Since Joe Burns’ last extended run in the Test team, Australia have used seven different openers.
They’ve churned through Cameron Bancroft, Marcus Harris, Matt Renshaw, Shaun Marsh, Aaron Finch and Usman Khawaja in addition to mainstay David Warner.
Now Burns is back for his sixth stint in the Australia side. That sounds wrong, but it’s not – the Queenslander’s 17 Tests have been spread across six separate stints in the team.
He started with two Tests against India in the summer of 2014-15. Then in late 2015 he returned to the Test team for what has been his only prolonged stint – ten consecutive Tests against New Zealand, the West Indies and Sri Lanka.
In late 2016 his third stint in the team saw him bizarrely recalled for just one Test, against South Africa in Hobart. His fourth stint also lasted just one Test when he came into the team for the fourth match in South Africa in March last year after the ball-tampering scandal. Burns came back to the Test line-up ten months after that for two Tests against Sri Lanka.
(AAP Image/Dan Himbrechts)
Now, another summer on, he has begun his sixth stint in the Australian Test team in resounding fashion by crunching 97 in a monster 222-run opening stand with David Warner in Brisbane yesterday. After a slightly nervy start, Burns quickly found his groove. In the 13th over he hooked a 145 kilometre per hour short ball to the boundary off 16-year-old pace prodigy Naseem Shah, who was hugely impressive.
Not long after, Burns advanced down the pitch twice to off spinner Iftikhar Ahmed, first lofting him cleanly over mid-on for four and then giving himself room to hit over cover to the boundary.
That took Burns to 32 from 47 balls and from then on he looked supreme. His footwork to the spinners was swift and assured. Against the quicks he timed the ball beautifully, leaning into drives and sweating on anything short. Naseem Shah tested Burns with several searing short balls, including one that smashed him on the elbow.
That blow came from the second last ball before lunch. Australia went into the long break on 0-100 with Warner cruising at the other end. The left-handed veteran has been flogged by critics over the past 18 months due to his role in the sandpaper scandal and his horrendous Ashes.
Many cricket followers even made the nonsensical suggestion he shouldn’t have been in Australia’s team for this Test, in spite of his astounding home record. Warner can’t change what happened in South Africa or in the Ashes. What he can do, however, is help Australia to win this series against Pakistan and then beat the talented Kiwis in the following three-Test series. That is all that should matter to him right now.
Yesterday Warner batted with tremendous control. Even when he was well set he resisted the urge to try to flay the Pakistan attack and continued to respect the good balls.
Burns, at the other end, did exactly the same thing.
(AFP PHOTO / Saeed KHAN)
Yes, the Gabba pitch was good for batting and, yes, this Pakistan attack is inexperienced. But the stand between Warner and Burns was high class. They look good together. They always have.
Across 20 innings batting as a pair, the average opening stand between Burns and Warner has been 53. That is the fourth-highest average in Test history for an Australian opening pair (minimum 1000 runs). It is even better than the 52 average of legendary opening pair Matt Hayden and Justin Langer.
Surely now, after churning through openers in the past two years, Australia must give Burns an extended run in the team. His record as a Test opener is fantastic, with 1074 runs at 43, including four tons and a 97 from just 15 matches.
At 30 years old he is in his prime and could potentially play for another four or five years. With no other attractive opening options – Bancroft and Harris have had their chances for now and Renshaw is in a long form trough – there is no need to look past Burns for the rest of this summer at a minimum.
It is time to belatedly give Burns a generous stint as a Test opener.
Mungbean74
Roar Rookie
Confusing is why the heck he wasn’t in the team after scoring 180....
Diamond Jackie
Roar Rookie
And to think Burns couldn't make the Ashes squad and instead they took TWO all rounders , one of which was only ever going to play... in fact out of a possible 10 test spots they played 1 between them. Ironically after two tests the selectors were looking for a right hander that could open or play down the order.... Joey , time for your time in the sun. You have earned it.
Insult_2_Injury
Roar Rookie
I can't see him being pushed, considering his reason for appointment. The end of the Aussie summer is as much of an end of season as international cricketers get, so depending on how many more fingers he breaks and his desire to tour, he could pull the pin then. I hope he doesn't, he is a calm, astute character - regardless of the media manufacturing drama about DRS decisions - and I can see him in discussion with CA as to whether it will be a burden on Smith, as he's the only one who'll realistically be ready by March. I hope he carries on for longer as I believe Smith, like Root, is a good bat, as a captain - not so much!
Chris Love
Roar Guru
In his last test he made 180 and then wasn’t selected for the Ashes. Which was the next test series after that. What is confusing?
Waxhead
Roar Rookie
@Ronan yes I agree Burns could do ok this summer in australia. There does not appear to be anyone better atm and he's made a good start in a winning team. A much tougher test awaits Burns if they pick him to tour outside australia :)
Mungbean74
Roar Rookie
Sorry, I love my cricket but I only watch the Ashes or Games at home in Auz. You’re saying Burns was dropped after making 180 before the Ashes??? And they didn’t bring him in when all were struggling? That sounds crazy!
Josh H
Roar Rookie
There's just something about that Harris ...he's just got that intent
Jeff
Roar Rookie
NZ has been shaping for a while as a tough series for Australia. I'm not expecting it to be the case, but were Aus to have a bit of a disaster series, a "Hobart-cleanout" with focus on a couple of players could happen. But I doubt it this summer. More of a danger could be the away Bangladesh tour (noting Aus lost a Test there last time) followed by India next year. Were Australia to lose (almost) consecutive series at home to India (this time with Smith back) that would be the end for Paine. But by end of next summer, does Paine really have that much more time on his side anyway? His saving may be not taking a new captain away to South Africa straight after.
John Gold
Guest
Who was the last batsman of note to have the open grip where the line of the edge of the bat runs between the v in the leading hand between thumb and forefinger and therefore comes round the front of the handle as apposed to the closed grip where the splice at the back of the bat runs through the v and the hand is at the back of the handle.
Insult_2_Injury
Roar Rookie
I'm a fan, but his age works against him. A year or so is the likely outlook, but if we're winning CA won't be asking questions.
Jeff
Roar Rookie
Hi James, this was something I posted a few days ago. I guess I did it because I've heard the same analysis before, and I think it needs further consideration. I'm not "anti-Burns" in this, just feel the need to push back when I hear things that I feel are being pushed in a particular direction when INO isn't quite representative/accurate. So apologies for it being recycled: That second rate Sri Lankan team went on to win their next series – away against South Africa.” From the quote elsewhere: “As Tim Paine won the toss and elected to bat first, the visitors confirmed the loss of Lakmal to a back injury, meaning they’ve had to bring in three new pace bowlers with a combined five Tests of experience between them” - Relating to Canberra Test. The SA First Test was not won by SL’s bowlers. It was Perera’s unbelievable unbeaten 150 that took them from about 9-220 to 9-304 that saw SL win by 1 wkt. SL’s bowlers were outbowled by South Africa (other than for Perera’s innings). The SA Second Test in PE was heavily affected by conditions with very low scores both sides first few days, It was their front-liner Lakmal (missing from Canberra) that took out de Kock and devasted SA’s lower order in the 2nd innings giving SL a target they could – and -did reach. The SL bowling attack from the Canberra Test was not the deciding factor in the series victory against South Africa. You only had to sit and watch the Canberra Test to see how poor that SL attack was. Burns 180, Head 161, Patterson 114*, Paine 45* just in the first innings alone should tell you all you need to know about the quality of SL’s bowling. And Khawaja got in on it for good measure with 101* in the 2nd innings.
DTM
Guest
On another note, you can see the value of a good allrounder by looking at the NZ/Eng test match. Both Stokes and De Grandhomme have scored 50's and taken 2/40 odd. De Grandhomme averages 39 with the bat (1 ton from 27 test innings) and 30 with the ball (about 2 wkts per match). Stokes averages 35 with the bat (8 tons from 105 test innings) and 32 with the ball averaging about 2.5 wkts per match). Would be nice having one of those batting at 6 or 7 for Aust.
Simoc
Guest
Great work from Labushagne today, the first true selectors pick that has shown he really values playing for Australia. He has been gifted the toughest gig at first drop with minimal experience and today batted supremely. Looks like a selectors discovery to me. The rest was sort of expected as Warner and Burns needed to deliver against the most inexperienced attack they are likely to encounter. Why isn't one of worlds best bowlers, Abbas, playing. No doubt he'll clean up in Adelaide. While you can only play what's in front of you I'm not convinced we'de be in a similar position against India, South Africa, England here. Making Burns out as a world-beater is a bit simplistic but good for him. He may have been in retirement mode had he played in England in the last series and delivered like Warner, Harris.
Scotty
Guest
The bigger problem was that Bancroft was then selected in front of the incumbent Harris for no reason other than a scrapping, somewhat lucky, grinding performance. Honestly I feel like I’m taking crazy pills when I watch Bancroft play - how on earth anyone thinks that technique is up to test standard is beyond me. At least Harris and Burns look like they can hit the middle of the bat once in - Bancroft by contrast never looks in!
Harry Selassie
Roar Rookie
If Burns keeps playing as he has done in this first Test he will make it next to impossible to drop him for future Tests this summer. It does make you wonder, "What if he had opened during The Ashes or in the World Cup?"
WayneS
Roar Rookie
mav... I certainly wasn't knocking either Burns or Labuschagne's efforts and I live in Qld. However, when your first three batsmen score over 400 runs between them, one has to temper enthusiasm and not get too carried away. By the way, I am from an era that played baseball as well as cricket at school hence the so called sexist "batsmen". Only softball and baseball used the term batters then hahaha.
maverick
Roar Rookie
Some people are just biased. It doesn't matter how much runs Lab and Burns score,they will keep decrying their contributions. I remember everyone devaluing Lab's efforts in county cricket for Glamorgan citing it was in divison 2. Then when he performed against Archer,Broad and co in English condition,they were pointing out to his moderate shield average and basically called his efforts a fluke.Now he dominated this domestic season and has just scored 185,they will devalue this effort by saying it's against a weak Pakistan attack. Three quicks bowling 140 plus and a high class spinner becomes a weak attack to them!!!
Chris Love
Roar Guru
I actually think in looking for all the reasons in the world to drop an opener who scored 180 in his last test. And in doing so throwing favourites like Bancroft and Harris into the Ashes, they’ve actually done both of them a disservice. Burns has now backed his 180 up with an impressive 97. That will see him play every test this summer barring injury. So that will be another 4 straight tests in home conditions and not against a hooping Dukes ball being flung by Broad, Anderson and Archer. He’ll be gutted getting out for 97 but should take a lot of confidence from that knock. Some consistency on home pitches should see him rack up a few more scores this summer and go into next years ashes feeling comfortable about his abilities and partnership with Warner. He’d only have to average low to mid 40’s in England next year to make it very difficult for any of the others to push him out of the side.
Chris Love
Roar Guru
Why so much talk about Paine’s successor? Surely Paine still has a very long time left in the test team if his keeping remains stable.
Jeff
Roar Rookie
That's not relevant though as an after-the-fact consideration. Burns didn't deserve selection based on his FC performances leading up to choosing the squad. Warner was an unknown and his likley form could only be assessed on short-form. Harris was the incumbent and didn't do anything to de-select himself. It was always going to come down to Bancroft and Burns for the last spot, and the final selection hit out, Bancroft played exceptionally well and Burns failed. Warner had no FC form. Burns had by far the worst of the other 3 leading into selection. So what's the specific point of the comment?