of 2013 series. Rogers was enormous in the first innings knocks for australia . He's actually the only opener to perform with 50 plus knocks (and centuries) consistently in the opening slot since 2013 series . Thats a bigger worry in general .
Jeff
Roar Rookie
- I'm citing Smith's consecutive single figures to make the point that batsmen get out cheaply as well as make good scores. Just because Warner has two low scores, doesn't mean he can't also get good scores. - I'm not sure why your considering not playing Warner in northern grounds. The four single digit scores I cited of Smith's were his total scores at northern grounds last tour. Yet that doesn't mean he shouldn't have played this Test nor does it mean (clearly) he can't score runs in these grounds. - You're focusing on Warner's first innings scores as evidence he can't play the moving ball. At Cardiff he made 17 just before lunch on Day 2. Yet at Trent Bridge he made 64 just after lunch, but also on Day 2 (and that was after Australia was rolled for 60 on Day 1). So there is no trend line there. - The match is not over before Australia bats for a second time, certainly not after just two innings of a match have been completed. As I've said before, I think you are focusing far too much on selective stats from a very small sample size, including some to make a point but excluding others when it suits (i.e. first innings of 38 at Lords isn't "north" and 1st innings of 85 at The Oval doesn't count as it's a "dead rubber") and that he can't bat early in a northern Test because he's gotten out in the first innings cheaply; yet one 2nd innings half century was scored on a Day 2, the same day of the match as a 1st innings failure - both northern grounds.