What's best for Marnus or what's best for Australia: Which way should the selectors go?

The conversation between now and Adelaide will circle around the immediate future of Marnus Labuschagne.

While he is not the only Australian batter out of sorts, he is the batter who appears to be most at sea.

His feet, his decision-making (pre and post dismissal) and his hands are not as sharp as they once were. He appears scattered and devoid of confidence.

The numbers are also bleak. He has been dismissed for a single figure score seven of the last times he’s batted in this format.

He has failed to reach triple figures for nine consecutive Tests, stretching back 18 months. And across the Queenslander's last 40 innings, his average barely exceeds 30.

It's not horrible, but in the critical position of number three, Australia demands more.

Labuschagne is unique. Anyone with a passing interest in the sport can see this.

Ordinarily, the age of 30 is a window for players of his calibre to prosper. When batters are physically young enough to be sharp, hungry and injury free. But old enough to understand the nuanced technical components required to succeed.

To this end, Labuschagne is an outlier. At precisely the moment when he should - based on history - be dominating, he is floundering and flapping his way to repeated failures. It's hard not to have empathy for him.

If there is such a thing as trying too hard or caring too much, this is it.

Brad Haddin is one former player who believes Labuschagne should be given the summer to sort out his problems.

Haddin, speaking on Triple M, contended that the right-hander is a “quality player” who might be out of form but deserves to be backed in.

And while the discussion around Labuschagne swirls, the far more important element concerns the team.

What’s good or bad for Labushagne’s career should be secondary to what’s best for Australian cricket.

Is Australia stronger without him in Adelaide? And if so, would Josh Inglis bat at three on Test debut? Would Smith move up? Could Marsh slot into three but forgo a large portion of his bowling?

These are always delicate points when assessing team changes in cricket. How much upheaval is too much? When does skirting around the seams transition into all-out panic.

Australia made five changes to its XI after the Hobart debacle in 2016. Something similar would be overkill here, but the optics of getting belted by 295 runs and making no changes also sit uncomfortably.

If, as it appears, he is entirely void of confidence, is it best to relieve him of his duties and send him to play for Queensland early next month?

Or is throwing him into the fire again, with a pink ball this time, the best thing for him to find form?

The truth is Australia can’t possibly be weaker without Labuschagne based on recent form, but surely they could get stronger.

That’s why selectors are selectors. They are paid to make line-ball judgement calls which impact the lives of people. To assess the hypotheticals and essentially weigh up the probability of varying factors. Nothing is certain. Occasionally it's also a guess (Hi, Ed Cowan).

History paints a bleak picture of the Australian first-class scene as it is compared to what it was. Of other big name players to be dropped mid-career, they were all replaced by proven run-makers.

Mark Waugh made way for Damien Martyn, before Martyn was dropped for Steve Waugh a year later.

Michael Clarke’s omission in late 2005 allowed Justin Langer to return from injury and Michael Hussey to slide down to number five.

When Ricky Ponting was dropped in late 1996, it was Langer who took his spot. Ponting went away, averaged 74 for Tasmania, then promptly made a ton in his first game back in the 1997 Ashes.

The point is, all these players were omitted at some stage. And all were young (and talented) enough to fight back. They were all averaging in the 20s or low 30s when they were cut.

Labuschagne is in this boat. If he is axed, he has time to return. He should travel to Sri Lanka regardless, but time away from the spotlight and a chance to decompress - as much as that’s possible for Marnus - may prove critical.

He could see it as a mid-career reset. A chance to take stock, to reflect, to refresh, and eventually go again.

The hurt at losing his position could ultimately drive him forward, just as it did for the Waugh twins, Ponting, Martyn, Clarke, Matthew Hayden and so many others down the line.

Australia’s only obligation is to pick an XI to level the series. No more and no less. Framed with that simplicity, Labuschagne’s days may be numbered.

The quest for stability is noble. And it has merit. But not at the expense of selecting the best team possible to win.

Listen to every ball LIVE on SEN and the SEN app.