Image Credit- Getty
The big question in Australian cricket is whether Steven Smith would open for Usman Khawaja against India in two months during the Border-Gavaskar Test series.
There hasn’t been much buzz about Australia’s Super Eight exit from the T20 World Cup, nor has there been a passionate fan base watching the ongoing white-ball tour of the UK for clues about the T20I team’s future trajectory or a glimpse of what the ODI World Cup-winning team will look like without the retired David Warner ahead of the Champions Trophy next year. Before Australia plays Test cricket once more, there are still eight ODIs and three T20Is to go.
However, because of the way Australians support the men’s team, there is a great deal of curiosity about Warner’s long-term replacement on the Test team. Smith has received harsh criticism for his four-match debut performance. Despite Smith being the one who initially asked to open, teammates, former players, analysts, columnists, and fans have all stated he should go back to No. 4, with the exception of the odd voice.
Cameron Green was able to rejoin the team at No. 4 thanks to Smith’s transfer, and in March, he reacted by hitting a game-winning 174 not out at the Basin Reserve against New Zealand. But as an opener, Smith had a challenging tour to New Zealand. In January, he demonstrated his ability to flourish in the role by making 91 not out in his fourth innings in it against the West Indies. He went on to post scores of 31, 0, 11, and 9 in Wellington and Christchurch, both of which had wickets that were ideal for new-ball bowlers.
His remarks regarding the first role have been significant ever since. He said back in January that he was in it for the long run and expressed a desire to open up to give himself a new challenge later in his career. He hasn’t specifically changed his mind since then, but he has acknowledged in public that Khawaja and Marnus Labuschagne had expressed their desire for him to go back to No. 4. This week, Khawaja was especially observant when following Smith’s instructions.
He’ll just probably never say it, so I’ll say it for him,” Khawaja told Fox Sports. “Opening is a very important spot … I still think we have the best Test player of my era in the side, in Steve Smith, and his best spot has been No. 4. I feel like the best balance for our team is Labuschagne three, Smith four.”
It presents a dilemma for Australia’s selectors. Although coach Andrew McDonald reiterated that, barring injury, the current top six from the New Zealand series would remain as the top six for the first Test against India, he acknowledged on SEN last week that no decision had been made and conversations were ongoing. As soon as the multi-format players are available for Shield cricket next month, there will probably be an indication of the plans.
So, who will start with Khawaja if it’s not Smith—which is still a possibility?
Though it doesn’t move Smith back to No. 4, this is the easiest and least disruptive alternative to the status situation. Smith and Labuschagne may just switch places in the sequence. In first-class cricket, Labuschagne has made fifteen opening runs, the most recent being in May of this year when he amassed 111 runs for Glamorgan against Middlesex.
Although Labuschagne’s opening average in first-class cricket is only 34.86, he has amassed two centuries, one of which came at the WACA in 2016 while he was still attempting to make a name for himself. In Test cricket, he has also gone out to bat eight times when his side is still without a run and numerous other occasions in the first overs.
But moving Labuschagne up from No. 3, where he has 11 Test centuries and averages 51.78, to open only to get Smith back to No. 3 might not appease the masses let alone Smith, Labuschagne and Khawaja.
Before Warner’s retirement, there was a tiny window of time where Green could very well open the batting. When the all-rounder was serving drinks during Warner’s last Test match in Sydney, Green was getting ready for it, spending time facing the new ball with batting coach Michael Di Venuto.
It seems unfavourable to move him to open for just two Tests after he hit a career-defining 174 not out at No. 4 in Wellington. Green’s bowling availability would be restricted if he were asked to take on the opening role in his extensive repertoire. After dominating in that position for Western Australia, Green has also been known to declare that he prefers to play at number four because he feels much more at ease there than at number six.
Khawaja believes Head is the ideal partner for him, allowing Smith to revert to the No. 4 spot. The hypothesis is gaining traction among the general public, especially in light of Head’s skill with the white ball at the top of the order and his history of opening the batting in Test matches played in India.
Another concern was Head’s poor starting record in the subcontinent against spin. As soon as Australia left India, he was sent back to No. 5, and he promptly hammered 163 against the same opponents in the World Test Championship final. Head may start at first base in Sri Lanka later in the summer, but the selectors obviously like his brilliant counterattacking skills at number five while playing at home.
Similar to Head, Marsh’s performance in white-ball cricket against the new ball has prompted suggestions to deploy him at the top of the order in Test cricket to let Smith to move back down. Given that he is performing at his highest level of his career, it is unlikely that the selectors would put Marsh in that situation, but he would give it his all for the team if asked.