Vics’ stance on Finch both politics and tactics

Victoria’s decision to deny Aaron Finch an opener’s berth in the Sheffield Shield is an intriguing power play directed at new Cricket Australia leadership.

After it was confirmed by Finch on Monday morning that he would not open in today’s Shield match against Queensland – his only red ball hit-out before next Thursday’s first test against India – debate followed about the role of state sides in the preparation of the Australian team.

Should Victoria do what is right for Australia on the eve of a Test series? Or should Victoria do what is right for Victoria to win the Sheffield Shield?

In recent years, those involved at domestic level have lamented the relegation of the Shield as a mere training ground for the Australian XI, rather than an elite competition in its own right. Recent years has seen the competition subject to in-game player management, rule tinkering and experiments.

Cumulatively, the moves have angered a swathe of players and coaches who want more respect.

So when Victorian coach Andrew McDonald said last week that he would stick with long-term openers Marcus Harris and Travis Dean at The Gabba, it didn’t just represent his side’s tactical preference – which in itself is justified.

It was also a sign that, post-Longstaff Review, the goalposts had shifted, and states wouldn’t be dictated by the wants and needs of Jolimont.

Perhaps more importantly, however, McDonald and the Victorian hierarchy have stuck to their guns knowing it was highly unlikely they would receive any backlash from CA. Why? Delving deeper into the Longstaff Review reveals a governing body who may now be contrite about previous moves surrounding the Shield.

Recommendation 31 of 42 in the review (one CA acknowledged and supported) advised that: “The management of players joining and leaving elite teams be improved so that the processes are respectful and compassionate”.

Looking at this particular case, that dictates a more ‘respectful’ and ‘compassionate’ stance on Finch leaving the Australian team and entering an established setup.

Should they have gone down a more combative route, the optics of CA publicly criticising Victoria for simply maintaining their opening partners of over two years would cause yet another stoush it can ill afford. Perhaps privately they are angered by what they see as a belligerent Victoria denying the Australian XI the best preparation heading into the second biggest test series on their international schedule.

Wisely, however, they let this one through to the keeper.

(Photo by Francois Nel/Getty Images)

Shane Warne’s input into the debate gave the issue traction on Sunday when he called his beloved Victoria ‘a disgrace’ for preventing Finch from opening in the Shield. “Have we forgotten what shield cricket is for in this country? To produce test players”, Warne tweeted. Yet his opinion contrasts with assertions just weeks ago about the domestic game.

“The foundation of Australian cricket has always been grassroots cricket, club cricket and Sheffield Shield cricket. To me, I think Cricket Australia at the moment are devaluing Shield cricket,” he said in an interview.

If Cricket Australia were to force Victoria’s hand to open with Finch, it would be doing the precise ‘devaluing’ that Warne so resents. In this case, it’s clear his close relationship with Finch – who he inexplicably claimed last month should “captain all forms of the game” – clouded a normally strong view on the sanctity of the Shield.

For his part, Finch was predictably (and understandably) diplomatic, saying he would bat wherever his home state wanted him to bat, likely to be first-drop. We’ve come to expect this from Finch, who is a respected leader and team-first player.

Irrespective of the political machinations of Victoria holding firm, the stats speak for themselves. Finch averages just 18 as a first-class opener, whereas Dean averages 33 and Harris 47.6 since joining the Vics in 2016.