Well, it should have been a cakewalk, and yesterday's result shows how close this two Test series could have been had the Black Caps held heir chances in Brisbane.

Ironically, the injury to Vettori that gave Boult his first Test cap may well have been the difference between the sides this time around. Without the spinner to clean up the tail the four man pace attack did the job for the Kiwis and out-bowled a developing attack that's not quite there yet.

You could also go around pointing out that any team that can lose 8/74 deserves to lose, but in the meantime it's back to the drawing board while we wait for the two Chairman's XI games against India to sort out a team for Melbourne.

We have, however, answered a couple of questions.

There's no doubt that Warner has done enough to hold his spot, and there's no way that Hughes can hold his. Clarke has done a good enough job as captain, but needs runs, and Pattinson, Siddle and Lyon are the basis of a decent bowling attack. So, injury permitting, we've got an eleven comprising:

Warner, Two, Three, Four, Clarke, Six, Keeper, Eight, Pattinson, Siddle, Lyon.

I noted, on my flick through the websites this morning, a predictable call from Bob Simpson for Simon Katich to be recalled and installed as captain. Presumably that also would involve dropping Clarke, given the apparent notion that you can't have both of them sharing a dressing room, despite the fact that they both play for New South Wales.

I filed the Simmo comment under Well, he would say that, wouldn't he? Simmo has, after all, been working with Katich fairly closely.

I was, however, more taken by his comment that the policy when he took over as coach was to decide who were the best seventeen players in Australia and then give them as many chances you could possibly get.

That mirrors my thoughts as I made my way back down Kennedy Street at lunchtime yesterday, and, arguably, immediately rules out Ponting and Hussey. Probably rules out Katich as well, when you look at it closely, but it's an idea with definite merit.

My thoughts yesterday were along the lines of an eleven for Melbourne, with shadow players to round out a squad of twenty and further shadows to cover any withdrawals due to injury, loss of form or retirement.

That retirement bit, by the way, is only there as an at some point in a relatively distant future consideration.

No, eleven for Melbourne, plus a backup keeper and all-rounder, three bats and four bowlers. We've acknowledged that the bowlers need to be managed carefully, so there's the justification for a four/three split between ball and bat.

Hopefully, out of that group of twenty you'd have enough talent to mould into a long term proposition, and if it was given some degree of official confirmation it could form the basis of communication between the selection panel and the players on the fringe of national selection.

While we're looking at these things we need to ensure that decisions are based on cricket factors and long term strategic planning rather than short term issues, sentiment and player preferences.

In terms of the big picture clearly none of the three aforementioned elder statesmen have much to offer beyond this summer, and if you're going to start planning for the future, with Katich gone you can't see much point in holding on to Ponting and Hussey beyond yesterday.

Actually, there's not much point in holding onto Ponting or Hussey, though Punter may get a short term reprieve. If he does it has to be on the understanding that he'll be holding that press conference before a specified point in the future. If he can't agree to do that, he should go now, and if he does agree and fails to follow through that should be the end of him.

Yes, he'd like to play on through the summer, and Mr Cricket would like to hang around at least as far as Perth, but it's fairly clear bowing to player and captaincy preferences has been a major factor in creating the pickle we find ourselves in.

Mitchell Johnson was a match-winner, an essential member of the attack, and an all-rounder in the making and had to be persisted with, which meant that Watson had to open, which in turn helped push Katich onto the sidelines when someone decided Hughes had done enough to merit a recall, because we always had Watto at the other end, which meant that Khawaja…

Speaking of Khawaja, where does he fit in all this? He's no good thing to hold his spot at Three, but when you look at it much of his run of low scores comes from arriving at the crease early after the departure of a certain opener caught Guptill, bowled Martin.

It will be very interesting to see how he goes for the Chairman's XI at Manuka, and since what transpires in the nation's capital is going to have a significant influence on the team selected for Boxing Day it's probably a matter of wait and see and try to figure out the jigsaw once we've got some form to go on and a better appreciation of where Messrs Watson, Marsh and Cummins are as far as fitness goes.

Back some time over the weekend....

In the absence of solid rain I guess you'd be looking at a cakewalk.

Taking 7/87 in the two and a half hours before lunch, of course, set things up nicely, starting with Ponting's second sljp snare that removed Kane Williamson from the equation. At four for with Brownlie in early on a day that looked like the ball was going to continue to do things you'd have been fairly upbeat, but I find it difficult come up with any description other than threw it away after watching the Black Caps' tail fold.

In a situation that literally sreamed for occupying the crease, grabbing any runs that were there and turning the runs required/remaining time quotient as much in your favour as you can manage, the batting from the lower order after Pattinson removed Taylor and Brownlie suggested that we were somewhere around lunch time on Day Four rather than Day Three, another hundred runs to the good and the key factor was getting Australia back at the batting crease ASAP.

Overall, I thought Australia bowled well in a situation that involved drying up of the run rate and picking up chances as and when they arrived.

Under the old regime this would have involved working back of a length and waiting for a mistake, but the keep it pitched up and look for the nicks policy came good, Starc's bouncer unsettled Brownlie and Lyon rolled up the tail as the Kiwis did their best to co-operate by seeking out Hussey at deep long on.

This Australianattack is still a work in progress, but at least it's a work that's progressing towards a target. Siddle is actually getting the ball to swing, Pattinson will hopefully be around for a long time, Lyon looks the best finger spin option we've had in a long time, Starc looks a viable option to Johnson and Bollinger and we've got a number of contenders on the sidelines waiting for their go.

So we're looking good in that department.

When it comes to the batting, it's a matter of looking at the way we pad out the bowling order, and where we go from there.

There's an obvious need for a batting all-rounder, and Watson's the walk-up starter in that role, with Daniel Christian as the fallback and Mitchell Marsh as an emerging possibility for the same role.

It's not beyond the realms of possibility to see the three of them in the same side on the subcontinent, with Pattinson or Cummins as the specialist quick and two specialist spinners and part time tweaking from Clarke and Warner. In that sort of line up you'd have Marsh or Christian at Eight, the keeper at Seven and t'other one at Six.

But that's getting a bit ahead of things.

First up it's a matter of sorting out what happens with Watto, where he fits into the batting order, how much he bowls and whether he needs cover.

Hughes has looked better second time around, but he's no good thing for Melbourne, regardless of how many he scores this time around.

On a game by game basis a hundred to Hughes might save his spot, but the same questions are going to be asked, and somewhere down the track they're going to be asked by an attack that's a bit more penetrative than the tradesman-like Kiwis. At that point we'll be playing someone in the upper echelons of the Test rankings and it's going to count.

So there's the message to Messrs Ponting and Hussey. We're heading for Number Three in the Test rankings. That's going to involve beating at least one out of England, India and South Africa, and we need to do that both at home and away.

Seriously, gents, how long do you see yourself fitting into that long-term picture? Time for a press conference in Hobart and another somewhere around Perth at the very latest.

It will be interesting to see how the national selection panel go about things in the wake of yesterday's remarkable first session.

Unlike Day One, which didn't produce much that needed in-depth reflection as far as Australia was concerned, there are a couple of major decisions that will need to be taken in the wake of a morning session where we lost 6/69.

It's already obvious that Hughes will be replaced for Melbourne, but in a situation where you'd have been looking for someone to put his hand up the way Dean Brownlie did for the Black Caps. His knock on the opening day was the difference between the two teams, and if you're a Kiwi supporter you'd be looking forward to a lengthy spell with D. Brownlie firmly entrenched in the middle order.

Kiwi supporters would also be upbeat about Boult and Bracewell as long term prospects, and while Vettori would be an automatic selection if fit, you'd think he'd be regaining his place at the expense of Southee or Martin rather than either of the two newcomers.

Williamson and Taylor have a chance to nail things down this morning, with Brownlie still to come, a deck that seems to have flattened out and the prospect of bowling to defend a total that will be closer to 400 than 200.

The question of whether that four man pace attack will be able to do the job on a wearing surface without the spin option will make for fascinating viewing on Monday and Tuesday but as a bowling group I thought they looked a better, more balanced unit than our three quicks and a spinner, though Lyon will be a key player on Day Three.

That second innings, however, is going to raise a number of issues, and hopefully deliver at least one answer. Unlike the first dig, when the bowlers were able to ask constant questions,

One assumes that Day Four will offer the best conditions fore batting, with Day Five presumably throwing a wearing pitch into the equation.

With Hughes' fate seemingly sealed, he will, of course, more than likely come up with a big hundred, but I suspect that a double century would only delay the inevitable. The opener's role is to display a bit of stickability on Day One in bowler-friendly conditions, and it seems Hughes hasn't sorted out his technique to the point where can consistently answer the questions the opposing attack will be posing.

Warner, one assumes, will have the series against India to cement his spot at the top of the order, but a score here would help his cause immeasurably. The big question will concern his opening partner in Melbourne.

Runs to Khawaja in the second innings here will cement his spot, and he could, if necessary move up one spot if the panel wanted to see Watson batting higher than Six.

Ponting, to all intents and purposes, will be batting for his place in the side for Melbourne, though I suspect he'd be best advised to hold the press conference and make the announcement before the Indians take on the Cricket Australia Chairman’s XI at Manuka Oval next Thursday.

If Ponting holds his place it will only be because the panel wants his experience at Four while they sort out One, Two, Three and Six. Clarke is safe at Five, but that's the only certainty apart from Warner's spot at the top of the order.

Much of that reshuffle will come down to the question of how much bowling Watson can expect to do. If the answer is none, you could make a case for putting him back to open, but that raises the question of where he bats when he's fit to bowl again.

No, Watson at Four or Six.

Khawaja and a fit Marsh look like filling Two and Three, though which of them goes where is still an issue.

The final spot in the batting order will depend on that Watson bowling issue. Given the need for a fourth seamer, if Watto's not going to bowl you'll want Christian at six. If you've got a question about Watto breaking down you probably still want Christian at Six, which means the only spot for Watson is Four, in which case it's Bye Bye Punter.

But that's the long term issue. More immediately, we have Starc and Siddle looking to cement their place in the attack and the question of how many we're going to be chasing and when the chase is going to start. That's the sort of issue that'll make for fascinating viewing and underlines the fact that there's nothing quite like Test Cricket in the sporting universe.

Rain interruptions at Bellerive yesterday and evaporation problems associated with last night's bottle of red mean I'm pushing it if I'm going to get this tapped out and published, hurl myself at the shower, rock up to the butcher on the corner and get back before what I assume will be a nine o'clock Queensland time resumption to make up for lost time.

Fortunately yesterday's play didn't produce much that needs in-depth reflection.

Another Pattinson five-for confirmed the impression from The Gabba and underlines my comment that he mightn't match his second innings figures from there too often but while he's working that line and length the possibility will always be there.

Lyon, once again, was tidy under conditions that didn't suit, Siddle was reasonably impressive in the work horse role and Starc didn't deliver enough to cement his place in the side when Cummins comes back into calculations.

The Black Caps batting was more or less what you'd expect in the conditions and could well have gone from five for to all out in a hurry without Brownlie's sterling effort with the bat. He's a definite find, and had Vettori been able to take his place in the line up we'd have been chasing a fair bit more than 150.

Five for sixty was about what you'd expect from that line up against this attack in those conditions, and ninety from the bottom half of the order was a reasonably sound effort under the circumstances.

Hughes' dismissal and the problems Warner and Khawaja experienced against the new ball in general and Martin in particular suggests things wouldn't have been all that different had Clarke lost the toss or elected to bat in the morning.

Left arm debutant Boult looked handy through his two overs and if rain hadn't intervened when it did Australia could well have been three, four or five for by the time the scheduled stumps rolled around.

As far as Hughes is concerned, regardless of what he manages in the second dig, it's probably a matter of who rather than whether or when, and you'd suspect that Mr Cricket's days are numbered as well. I'm still inclined towards Marsh for Hughes and Watson for Hussey, though if the selectors go for Watto at the top of the order they may well decide they need the extra bowler in Christian at six.

Time will, as always, tell.

In the quest for an attack that'll take twenty wickets James Pattinson definitely looks the goods, provided he can maintain the same line and length he bowled yesterday. He might be pushing to match the figures he had in the middle of that spell but as long as he's bowling that line and length the possibility will be there.

Remember that most of the radio commentators were bullish about Day Four as the best batting day on that particular Gabba deck…

And that spell put a big tick beside McDermott's fuller length, give the ball a chance to swing philosophy that had the technical staff moving the pitch parameters a metre towards the batsman when they're defining the length.

Actually, this little issue possibly confirms some long-held suspicions about the bowling coach's role in the pecking order. When Troy Cooley was brought back into the fold after his sterling effort with the English attack in 2005 I found myself scratching my head and wondering why our bowlers were't able to swing the new ball or reverse it later in the innings.

After all, the Cooley co-ordinated Poms did it in 2005 and the non-Cooley co-ordinated version did it out here last year.

From where I'm sitting it starts to look like Cooley's role as far as the blokes he was working with were concerned was to provide technical support while the bowlers sorted out the strategy. That's the same issue I raised in an earlier post (A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest) and it definitely means we need a clear channel of communication between selectors, bowling coach and players.

The selectors define what they want to see out of the attack, the coach provides the support and the bowlers deliver what they're asked to deliver rather than what they choose to define as desirable.

Pattinson with a fit Cummins looks like a sharp attack, Starc may or may not have Hobart to demonstrate what he's capable of, Copeland is lurking on the fringes and naming Christian as cover for Cutting also suggests we've got a shadow for a bowling Watson pencilled in.

Comments on ABC Radio News this morning suggest Cummins will be back for Bellerive on Friday, but I'd be inclined to stick with the same attack and see what we reckon as far as Starc and Siddle are concerned.

But we're looking good in the bowling department.

The only major question mark beside the batting group, apart from the Ponting/Hussey retirement issue (and it's clear where I'm sitting on that one) concerns Hughes at the top of the order.

When you look at that question he's only hanging on by the skin of his teeth while Watson and Marsh are on the injured list.

Personally, as far as the side for Melbourne is concerned I'd be seeing how we get through Hobart, giving the side a couple of days off and reconvening the current twelve (with Christian in for Cutting) along with Watson, Marsh and Cummins and taking a couple of days to ponder the possibilities.

Assuming Hughes' days are numbered, and Marsh and a bowling Watson are both fit, my choice, three weeks out from Boxing Day, would be Marsh for Hughes, Watson for Hussey and Cummins for Starc.

Injuries between now and then, or a non-bowling Watson would complicate matters slightly, but in the event of Watson not being right to bowl or Marsh not being fit Watson for Hughes, Christian for Hussey.

Sorry, Mr Cricket, but we need a bowling option in the middle order and if Shane persists with the belief that he can open the batting and bowl his share we still need a bowling option in the middle since his share as an opener will probably be less than his share as a middle order bat.

So, at one-up in the two Test series we can leave things for a bit. I'll be back Friday morning for a preview and, in the meantime, I've got another couple of fish to fry.