I'm afraid that is not the case, because in the current C# version, the compiler does nothing help you determine if you've matched all the possibilities. (it is not exhaustive)
Exhaustiveness is important because it gives warning or an error to help you refactor and modify code without fear of breaking other code. Why engage in all the static typing business if the compiler is not going to help you refactor things?
This is important in the same way that adding a subclass requires exhaustively supplying all the abstract methods (true pattern matching is "dual" to adding a subclass; you use the compiler feedback to direct what actions to take next. you can't do this with the Switch based formulation because you don't get any feedback from the compiler if you missed cases or have refactored other code to add cases (for example, adding/refactoring abstract methods in a base class provides feedback on where to add/update methods in the subclasses)