- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
Opinion
No matter how settled the Australian Test team is at the beginning of any summer, pundits everywhere will have some form of criticism on the makeup of the team.
Whether it’s “this bowler is underperforming” or “he hasn’t made a century in his last six games”, the list is usually endless, but this summer had a different feel about it.
The chorus is rarely so unanimous for an incumbent to not be picked, and Joe Burns looked woefully out of form in the lead into a series against one of the best bowling attacks in the world.
Burns’ statistics made for sorry reading with his previous five innings in the Sheffield shield garnering an average of just 11.
It was not just the low average, but the frenetic way he was batting and the truly uncomfortable nature of his dismissals.
The selectors, however, decided the party line they wanted to parade around was that Burns was the incumbent and had earned his position in the team.
This made a lot of sense in the mid-2000s when the incumbents were Justin Langer and Matthew Hayden, who may have only briefly been out of form.
Burns, however, had only been recalled to the team at the beginning of the summer prior and other than one score in the 90s against Pakistan, he only averaged 32 against subpar bowling attacks when his teammates could not stop making runs around him.
The incumbency argument made little to no sense as Burns had not performed exceptionally well the summer prior.
They then stated that Burns was the likely option as David Warner enjoyed batting with Burns and felt comfortable with him.
Whilst obviously having a good relationship at the top of the order is pivotal, positions cannot be wasted on batsmen who are not performing.
Once Warner was ruled out through injury it became clear to most fans that Burns should not be playing in the first Test, however, the selectors decided to stick by the underperforming batsman.
The faith only lasted two Tests as Burns has been removed from the Australian squad for the final two Tests against the Indians.
Whilst it was clear to much of Australia that Burns should not have been selected originally, the selectors appeared to need to see him underperform on the Test arena to make their decision.
The question must be asked, do they lack any sort of faith in the Sheffield shield?
The argument could be made that the early rounds may not have been the best indications of form as players like Mitch Starc were almost making centuries and Sean Abbott was making centuries so maybe the flat tracks that were being produced were not providing a clear indication to selectors.
Surely though if Joe Burns could not make runs on the flat wickets he was batting on, it would be even clearer that he was woefully out of form?
The COVID summer had provided for the first time in a long time a good consistent run in of four-day cricket as opposed to the regular one-day series that had become the norm of the previous few summers.
The selectors had finally got what they wanted for the lead into a Test summer, a clear indication of form, it was good enough to pick 21-year-old Cameron Green but apparently not good enough to drop Burns.
(Photo by Mark Brake/Getty Images)
Once again, the powers to be at Cricket Australia have been shown the importance of a strong Sheffield shield scene in the lead up to the summer as a way to guide the selectors.
Burns is a perfect case study that even though they may be the incumbent, the Shield is in a strong enough position that if someone is underperforming it’s a pretty clear indication that they will not perform in the Test side.
The coming summers must provide a strong run in of four-day cricket to provide the selectors with an opportunity to assess form for the Test team.
Build your own fantasy cricket team and put it to the test with Draftstars daily fantasy competitions. Pick your match, pick your team and watch the points roll in to take out cash prizes on each match. What are you really gambling with? Set a deposit limit.