Ben Gardner looks at the pros and cons for Australia sticking with each of their batsmen, in the event that David Warner is fit to return for the Boxing Day Test at the MCG against India.
When you’ve just been bowled out for the lowest Test total in your country’s history, the last thing you want is to realise your opponents are about to bring back one of their greats. While there’s no guarantee David Warner will be fit to play in the Boxing Day Test at the MCG, he’s doing his level best to get fit.
“If I can run between wickets and move laterally and do some ground fielding by the end of next week, I should be ready to go,” he told SEN Radio. “Fingers are crossed.”
If the pugnacious left-hander is available, that will give Australia quite the selection headache, especially given that they employed a makeshift opener at Adelaide; they could conceivably move Matthew Wade back into the middle order, meaning there are plenty of ways they could get the Warner back into the side.
Here’s a look at the pros and cons of each candidate.
Joe Burns
Pros: Well, he’s actually an opener for a start, and, with an unbeaten half-century in Australia’s small chase in the first Test, looked finally to be back in some sort of form.
Cons: Relatively pressure-free runs in a sub-100 chase against a shellshocked opponent won’t convince everyone, and Burns’ form slump was so severe – he was averaging 7 in first-class cricket this season before the second innings of the first Test – that there is still an argument that his place should be the most in danger. It probably isn’t, though.
Matthew Wade
Pros: Matthew Wade’s recent Test form has been decent, if unremarkable. A first-innings dismissal for 8 brought to an end a streak of 12 consecutive double-figure scores, including a special century against an inspired Jofra Archer at The Oval, one of two tons he made that Ashes series. In the T20Is against India, he was in brilliant touch, smashing two Warner-esque half-centuries in the last two games of the series.
Cons: He’s the easiest to move aside for Warner, given it was Wade who filled in as stop-gap opener. The second Test will start on his 33rd birthday, making him the oldest of the four candidates to be left out. If Australia are looking to the future, Wade is the most likely to be pushed to one side.
Travis Head
Pros: Travis Head doesn’t fully get the credit he deserves for the start he’s had to his Test career. While there is yet to be a statement knock or dominating series, an average above 40 from 18 Tests is decent going, and a century in last year’s Boxing Day Test played a significant part in seeing off a strong New Zealand side. He’s also still only 26 years old, and has been earmarked as a potential captaincy candidate down the line.
Cons: While he’s hardly looked out of his depth at Test level, Head has also never really seemed like the world-beater he was marked out as at a young age. A high score of 51 in the first four Ashes Tests in 2019 saw him left out for the fifth, and while he’s performed well since, it might be that, given Wade’s two hundreds in that Ashes series, Burns’ strong partnership with Warner atop the order, and Cameron Green’s apparently boundless potential, it’s Head who gets left out, almost by default.
Cameron Green
Pros: He’s all anyone can talk about. A first-innings 11 didn’t quite enter into the annals of the great Australian buzz-builders – see Rob Quiney’s 9 or Usman Khawaja’s 37 for examples – but he didn’t look out of place, and by clocking speeds upwards of 140 kph with the ball, suggested that he might just be the all-rounder Australia have been desperate for to balance their side.
Cons: First in, last out. While Green didn’t get the chance to do much wrong on Test debut, when the rest of the top six are established, and you’ve played at least in part as an injury sub, perhaps it’s only fair that when the absentees return it’s you who makes way.
David Warner
Pros: It should go without saying that if David Warner is fully fit, he plays. He’s up there with the best home batsmen there have ever been, and his mere presence emboldens the rest of the batting line-up.
Cons: If he’s not fully fit, the question is less clear. While Australia’s top order hardly covered themselves in glory at Adelaide, the hosts may reason that, against an increasingly weakened attack and without their talismanic skipper, they can do without an only partially prepared Warner at the MCG. Better to make sure they have him for the last two Tests than risk him re-injuring himself and potentially being out for even longer.
