McSweeney Dropped, England Ought to Take Notice
McSweeney in. Bumrah in. McSweeney out.
The selection of Nathan McSweeney for the first test of the Border-Gavaskar Trophy looked a fair one at first take. With no real frontrunner emerging from the pack across state cricket, McSweeney found himself almost by accident at the non-strikers end as Bumrah charged in at Usman Khawaja in Perth.
Three early season hundreds batting at three and four for South Australia earned a place in the squad to face India A, and an unbeaten 88* secured the baggy green. Easy on the eye, full of talent, but undeniably batting out of his preferred position.
Roll on a month and McSweeney finds himself out of the squad altogether for the Boxing Day test, his technique having been worked over by a remarkable bowler in Bumrah; his confidence shot. How, one might ask, was he ever expected to succeed immediately at this level? Why, one may question, was a young player with such talent exposed to arguably the best bowler of the 21st century in a position he has such little experience of doing?
England would do well to follow proceedings down under as they grapple with Zak Crawley’s horrific run of form. 52 runs from 6 innings at an average of 8.66 deemed Crawley’s series the worst of any England opener on record. Watching the wisened Matt Henry nip it this way and that at c.82mph was about as close to a nightmare as Crawley’s technique could have come up against, and so it proved.
Speaking on the Sky Sports Cricket Podcast, Michael Atherton was right to suggest that had there been tests four and five against New Zealand, Crawley would have been dropped. Since England keep their squads tightly knit and lean in number, Bethell would have been nudged up to open, Pope back to 3 and Ollie Robinson at 7 tucked behind Stokes. Hardly ideal, but a quick fix to the immediate issue.
Amongst others, Steve James in the Times has called for Bethell to open against India next summer. But England now have 5 months to figure this out, and I can’t help but feel McSweeney serves as an example to England not to overexpose Bethell at this stage, generational though he may be.
Bethell’s was the best debut series from an England batsman since Ian Bell said Wisden’s Phil Walker, and as Will O’Rouke make everyone but Bethell look inadequate last week, it’s fair for fans to get excited by how things could pan out for England’s new No. 3. But it’s at 3 where he should remain, and Pope make way for the returning Jamie Smith come Zimbabwe next May.
Bethell’s next red ball game could well be against the Zimmers with his IPL commitments, and then it’s Bumrah at the top of his mark. It would be unfair for the expectation on Bethell to be any higher than Crawley’s against India, and if you’re telling me that Crawley is no chance of averaging 50+ for Kent in Division 2 early next year, and not making a score against Zimbabwe, then we’re singing from a different hymn sheet.
Bethell isn’t an opener, Crawley is. England bat down as far as 10 with Carse. England already have a small, aggressive left-handed opening batsman in Duckett. Crawley’s average is proven to go up with the quality of the bowling. Crawley & Duckett’s effectiveness at the top owes to their height difference and right-hand left-hand combination.
For someone to be dropped, an improved offering must be put forward. As things stand, Bethell opening for England is not the long or short-term solution. What a start he has made to his career, let’s sit back and enjoy it before overcomplicating matters.
By Alex Holt-Evans