Accidents aren’t much happier. Usman Khawaja’s mid-match back problem was annoying for the player and potentially damaging for his team, until it wasn’t. The elimination of the regular dry powder opener created space in the final stanza of the Perth Test, allowing Travis Head to finish off England with the bloody certainty and splash count of a Mortal Kombat fatality move. Sometimes you mash the buttons and everything works.
Consider an Ashes innings stand of 123 off 83 balls, on a bouncy pitch where two other players pushed for 50, in an effort that not only won the match but also sent the opposition into a demoralizing tailspin. Thus, serendipitous success creates a dilemma as to what to do next.
Advertisement
Related: Travball 1-0 Bazball: Head’s big numbers add up to a damning zero for England | Geoff Citron
Khawaja may not be fit for the second Test, but if he is, should that be enough to reassure the selectors his injury won’t recur? And even if they think he’s ready, should that be reason enough to hold him back?
During two years of uncertainty over whether Australia would be permanently open, Head was a regular suggestion from some quarters. It made sense: there’s the absence of a highly qualified candidate nationally, his history of success in difficult conditions and the fact that he’s already doing that job on both white-ball teams. His performance in Perth turned that snarl into a roar.
Advertisement
Before proclaiming the matter self-evident, it is perhaps worth assessing just how impressive his performance in a historic contest was. Despite the relatively low target, only eight bigger Ashes scores were made in a successful fourth innings: the joint efforts of Don Bradman and Arthur Morris chasing what was the world record 404; hundreds on separate tours of the great opening duo Herbert Sutcliffe and Jack Hobbs; the 2019 Ben Stokes miracle at Headingley; The more sober version of Mark Butcher on the same ground 18 years earlier; and rounds from Australian Joe Darling and Englishman Jack Brown.
All of these are also dwarfed by Head’s strike rate of 148 – even the lightning final stages of Stokes’ innings took his overall rate to just 62. Nine tons of Ashes was faster than a run with a ball and the one quicker than Head’s was Adam Gilchrist’s Waca statement smash. In all Test cricket, five centuries have been quickest and you can rest assured that none of those have been achieved in the fourth innings of a match. In terms of context, there is no equal.
As a result, probability indicates that you cannot pick this player expecting a similar round to happen again. We’ve already seen the one that would define most careers. If Head tries to repeat the magic, it may distract his focus and cause him to attack too hard at the wrong time. Especially in a pink ball Test, teeing off in the first innings in Brisbane would likely be much riskier than in the fourth innings in Perth. Khawaja has shown that there are different ways to counter this threat, such as his long and patient 145 against South Africa with a pink ball in Adelaide in 2016, batting for over seven hours to achieve victory.
Advertisement
Related: Does Travis Head’s knock deserve to be among the greatest Ashes innings? | Martin Pegan
Likewise, there is a strong argument that opening is a specialist risk position and that Head has already won many important matches for Australia from No.5. Placing him lower in the order leaves his freebies less subject to the peril of the moving ball at the top. With Jake Weatherald as the new occupant of an opening slot, you could argue that Australia don’t need two hard-hitting left-handers to attack the bowling from ball one.
However reasonable your position may be, it now risks being swept away by sheer momentum. Anyone who saw this innings in Perth will want to know what happens if Head smashes another set of buttons. If this round defined most players’ careers, for Head it could be a top-five finish. Perhaps from here it is possible to extend this to a top 10?
Sometimes it’s reasonable to be greedy. As Australia weighs its options, the common-sense approach says no. The impulsive one says: it was fun, let’s do it again.
