Test cricket: Nathan McSweeney shows why he should partner Khawaja as contenders falter
Nathan McSweeney ticks almost every box to be Australia’s next opener, except for one crucial thing. DANIEL CHERNY examines the fallout of a disastrous day for the bat-off in Mackay.
Cricket
Don't miss out on the headlines from Cricket. Followed categories will be added to My News.
If Nathan McSweeney was an opener, this would be just about cut and dried.
The Queenslander turned South Australian is ticking just about every box to partner Usman Khawaja at the top of the order three weeks from Friday.
He’s a good player who looks to be getting better by the year. Picked to captain Australia A when his first-class average hovered around 28, it has risen above 37 following three Sheffield Shield tons last season and another influx of at the beginning of this campaign.
McSweeney is 25, a wonderful happy medium between throwing a teenage Sam Konstas into the shark pool or going back to 30 plus options Cameron Bancroft and Marcus Harris.
A potential future captain, he is also a right-hander, providing a nice foil for the left-handed Khawaja and guarding against the threat posed by India’s veteran off-spinner Ravichandran Ashwin, who has claimed the scalps of more lefties than any other man in history.
And he looked comfortably the most assured of any of the four prime contenders who batted for Australia A against India A in Mackay on Thursday.
Konstas’ third-ball prod to Mukesh Kumar was the embodiment of overeager youth. It was more than reasonable to have a look at him in these pair of matches, but on exposed form he looked more likely to replace Khawaja down the track than open with him against Jasprit Bumrah and co.
Cameron Bancroft’s dismissal down the leg side was dubious. It left his first-class runs tally for the season at 10 from five innings, and bordering on unselectable.
Marcus Harris nicked off for 17 and was lucky to get that far, dropped at third slip on eight. He had sworn in the pre-season not to get swept up in the annual jostling for Test spots, but having been presented with a gilt-edged opportunity is letting it slip.
And so that left McSweeney. As has too often been the case with his state, in he came very early in the innings. Circumspect but assured, he eked his way to an unbeaten 29 from 110 balls on a day in which 14 wickets fell and no other player faced more than 77 deliveries.
If he can nudge his way to 50 and beyond on Friday, he will have one foot in the Test team, no matter how much national selectors insist that this is not a bat-off. Even if McSweeney was not their preferred man to start, this is a panel that has shown a willingness to change course when confronted with the evidence of cold hard runs, as evidenced by the respective comebacks of Khawaja and Mitch Marsh in recent years.
That McSweeney is not a dasher in the David Warner mould is a moot point. Good luck trying to find someone else to average 44 and strike at more than 70.
No, the sole issue is that as much as he has batted in opening-like positions, he does not actually bat in that position.
The panel has reserved the right to shuffle the top four for the second A game at the MCG next week, and the murmurings on Thursday were that McSweeney would get his chance up the order. To be fair, similar rumblings had Harris and Bancroft open in the first innings in Mackay, a situation that did not materialise.
For years batters were eased - relatively speaking - into the Aussie Test batting line-up at No. 5 or 6. That is a luxury no longer afforded given the unwillingness to shift Marsh or Travis Head, and the preference for Steve Smith at No. 4 after his brief experiment at the top.
And so if it is McSweeney, it will have to be as opener (where he doesn’t typically bat) or No. 3, meaning Marnus Labuschagne would have to slide up. Neither is ideal, and it would be particularly ironic if Australia replaced Smith as opener with another non-specialist.
Speaking slightly around the question of whether McSweeney could open in Test cricket, Matthew Hayden - de facto leader of the specialist opener union - said on Wednesday that: “I’ve always thought that one, two and three is as close as you can possibly get to a specialist position within a batting line-up.”
Whether that means they are completely interchangeable is the pertinent question, because if they are then best end the debate here.
More Coverage
Originally published as Test cricket: Nathan McSweeney shows why he should partner Khawaja as contenders falter
The key detail which could make Smith the greatest again
Steve Smith has regularly spoken about the phenomenon of ‘losing his hands’ and then ‘finding’ them again in the never ending pursuit of his nirvana at the crease. He may have rediscovered the detail which placed him among the world’s best batsmen.
India coy on star – but Aussies aren’t buying into mind games
Australia has brushed off any attempts at ducks and drakes from the cagey India despite the tourists springing a surprise while remaining coy on the status of top order star Shubman Gill.