MITCHELL JOHNSON: Nathan McSweeney’s Gabba failure should not reflect badly on him as rain dominated Test

The third Test in Brisbane was disappointing all-round after endless rain delays marred Australia’s efforts to set up the prospect of victory, which continued until the final day.

The wash out of what could have been commanding Australian win or great Indian fightback is why Test cricket should be played in Brisbane in November.

I don’t see the issue with starting a Test summer there as was the tradition. We could see how tough it was for India and I still believe visiting teams have a hard time playing there.

Australia’s second innings on Wednesday, when they declared at 7-89 after just 18 overs after chasing quick runs, was a tough situation for the batters. In the end, it’s a team game and it was about a team effort.

They had a role to play but it’s hard when you’re a new guy such as Nathan McSweeney, already batting out of position under the pressure of Test cricket and yet to secure his spot.

Then he gets told to forget about your average and go for it. You hope that McSweeney is being supported by the captain, coach and selectors and that they will not look at it as a failed innings.

But I liked Australia’s declaration decision overall and all three results would have been in play if the rain had stayed away. Pat Cummins would have been aware of India’s dangerous short-form players so didn’t want to give them too many overs. Anything could have happened but unfortunately what could have been a very exciting ending wasn’t to be.

Stoppages for rain, bad light and even lightning mean the series is stalled at 1-1 ahead of the Boxing Day Test, but I don’t think it’s fair to point the finger at the umpires.

From the perspective of fans and TV viewers, it goes without saying they would like to see fewer stoppages and more cricket. They pay their money to watch the game and what is turning into a very interesting Border-Gavaskar Trophy series.

The umpires have protocols to follow when light becomes an issue, and that’s there for the safety of all players. It can also be for the fans when the ball is hit into the stands because when it’s hard to pick up the ball, that makes it dangerous.

The umpires now have sole discretion over when bad light is taken but the debate hasn’t stopped. Sometimes one team wants to keep playing more than the other for obvious reasons. At the Gabba, overall, the umpires did what they could over a difficult five days.

Even the umpires would prefer to play on at times but they have strict guidelines to follow, including using a light meter, and it doesn’t seem like they have much wriggle room.

There seemed to be plenty of room to move during the extraordinary 2007 World Cup final in the West Indies, when Australia defeated Sri Lanka in near total darkness in Barbados.

Our victory celebrations were halted when the umpires said we would all have to come back the following day for the final three overs because the game had been stopped by light and not rain.

With the Sri Lankans needing an unlikely 61 more runs from 18 balls, captain Mahela Jayawardene agreed to complete the game that night in the dark if Australia bowled spin.

If the game had to be completed the following day, it would have taken away from the excitement of fans there, not to mention the Australian players, and I wouldn’t have thought too many spectators would have turned up the next day to watch three overs and see Australia collect the trophy.

So was the compromise ultimately the right thing to do? Everyone will have a different view I’m sure and ultimately the umpires and captains made a decision about what was best for the game. I’m not sure if that could still happen with cricket today.