So there's a 60% chance of showers and thunderstorms for Adelaide later today but at 6-166 with another 334 required to win, you'd expect India would be pushing it to last until late morning when that 60% likelihood kicks in.

Had they done a little better in the final session yesterday they might have been in a position where the cavalry arrives amid rolls of thunderheads, but pause for a moment to consider what occurred between tea and stumps.

We'd been summoned to the regular end of the month retired teachers' lunch, which coincided nicely with the lunch break at the cricket, so I'd been able to catch the first session along with the requisite radio commentary. Not all that much to report there, with Clarke and ponting seemingly batting time and building the lead while they waited for time to do its bit on what still looked like a good batting track.

With Clarke and Hussey gone in the first session and the lead crawling towards 600, I'd been careful to claim a seat at the table where I could see a TV screen in the public bar, though it wasn't close enough to be able to pick up too much actual detail.

Fair enough, things weren't going to get really interesting until the declaration, which came three overs into the middle session, a little earlier than I'd expected, but still probably ruling anything like an extensive warmup for the Indian batsmen out of the question.

I'd figured we might opt for a declaration about forty minutes into the session, so that if Gambhir and Sehwag had been able to sneak in a warmup in lieu of lunch they'd have been out in the paddock long enough to have lost some of the benefit, but the target was obviously that 600, so in they came.

Since we were into the Indian second dig a bit earlier than I'd expected I missed much of the mayhem as Sehwag set about carving the bowling.

Gambhir went early, but it's fairly obvious Sehwag doesn't need much in the way of warm ups to get his eye in as he blazed past the half century at better than a run a ball. It was possible to get the gist of what was going on from a distance, and frequent updates arrived courtesy of Warbo and Jimbo as they returned from the bar, with their data adding to what I'd managed to glean in the to and fro pursuit of schooners of Fat Yak.

Sehwag was still blazing when we left, headed for an appointment with a box of wine at the Post Office before heading back to the LHoC. Could've collected the box earlier, of course, but you don't want to leave a dozen Coonawarra Cab Merlots sitting in the boot for an hour or two if you can avoid it.

Consequently I missed Sehwag's dismissal for 62 out of a total of 80, close to 80% of the score, 53 deliveries. Waist high full tosses do get wickets, but they shouldn't be getting them at 1-80 when you're supposed to be looking to bat time.

At that point in the quest for ten good balls, ten batting errors or an equitable balance between the two we were on a fairly equitable one-all.

The classification of the next three to fall is going to depend on your particular bias.

I thought Dravid's catch to Hussey was the maintenance of the bowling plan, which I assumed was to keep plugging away there and you're going to get a nick, particularly if he's looking for the one that sneaks back through the gate. 3-100, and a couple of significant obstacles overcome.

As far as that classification goes I'd be placing the Tendulkar bat-pad dismissal off Lyon squarely in the good ball side of things. Lyon got it through a little higher off the deck, master batsman deceived. Others may have seen it differently, but on this deck under those circumstances I thought it was the offie doing what his job description called for.

And you can tick the bowling/captaincy box for Laxman's dismissal as well. Two fielders close in on the leg side, Shaun Marsh in a spot you might have thought superfluous and Laxman chips Lyon straight into the clammy claw. Red ticks and gold stars to captain and bowler.

What followed is one of those little incidents that has you scratching your head and wondering what the (expletive deleted) certain people were thinking.

Two overs and four balls to go, five-sixths of the top order in the sheds and in comes Sharma as a night watchman. Fair enough, if you accept the need for the night watchman.

Then again, with Ashwin, Sharma, Zaheer and Yadav to come after Saha do you really need to be protecting the remaining batsman?

But if you do accept the need, then you're not looking to the established bat to farm the strike are you?

The night watchie's there to hold up his end until stumps and then provide nuisance value into Day Five. When he (presumably it's him) eventually goes, in comes Saha and the two who'd posted a century partnership in the first dig set out to bat time with Ashwin in next.

Hell, on that basis you just might hang around until the weather kicks in.

But no, it seems like Kohli's needing to shield the tail ender, risky single, sharp bit of work from Hilfenhaus and we're waving goodbye to the second last recognized bat.

On that basis you'd have to expect proceedings to be rolled up fairly smartly later this morning before the clouds roll in and the rain tumbles down in Adelaide in January.

That's a prospect that has me more worried about the South Australian grape harvest than a four-nil result in a disappointing series.

Disappointing, that is, for anyone who was looking for something competitive...

As Day Three unfolded at the Adelaide Oval a certain inevitability set in,

Eventually someone in this Indian batting line up was going to pick up a century, and while you'd have started off thinking Messrs Gambhir and Tendulkar were the prime candidates, and when they'd departed it seemed fitting that the eventual ton arrived at the hands of young Mr Kohli.

There's every possibility Tendulkar will eventually get that hundredth International hundred, but reflections on this morning's walk suggested it will be more likely, and arguably more appropriately achieved, during the round of T20s and ODIs that will follow the Test Series.

It is, after all, the proliferation of limited overs matches that has brought Sachin within reach of a remarkable milestone.

Continuing that theme of inevitability, while you mightn't have thought Kohli as the most likely centurion in this Indian order his knock, and the supporting cameo from Saha was a timely reminder that there will inevitably be batting life after Messrs Dravid, Tendulkar and Laxman have departed the International scene.

Lyon was going to come into calculations by picking up a top order scalp eventually, though you might have expected it to happen on Day Four or Five rather than before lunch on Three, but there you go. With Sehwag, Dravid and Tendulkar back in the sheds, Laxman was always the most likely suspect, wasn't he?

Laxman's departure, caught behind for 18 inevitably left it to the tyros to get the score to the point where Australia would be looking to bat again to avoid a nasty little Day Five chase.

Then again barring a major collapse or rapid deterioration on the track we were probably always going to be batting again, weren't we?

And you could keep on ticking off the inevitables.

Five for to Siddle, check.

Zaheer failing to trouble the scorer, check.

A bit of niggle as the quicks locked horns, check.

Decision to bat again rather than enforce the follow on, check.

During the change of innings you'd have been offering very short odds on Ashwin coming into the attack early, and you'd have been right on the money. You mightn't have been expecting him to open the bowling, but if you're going to get him on early you might as well give him the new ball and be done with it. Inevitable? Check, I think.

That in turn saw a quick fire Three for, which will inevitably have the eraser being applied to Marsh, S. as a serious contender at Three, leaving a spot for a fit Watto and the extreme likelihood that both Ponting and Hussey will be packing their bags for the Caribbean.

On revealed form to date they're probably entitled to, though I'd rather see both given time off as we have a look at options before South Africa at home and India and England away.

So what's inevitable today?

382 runs on, you'd expect the declaration some time before drinks in the middle session, and with Clarke and Ponting at the crease with Hussey and Haddin to come you'd expect a lead of around 480 by lunch.

Bat on for a bit thereafter,to break up the track a bit more and bring the variation in bounce into the equation would seem to be the way to go, which probably means it's inevitable that Clarke will declare inside the first hour this morning, eh?

In fact, having hit the Publish button I'll probably head over to Cricinfo and discover he's declared at the overnight total...

Despite the extreme bat-friendliness of the Adelaide track this time around there are very sound reasons why we see statistical oddities like the news that Michael Clarke's double century made him the first captain since Don Bradman and Wally Hammond to score a double and triple century in the same series.

As Clarke's dismissal from the first ball he faced after lunch yesterday reminds us, each ball you face with bat in hand could be the last for the innings, and while you might get a second chance here and there, at the top level one mistake can be fatal.

A member of the Bowlers' Union would, at this stage, be talking in terms of eight good balls before the Indian total passes the follow on target, while a batting consultant would be inclined towards eight mistakes or false strokes. Having previously referred to Doug Holloway's batsmen get themselves out I was again reminded that Doug haled from Adelaide and on the basis of Days One and Two the batting error is the most likely source of dismissal.

The morning session yesterday, runs flowing faster than the clock with nary a wicket lost certainly raised the prospect of an interesting poser as far as declarations were concerned. I couldn't help wondering whether Clarke might have been quite as inclined to close on 600 if he'd still been at the crease with Ponting.

By that stage we'd have been around tea time on Day Two, three down, nothing obvious on offer from the track, two bats in the upper reaches of a double century and the temptation to bat on until the pitch at least started to deteriorate could well have been lurking in the back of the mind.

One ball is all it takes, though, and with Clarke back in the sheds straight after lunch, Hussey following soon afterwards off a freak dismissal and Ponting holing out in the deep you could well have been inclined to let things unfold, have been pushing the declaration to one side.

On form Haddin was no good thing, Siddle didn't hang around long but with Harris hitting out the 600 was passed, the declaration made and it was down to two lots of ten good balls or ten batting errors, depending on the observer's bias.

Watching those events unfold in the middle session one got the impression of an Indian side that had regrouped over lunch and found some approaches that seemed to work, though there's no way you can plan for the sort of opportunist flick from Gambhir under the lid at short leg that brought Hussey unstuck.

Under ordinary circumstances, a day and a half into a game played with temperatures in the mid-thirties you wouldn't expect something like that, and one notes Gambhir's continued presence at the crease as an indication that he's got a fair degree of mental toughness.

As, of course, has the dude at the other end. You don't achieve the career milestones Tendulkar has managed to accumulate without it, so you'd want to be looking for something early in the piece on Day Three if you were going to roll them early. Otherwise it could well be a long wait.

Earlier in the day ponting and Clarke had underlined their status as major figures, and here's every possibility that Gambhir's on his way into the stratosphere, though he mightn't quite end up there with Sachin, Sehwag, The Wall and VVS.

And, at the start of the Indian innings it looked like the Australian radar had temporarily gone on the blink, with Harris and Hilfenhaus both wayward and a batting combo that looked likely to take full toll.

Getting Sehwag off Siddle's first delivery helped, of course, and Dravid looks to be a shadow of his former self (which, given the way these things pan out, will probably equate to a second century) but with one of the Big Four there at the moment, another to come, an opener with a point to prove and Kohli looking to cement a place in the long term, twenty overs into the innings on a flat track the omens aren't good for the bowling fraternity.

Some time later today we'll see reverse swing emerge as a possibility, and somewhere along the line variable bounce will start to kick in.

The question is, of course, when?

Looking at events on the cricket field over the past month you'd have to be scratching your head and wondering how India managed to rise as far up the Test pecking order as #1, wouldn't they?

Well, actually, you know the how and the why, resting as it does on a stellar batting lineup and mastery of their home conditions but the frequently remarked on fragility away from home is the factor that brings the head scratching.

In the end, despite all suggestions that they were here to win a series in Australia I've come to the conclusion that, deep down, they don't care or are convinced the attempt is futile. There seems to be a sense of being here because they have to be for a series that they're not going to win in conditions they don't like.

Maybe it's not just the administrators who are thinking the fans back at home will be disappointed for a bit, but then they'll go through the IPL bit and host a few Tests at home, which they'll duly win, and everything will be right in the applecart again.

I never thought I'd be looking towards a series of ODIs to get a sense of commitment from the opposition.

That's not to suggest India didn't have their chances on Day One in Adelaide. At 3-84 you'd have conceded the first session to them, but Tests aren't necessarily won in a session. They're often lost in one, but that's almost invariably because the momentum has been handed to the opposition and they're not going to hand it back in a hurry.

It certainly looked like acting captain Sehwag was doing his best to wrest the initiative when he brought Ashwin into the attack, obviously looking to undo Warner by taking the pace off the ball and denying him the chance to establish a rhythm. One wonders how often the opposition will try the same thing in the future, because it certainly seemed to work.

Admittedly it was Zaheer rather than Ashwin who got him LBW, and the decision certainly could've gone the other way, looking to be high and possibly going down the leg side. It was the sort of decision that probably would have been referred under the DRS, and could have gone either way. It certainly wasn't one of the howlers the DRS is meant to avoid.

While Warner hadn't looked settled, Marsh was unsteady from the time he walked to the crease, and an early departure came as no surprise. Bowled through the gate, playing for non-existent turn, that probably marked the end of this incarnation of his Test career.

It certainly seems to have cleared up the identity of the player who'll be making way for Watson when he eventually makes his way back into the side, but it'd be handy to have a few extra cards up the sleeve. I missed the Mark Nicholas chat with National Selector John Inverarity during the tea break, but suspect Invers would have been keeping the cards close to the chest.

Seriously, though, it's a situation where you'd like to have at least two alternatives to a non-performing Marsh with an injured Watson in the wings.

If Marsh is this uncertain with no one breathing down his neck, having obviously been given the card as next cab off the rank while he got over the back problem one doesn't like his chances come crunch time against a committed opposition. Sure, Warner going early wasn't the way things were supposed to go, but when you bat Three you have to be ready to go in to face the second ball of the innings.

Considering evidence to hand, Marsh may not be a Three, could be an opener, but the confidence bit kicks in there as well, and probably doesn't fit in further down the order.

Given the suspicion that Ponting won't be holding that press conference any time soon in the interim I'd be inclined to move him up to Three, shuffle Clarke into Four if Watson's still out injured, and throw the new face in at Five with a chance to establish himself. Otherwise, with Watto fit, bat him Four.

Despite Warner's early departure this time around, given the fact you can always expect to lose an opener early in the piece, the Warner-Cowan combo looks good in the short term, despite the soft dismissal that caused Cowan's demise in the run in to the lunch break.

I suspect the original rationale behind Marsh at Three was the third opener option rather than we think he's a genuine Three, so with a more stable opening combination we can possibly go looking elsewhere in the order as the avenue to introduce new blood.

Despite the 250 run partnership between Ponting and Clarke, there's a definite need to establish options, so the next month or so will be interesting (to say the least).

Again, despite that fourth wicket partnership that'll hopefully cruise past three fifty in the morning session Australia's dominant position at the end of Day One has as much to do with India's lack of drive as the skills of two top class bats.

In that department, Geoff Lawson was particularly interesting in the radio commentary, repeatedly stressing that on this type of wicket the runs are going to come, there's not a lot you can do to stop them, and you need to set fields that'll be likely to grab whatever chances they're given and then bowl to them according to a predetermined plan.

Whether Ashwin to Warner was a predetermined plan is, of course, something we'll never know for sure, but wandering slips and ineffective dives in the field aren't going to give your bowlers much heart while they're getting carted, are they?

No, better to go with three slips and a gully and delegate outfield duties to a couple of committed fielders with a degree of pride in their work.

So, from here? Bat all day. On that basis a total around 750 looks doable. Bat on into the third morning and declare around the 800 mark, setting 600 to avoid the follow on with a deck that may be starting to come through at two heights and see how young Mr Lyon goes with the ball.

We'll be needing someone of his ilk in India in two years' time...

And so we're off to Adelaide later this morning, looking towards securing the 4-0 result that will lift Australia level with India in third place in the Test rankings.

Well, as far as the LHoC is concerned we're not physically heading that way, but we will be watching with interest.

The interest this time around goes a little beyond the eventual score line, since we've already got a few things that need to be looked at.

You could, for example, start by looking at comments from the Indian camp about the tracks they've been given and Gambhir's call for raging turners when we're next in their neighbourhood, which hardly comes as a surprise, but was interesting to read after previously noted comments about result reversals on the subcontinent.

We might just let the possibility of a repeat of the minefield on which Clarke took 6-9 go through to the keeper without further comment.

Right around the Test venues so far this summer we've had pace bowler friendly conditions, though one would hardly describe that as earth-shattering news in Brisbane and Perth, would we?

Adelaide is, traditionally, flatter, and you'd expect the Indian batting lineup to go better there, but the big question is going to involve the damage inflicted on confidence in the first three Tests, isn't it?

That, in turn, raises the question of what they were thinking of and how they prepared before setting off on tour, doesn't it?

We're due to head across to India in 2014, so preparations for that tour will be a matter of interest here in the LHoC. We might get a little insight from Adelaide, since the four quicks approach in Perth has reverted to the three quicks and a spinner that's been in operation through the rest of the summer.

The first issue that comes out of that is, of course, the question of rotation, with Siddle having played through the summer and looking tired towards the end in Perth. Under a rotation policy you'd think he'd have been the logical bloke to rest, but he's been given the nod to play, with Starc combining the drinks waiter role with a chance to play in the Big Bash Final.

I've got no issue with that decision, by the way, provided it's part of a this is something we're working on gig rather than a he's the leader of the attack so he's got to play routine.

Contrary to expectations in these parts he has been the leader of the attack through the summer, though one would have been inclined to be using that term to describe young Mr Pattinson by this stage if he'd been fit throughout the series.

Adelaide, however, with the quickie-friendly factors being taken out of the equation, is going to be a situation where reverse rather than normal swing comes into play on a track that'll resemble what we might find in India in two years' time, so if we're looking at that side of things the decision to go with Siddle rather than Starc would make a fair bit of sense. He can, after all, be given a break through the one dayers, can't he?

So we'll be watching the approach with the ball rather closely.

Spin, on the other hand, will be a significant factor, with India looking towards playing two with a third in acting captain Sehwag. They mightn't actually bite the bullet and do that, since you'd expect Zaheer Khan to be safe, Ishant Sharma to be persevered with and Yadav to be hard done by if he was the one to get the chop. He's an emerging talent, and would have been the first one of their bowlers picked if I was doing the selecting.

But I'm not doing the selecting, so we'll wait and see.

On the spin front, one notes with some alarm that Lyon has been looking to Ponting for advice, which would presumably have the rest of the ex-Test spinners' fraternity raising the odd eyebrow, but the suggestion that they're working on the same lines as Ashley Mallett was suggesting and bowling closer to the stumps to improve his angles and take the shots through the leg side out of the picture. Hmmm. Time will tell.


Predictions? Well, win the toss and bat, for a start. From an Australian point of view we want to see either a substantial opening partnership with substantial runs to Marsh at Three or a disciplined spell with the new ball while the thing is likely to swing.

Not that either of those is an earth-shattering suggestion.

And if India wins the toss and bats we've got the prospect of a final chance to enjoy Messrs Sehwag, Dravid, Tendulkar and Laxman at the crease in an Australian free to air friendly time frame.

Add the possibility of a close examination of how far the Lyon as a work in progress has progressed against a batting lineup that would devour a couple of spinners before the daily breakfast and there's plenty to look forward to, isn't there?

Technical issues with broadband usage has been a major preoccupation in these parts recently, which explains the lack of clickable links above, and there's a substantial backlog of writing projects that needs to be attended to, so at this point we might just close the preview, promising to return with a comment on Day One tomorrow morning.

Apart from statements about sides being here to win a series and predictions about The Niggle, which I was anticipating would be a key ingredient in that ambition, I've tried to avoid commenting on the performance of this Indian side, since I'm more interested in observing the Australian pursuit of that #1 ranking than trying to interpret what may or may not be happening elsewhere.

I mean, if we're not even sure what's happening behind the scenes with Australia, what chance do we have of understanding the internal operations of any other side?

The Cricinfo Quote Unquote panel this morning had this little gem from BCCI president N Srinivasan: They cannot beat us here and we will feel very happy.

If you read between the lines, this means that, at the very top of the BCCI administrative tree, a 4-0 donkey-licking doesn't matter. They'll be guaranteed to win against England and Australia at home, presumably in the meantime there's the IPL and that's all that matters.

And, in any case, while there'll be a temporary storm in a teacup until the IPL draws everyone's attention away from this debacle there's no real reason to worry because the Adelaide Test will be India's last away from home over the next two years and while the same article has Dhoni discussing the possibility of a gradual phasing out of the senior players two years without the need to worry about unfamiliar conditions will presumably give them time to stage manage the transition.

And when they're eventually obliged to venture out into foreign conditions it'll be someone else's problem, won't it?

Anyway, according to chief selector Srikkanth the result in this series reflects a collective failure and if that's the case and everyone's to blame you can't single anyone out as a scapegoat, can you?

I'll be scanning the news outlets over the next week or so to see whether anything happens as a result of Dhoni's one match suspension after his second over rate incident in the last twelve months. He was probably ready for a break anyway.

But, really, that's about all the attention I'll be paying to matters on the Indian side of the fence. What happens on the field is what matters, and, as Brydon Coverdale pointed out on Cricinfo while we've done well in these three Tests, there's No reason for Australia to get carried away yet.

A 4-0 result in this series will, from what I can gather, leave us level with India on points as far as the Test rankings are concerned, and the obvious way to move past them on the way to #1 is by winning in the West Indies, which should be achievable, then rolling South Africa here before Christmas, knocking over Sri Lanka after Boxing Day and seeing how close we can go in next year's Ashes series.

At the moment there seems to be a commendable one hurdle at a time mentality, but while we look to be getting an impressive array of bowling options together we really need to find a few extra strings to the batting bow.

Warner and Cowan look like a viable medium term opening combination, and I'd be looking forward to seeing what happens when Warner hits those pocket handkerchief-sized grounds in the West Indies.

Marsh still hasn't shown he's the best option at Three, Watson has to come back some time, and we really do need options apart from Khawaja in the first six, don't we?

Meanwhile, with a week to go until Adelaide that's about it from the Sports Desk until the weekend.

Assuming, of course, there's no major incident in the interim.

When you go looking for the rather remarkable form reversal batsmen and bowlers are probably going to approach it from different directions.

Just after I arrived in Bowen and became involved in the local Junior Cricket scene I met Doug Holloway, an ex-serviceman from Adelaide who'd been stationed in Bowen during World War Two and came back regularly to go fishing and do some coaching on the side. He'd been involved with the South Australian Shield squad, and was definitely a batsman.

Wickets fall, in what I recall of his philosophy, because batsmen make mistakes. Being of the bowler persuasion I questioned this, but Doug was quite definite.

Batsmen make mistakes. He was a rather good analyst of batting weaknesses, and seemed to work on the premise that you stayed in until you got something wrong, which is fairly obvious in its own logic.

By that reading a day where fourteen wickets fell for 308 runs would suggest a large number of batting errors, wouldn't it? That's coming after a day when ten fell for 310. Plenty of errors there too.

The four wicket difference between the two days, of course, would go down in the batsman's Book of Explanations as a dominant performance by Warner and Cowan in the face of what I described yesterday as what's looking increasingly like a popgun pace attack that doesn't seem to have the pace to exploit the track operating to a slips cordon that's standing a good metre too far back.

Day Two, on the other hand, was a case of same horse, different jockey and we were back with the attack that looked, in Sydney and Melbourne as good enough to trouble an Australian batting order that had serious question marks beside most names from One to Six, except for Michael Clarke, who was probably only safe because he had the captaincy.

At the start of the series I'd been thinking that our emerging but showing considerable potential bowling against their star-studded batting order was about equal to their weaker attack against our weaker batting order.

In the first two Tests it was the bowlers' ability to keep the targets down that allowed the bats to run them down, and the bowlers' ability to roll them again that delivered the victories, and we're probably still looking at the same scenario here.

It could, of course, have been very different if India had managed to get their line and length right in the last session in Day One. That's not to take too much away from Warner's innings. They put it there to be hit and he duly hit it. Simple.

He was a bit more circumspect on Day Two, but part of that was because an improved line and length and the cracks opening in the track forced him to. When they strayed into his zone the ball departed very swiftly towards or over the boundary.

And once Cowan and Warner had gone the rest of the Australian batting order and the aging champions from the subcontinent set about proving the Terry Alderman thesis from Day One. You're never, it seems, quite in on this track.

There were fairly similar sentiments from Geoff Lawson yesterday, and I'm inclined to fall in with them. We bowled the way we have through the series, putting the ball up into the zone where the batsmen make mistakes and the bats obliged.

The Indian attack, lacking the horses for courses faster bouncier wickets personnel we have to draw on couldn't manage to do that quite as consistently.

Looking back, in Melbourne it was win the toss, bat, roll them for a first innings lead and set a large enough target to bowl at.

Sydney was lose the toss and bowl, roll them again, make the most of good batting conditions and roll them again for the innings victory.

Here, it looks like being much the same except the Indians didn't choose to bat first, and it almost seemed the Indian brains trust hadn't considered what occurred as a likely scenario, didn't know what to do when it happened, sat down to figure things out overnight and worked out a viable bowling plan.

It would have been very interesting to be a fly on the wall in the Indian dressing room and assorted hotel suites while those matters were under discussion.

They still haven't addressed the issues with the batting, and, again, it would have been interesting to be a fly on the wall last night to eavesdrop on discussions about the Tendulkar LBW.

As I've remarked before I'd have thought Tendulkar, who's been on the receiving end of more dodgy decisions against him that most Test playing nations' entire XIs, would have been all for the DRS.

The replays using the relevant technology were, however, quite definite, While The Little Master was livid to be given out lbw when he thought it was going down leg side and "reacting with dismay to replays that showed the ball clipping leg stump" () it'll be quite interesting to see what the match referee makes of it.

One suspects, however, that the forensic evidence will be downplayed with the old but the technology is wrong, but you'd have needed to be the fly on the wall to know for sure since I haven't seen that line used in public this time around

Yet.

I must admit I wasn't in the best of moods at the start of the Perth Test, though these matters are as much a matter of Hughesy's personal foibles as anything else. With play scheduled to start at 12:30 local I switched on the TV, noting the presence of MS Dhoni on the screen, so the toss had, presumably, already been made.

The ABC Radio was still on the midday news, so it was a matter of waiting and seeing, wasn't it?

What I really wanted to see was the pitch, of course, and as the midday news turned into The Country Hour, with a passing reference to Clarke winning the toss and sending them in I toyed with the audio options. I was on the verge of turning up the sound on the TV when I noted the presence of AW Greig in the middle, so that was the end of that.

He seems to have gone out of his way over the past thirty years to get up Australian noses and in my case he's succeeded to the point where I've classified him, along with hessian underpants, as in impossible to wear.

So I headed to the computer looking for the streaming commentary, and when that option kept running up against the buffers it was a case of back to The Country Hour as I ristled up lunch and waited for the radio commentary to come back.

You didn't need commentary while Harris and Hilfenhaus set about working over the Indian top order, and Sehwag caught at second slip was a nice way to start that didn't require jubilant shouts of Got 'im, anyway.

Everyone in the opening session looked tentative, and you could see where Indian commentators like Gavaskar were coming from when they questioned the lack of a two day tour game between Sydney and Perth.

With India 4-73 at lunch you might have thought the bird had flown and the stable door might as well stay open, but Laxman and Kohli were still there at half way drinks (4-99, 42 overs,). It was hardly the most gripping cricket I've ever watched as the bowlers toiled away and the batsmen did likewise.

If 26 in an hour off 14 overs isn't toiling, I'd like to know what is.

But at least it looked like someone was coming to grips with the surface.

Things picked up with 45 in the next hour, but the key element in the whole day was the twin dismissals of Laxman and Kohli just before tea. It took an excellent catch diving forward after Warner had ruled out a fourth run to a shot through the covers to keep Laxman on strike to break the partnership, but from there at 5-131 it was a case of Goodbye wheels….

The most interesting comment through all this came from Terry Alderman who pointed to Laxman's 44 off 81 deliveries and suggested you're never quite in on this sort of wicket, comments that were mirrored by Warner after the close of play.

To quote the man himself, you just had to treat every ball with some respect and show some intent.

Losing 6-30 definitely suggests a lack of intent, and that's without looking at the actual batting.

But we'll draw a veil over that side of things because it seems the long impending niggle has finally arrived on the field. There has been plenty of it already in the media, both from players (e.g. the interplay between Haddin and Zaheer Khan, though they're hardly the only participants) and media figures (as noted by Harsha Bhogle here) and you might see Warner's comments as part of that off-field sniping.

There were, after all, cries of outrage from the Indian media along the lines of drunken ground staff interfering with the wicket that would presumably have been covered in the half hour before the start of play if I'd had something to listen to. As it was, I had to wait until this morning to find what appears to be a perfectly reasonable explanation of what actually went down out there under cover of darkness.

But going back to those post-match comments from Warner, No one (that's presumably no one on the Indian side, if you believe the Australian side's been quiet you might just be interested in this Harbour Bridge I have for sale) has said anything the two previous games but Ishant Sharma and Kohli were apparently chirping away at mid off and mid on with comments about batting averages and what's going to happen when Cowan and Warner hit Indian conditions.

Warner's alleged observation that his average would probably improve, since the wickets won't be as lively would appear to be close to the perfect squelch. Further details here.

The interesting bit here is the location where this little interchange occurred. There are, presumably, effects microphones in the stumps at both ends, and, presumably, they're turned down and back up again between deliveries and kept down at the bowler's end.

You always tend to associate the chirp with the 'keeper and slips, but this one, I though, was interesting. The Niggle, it would seem, comes from both ends.

Coming from a background where The Sledge, The Niggle and various other forms of verbal sparring are seen as an interesting intellectual exercise, with participants on their toes as they attempt to get a shot in at any available target while maintaining a strong defensive position (Hughesy's novel p. 125) one would suggest India are operating a little out of their depth here, and need to send out an urgent summons to the Turbanator if they want to be competitive in that department.

In any case, it was Warner's innings in the last session that provided the day's real talking point. A score of 101 off 69 balls, fastest by an opening bat and equal fourth fastest ever. Should be enough said, but while the Australian innings started we couldn't see anything because we had to watch the Channel Nine News, didn't we?

Well, we had to watch it in this neck of the woods, anyway, and as I wandered in and out of the office passing the TV screen in there (we'd left the one in the living room off) I got a few reminders of the reasons why Hughesy doesn't bother with commercial TV news.

I should point out here I tend to avoid all news bulletins, but if I have to watch one I'll go to the ABC or SBS for stories that actually matter rather than what appeared to be stories concerning neighbourhood disputes involving dogs and some dude showing off his collection of tatts.

In this case, with a key session underway I would have preferred to be watching the cricket. I was cranky enough about The Country Hour earlier in the day, but at least it goes out at that time five days a week close to fifty-two weeks a year at a time that presumably coincides with the rural worker's lunch break.

Still, when the TV coverage deigned to return to the cricket we got a good hour and a half demolishing what's looking increasingly like a popgun pace attack that doesn't seem to have the pace to exploit the track operating to a slips cordon that's standing a good metre too far back.

Which brings us back to an Australian attack that has consistently been the story of the summer. Into the fifth Test of the summer and they've bowled the opposition out nine times for an average of 225 and three of the four on the paddock yesterday were in the attack plundered by England for an average of 409 per.

Warner's explanation of yesterday's approach and the Indian response makes for interesting reading, as does his explanation of the technical aspects of what he set out to do yesterday. Head still over the line of the ball, eh? Who'd have thunk?

And there's an interesting take on things from young Mr Kohli that makes interesting reading when we're talking about the futures of Messrs Ponting and Hussey. We're just talking a legend of the game and a champion bat. India's got the same problem, but twofold...

I found it interesting that among all the speculation about the green tinge on the WACA wicket and the possible implications for team selection the only actual explanation of the phenomenon I could find was hidden away in the side bar of an article at Cricinfo with the headline Australia undecided on all-pace attack.

We knew that already, but it's always interesting to know the underlying factors, which is why you always need to talk to the groundsman or whoever's in charge of preparing the wicket square.

Cricket pitches are interesting exercises, and there's definitely more to these matters than meets the eye. It's not just a matter of a quick squiz that suggests it's a bit green, or an exploratory thumbprint that suggests it's a bit soft. You need to do a bit of the old Julius Sumner Miller and ask why is it so?

And you need to follow that explanation with an extrapolation, If that's why it's so, what does it all mean?

Cricket pitches need to be hard and flat, which is, along with the fact that your back yard probably wasn't big enough, the reason behind the failure of that cricket pitch you mowed in the back yard when you were a kid to host international matches.

There were other factors, of course, but regardless of those childhood dreams your back yard pitch probably hadn't been rolled to the required hardness and your common or garden lawnmower wouldn't have been able to shave the grass down to the required level.

Rolling is important because you need a hard flat surface to get something approaching the right degree of bounce, but that hardness doesn't sit well with certain other codes, which explains the use of drop in wicket squares at Australian grounds that also host AFL matches.

Having footballers jumping up and down on your wicket square probably doesn't do it a whole lot of good either, because it's not just what's on the top that counts. You need the right foundations, and repeated impacts over a long period (a la AFL players landing after taking a high mark) is going to cause compaction, to the point where wicket squares occasionally need to be dug up and completely relaid.

That also means there's a subtle difference between a track that has had lengthy and repeated attention from the heavy roller and then copped a bit of moisture on the top and one that has been sitting under the covers for three or four days, which is what happened in and around a certain Primary School State Carnival in 1992.

Coming off a proper preparation the deck will be lively early on and flatten out. An underprepared track, on the other hand, will give the early life and then die, giving you the slow and low that brought our opponents in that 1992 final unstuck after they won the toss and sent us in on a pitch that had much the same consistency as plasticene.

It had been under covers for four days, and only had half an hour's rolling on two mornings before we played on it.

So you don't just take a glance at the WACA wicket, notice the resemblance to The Incredible Hulk, select the four quicks and insert the opposition if you win the toss.

The grass is there to hold the track together, and given the likely weather conditions in Perth today and tomorrow you'd expect the track won't get its final shave until the last possible moment, which will, in turn, translate into an old style green-top, right?

Well, maybe, but not quite. You can click over to Cricinfo to get to that side bar, but the guts of it is they're using a new type of grass with a high fibre content in the finer than normal leaves so it holds its colour longer but won't seam as much as you'd expect, which is presumably why we're hanging off until the last shave of the surface to decide on the twelfth man.

The sun was drying out the track yesterday, so there was still a five o'clock shadow of grass on the wicket to protect it from a blistering sun overnight that'll presumably be getting close attention this morning. Grass on the pitch might help the quicks as far as sideways movement is concerned but if the track bakes and the grass dies off it may crack, with variable bounce entering the equation.

And Michael Clark's definitely not ruling the spinner out of the equation either, particularly with the Fremantle Doctor coming into play.

Apart from that, we've got the predictable stuff about sledging (by players and spectators). One notes the comment therein that While Pup generally steers well clear of anything that might be interpreted as "sledging", he's quite happy for his 'keeper to indulge in a bit of byplay.

Sort of like my remarks about Mr Tendulkar in yesterday's blog. He doesn't either, but he was very quick to jump to the Turbanator's aid when Monkeygate broke…

Blog preview of WACA Test is the first item on Hughesy's ToDo list today, but a glance at Cricinfo reveals headlines like Australia will adapt faster to the WACA, Ponting expects quick pitch, and Reports of rift in team are 'rubbish' - Sehwag, while over at The Australian Monkey was on our backs, says Ricky Ponting, MCC committee calls for India to be brought into line and Coy Dravid puts up the brick wall.

Not what you'd call a lot of opportunities to get away from recurring themes that have already been done to death in that lot, is there?

So you need to dig back into the memory banks, which is what I did on the section of the morning walk that precedes the rendezvous with Jimbo somewhere around the Front Beach and Starboard Drive.

That initial headline about the WACA track had me thinking back, and I was scratching my head (figuratively, at least) trying to remember details of recent Perth Tests, one of which was Shaun Tait's last run in the baggy green, which I thought might have been against India

The middle of the morning walk doesn't allow ready access to reference material, but I could recall, back when The Little House of Concrete had pay TV, Allan Border, Mark Waugh and Brendon Julian discussing Tait's recall to the Test side and the accompanying question of whether he'd make the final Eleven.

The suggestion at the time was that he lacked accuracy, a rather remarkable allegation when subsequent research revealed the presence of Mitchell Johnson in the side. AB's take on the matter was along the lines of pick him, give him the new ball and let the Wild Thing loose. In hindsight I'm not sure about the new ball, but let the Wild Thing loose is the exact terminology used.

That subsequent research reveals the opposition was India, and we're talking the sequel to the Monkeygate allegations coming out of the Sydney Test in 2008, with Turbanator Harbajan suspended, the Australian side distracted by the kerfuffle and India coming back to win in conditions where they weren't supposed to be competitive.

Perth, given its reputation as the fastest track in the world would, you'd have thought, have been a natural fit for Tait, but a glance at the score card has him bowling second change behind Lee, Johnson and Stuart Clark. Hmmm.

It also reveals Tait bowled a total of 21 wicketless overs for 92. Lee got 44.4 (6-125), Johnson 38.4 (5-144), Clark 36 (6-106) and Andrew Symonds 20 (3-72). Michael Clark even got 17 across the two innings.

If you're wondering about that last bit, Australia fined for slow over-rate may have had something to do with the Clarke/Symonds bit, but there was also an error of judgement when it came to the actual pitch on offer.

With hindsight, apparently, we'd have played Brad Hogg on his home track.

It does, however, bring us back to this pitch, this time around and the makeup of Australia's attack. The smart money seems to be on four seamers, and the allegation is that Pattinson would have been rested for this one even if he hadn't come down with the injury.

Four quicks seems a reasonable approach given the pre-match publicity, and it'll be interesting to see how the new definitions of a good length stack up on a faster, bouncier track.

Given a track with pace and bounce there's a natural temptation to go short or back of a length and have the batsmen ducking and weaving, which might give bowlers and spectators a bit of a thrill but doesn't always bring results in the Wickets column of the score book.

Pitch it up, on the other hand, and have the extra bounce come into play around the upper body…

I also can't help noting the names of the other three members of the four man pace pack four years ago, and the paths they followed on their way into the Australian side.

Stuart Clark, as far as I can recall, emerged on the scene out of an unremarkable background, rising through the ranks in the regular manner.

Brett Lee and Mitchell Johnson came onto Hughesy's radar around the same time as kids on the way up. Johnson was playing A Grade in Townsville as a teenager along with three members of my 1993 NQ Primary Schools side. Knowing how good those three were, I was ready to be impressed, but I wasn't watching club games in Townsville, so I didn't actually sight him until he was wearing Australian colours. I'd read the huge wraps from the likes of Dennis Lillee, and, to be honest, what I saw at the start wasn't all that impressive.

Brett Lee, on the other hand was mentioned in despatches some time around the 1995 Australian tour of the West Indies, where a new Australian attack was taking shape without Craig McDermott. Resources looked rather limited, but my informant, the then-Queensland Cricket Development Officer for the area alerted me to the presence of Shane Lee's younger brother, who'd been bowling in the nets to Alan Border, who'd been impressed by the teenager's speed.

Johnson mightn't have had the same background but he came endorsed by people with significant influence.

And Tait?

I suspect he'd spent years on the way up with labels like fast but erratic attached to his file, often by people who were looking for excuses not to pick him in some side or other.

I may be wrong about that, but I know what would have happened if I'd had him in my side at a trial where someone else had a favoured candidate for the same role. Hell, I know what I'd have said if he'd been in contention for a spot I'd earmarked for a kid I was coaching.

So we get to a supposed green-top, select him in the side, then bowl him second change when you'd have thought the recipe involved the new ball, short sharp bursts to get the Indian batsmen on the back foot and much up the hill into the Fremantle Doctor work from Stuart Clark.

That's the sort of scenario you see emerging when you've got a team that's got an established pecking order, possible factions and personality issues and a newish kid on the block whose presence is keeping someone more favoured out of the side.

You don't read about that sort of factionalism along the way until the team gets into difficulty, which is why that Dravid media conference referenced before is an exercise in managing perceptions rather than reflecting reality.

While there's no way that anyone outside the Indian dressing room can be too clear on details, you'd have to believe there's something lurking there under the surface. Given the nature of the beast, a touring party drawn from a range of cultural, religious, regional linguistic and socio-economic backgrounds it would be remarkable if there wasn't.

Dravid or whoever's rostered to front today's media conference can't, of course, come out and admit that these things exist. Once he does, there's going to be the predictable

Which, obviously requires a denial, that in turn prompts further questions from a room full of people who need to find something to fill column inches.

That factional bit (and I'm not having a go at India here, you'll find it in any international team, though things won't work the same way if you're Australia, Pakistan, New Zealand or South Africa) doesn't matter until it starts to influence team performance, does it?

I've just spent a good half hour looking for the article I sighted recently that suggested a reason for the apparent non-arrival of The Niggle in a series that seemed set for it. In a passing reference to alleged regional and IPL based factions in the Indian camp the article slipped in a comment about the Mumbai group, predictably centred around The Little Master, with a comment along the lines of Tendulkar can make the bullets, but he doesn't have to fire them.

And, when you look at it, he wouldn't be firing them, even if they were his own creation. But you could drop the odd comment while someone with a demonstrated ability to get right under Australian skin, couldn't you?

No, I remarked to Jimbo on the last leg of the morning walk, Harbajan's recent form with the ball mightn't have been crash hot, but he's got definite long term and ongoing form as far as The Niggle is concerned.

So if we fail to see the predicted outbursts over the next two Tests, there's a possible explanation...

I've never been one to pay too much attention to what happens when some elite sports star gets to sit in front of the sponsors' logos and make sage pronouncements about the talking points of the moment, in much the same way tas I disregard hard-hated politicians doing something or other in front of the TV cameras to ensure they've got their face towards the top of the prime time news bulletins.

We know why the politicians are doing it, and you don't need to be Einstein to figure out why those elite sports personalities are there, sandwiched between the corporate logos and the media scrum.

The media scrum wants content, the sponsors want their pound of flesh and if you don't give the journos something relatively straightforward to cover they might have to start looking. If they were to do that they might well look elsewhere or start sniffing around areas you'd prefer they didn't.

At least, if you've corralled them into the media conference you can exert some control of what's going to come out in the news bulletins and potential fish and chips wrapping, which is also why so many of those events end up as statements of the bleeding obvious.

There's the occasional headline that comes out of such events that's worthy of comment, such as Australia aim for 3-0 in Perth, leave talk of 4-0 for later.

Click on the link and you'll find the predictable cliches rolling out one after the other. The late and definitely unlamented in these parts Joh Bjelke Petersen used to refer to it as feeding the chooks.

At the same time Mr Hussey, who copped the short straw to front the media this time around has certain topics he'd prefer not to discuss, which is tricky given the fact that their cousin-brothers are rearing their ugly heads on the subcontinent as people start questioning the future of India's aging batting order.

For all the cliches Hussey's right. Leading two-nil in the four Test series you look at what's in front of you at the WACA, see how events unfold and then turn your thoughts to Adelaide. One step at a time and all that…

While you're doing that, of course, you're conveniently not looking too far into the future and raising tricky questions about retirement and rotation policies, are you?

Because rotation policies are back on the agenda with headlines like Cricket Australia outlines rotation policy, though one notes general manager of high performance Pat Howard's still talking bowlers at this stage.

Much of the problem facing India lies in the fact that their batting line up has, at various stages, been highly successful, with the corollary that success encourages continuity and stability to the point where you're stuck with the incumbents because they might hit form and the horizon's light on for replacements.

That's sort of like suggesting while Brad Haddin's not going that well at the moment Tim Paine's injured and the other candidates have yet to prove themselves so we'd better stick with Haddin, hadn't we?

In any case, even if we manage to get to the 4-0 whitewash against India we're probably going to have a few question marks heading off to the West Indies and points beyond, so let's return to a well-worn path for a moment.

A clean sweep in a Test series tends to minimise the number of areas that will be needing scrutiny, and at the moment it looks like we'll be right in the bowling department.

Assuming the current twelve get through Perth and Adelaide unscathed, then get themselves through the rest of the summer without anything going wrong, you'd expect the twelve that emerge from Adelaide to supply the basis for the Test squad for the West Indies. The extras will depend on the size of the squad they want to move around the Caribbean and the playing roster we end up using for the five ODIs and two T20s before three Tests in Barbados, Trinidad and Guyana.

The first factor that needs to be pencilled in here is the travel time involved if you need to fly in replacements. You need to have most eventualities covered in the actual squad as an injury late in one Test may mean the next game starts before the replacement arrives, so you'd be inclined to think one of your reserve bats might need to cover the 'keeper's role as well.

So, pause for as moment, and assume a Test squad of sixteen, which might seem excessive for a three Test series, but you're going to have some cover for injury along the track and there are those logistical issues with replacements.

That means, with the twelve from Adelaide providing the nucleus, you've got space for two bats and two bowlers. The bowlers would be Pattinson and Cummins, assuming both are fit, one bat would be a fit Watson and the other the reserve 'keeper, whoever that might be. If he was fit you'd go for Tim Paine, but with long term injury issues….

That, in turn brings us back to the existing batting order, doesn't it?

If he's fit, you'd expect Watson to slot right in somewhere, and by the end of Adelaide we'll hopefully have a better handle on Messrs Warner, Cowan and Marsh at One, Two and Three. That, in turn means we're going to be looking at Ponting and Hussey agian, aren't we?

Small wonder that media conference appearance from Mr Cricket had him talking about just trying to enjoy each Test match and then closing the door on that one and starting afresh for the next.

You need to remember, I remarked to Jimbo and the attendant Triple B (Black-Blonde Betty) on the return leg along Starboard Drive two mornings back, that somewhere around the corner Fate is probably slipping the lead into the boxing glove.

At the time I was looking at the outcome of the Sydney Test, but around four yesterday morning my suspicions were confirmed when I discovered that we'd allegedly almost used our entire monthly bandwidth allocation from the friendly ISP on Day One of the billing period.

It was a matter that needed to be investigated before the morning walk, and I reckoned it was probably too early to get a live human in Tech Support, so the walk proceeded as scheduled and I was able to expand on the Fate/corner/lead/boxing glove bit.

We were discussing the merits of the Clarke triple century and the impact on public perceptions and were around the same point where I'd made the previous prognostication when I outlined the following scenario.

Tendulkar and Laxman bat most of today, so they get to stumps around level pegging or slightly ahead. Bat on into tomorrow, Dhoni slams a ton and we end up with a nasty little run chase, which we lose. So, two days after everyone was singing his praises they'll be calling for his head on a platter…

For declaring too early, Jimbo agreed.

Triple B, being of the canine persuasion, said nothing, but eyed a passing pooch that wouldn't have made much more than a mouthful…

The phone call to Tech Support consumed the best part of an hour as the bloke on the other end of the line tried to figure out what had gone wrong, and while we didn't get the lost bandwidth back we did get, gratis, a complimentary data block to keep us going for the time being, advice to download software to monitor internet traffic and a suggestion that I set about changing passwords and that sort of thing.

All that, a morning shower and breakfast took me up to the resumption, and I set about the computer tasks with one eye on the cricket, but wasn't able to agonise over the scenario I'd outlined on the morning walk.

At this point I should also point out that it was only a matter of eight good balls and sticky (rather than butter) fingers.

I'd sort of sorted out most of those issues through the morning session, noted in passing the departure of Gambhir, and done the lap through town to the Post Office and the bank in the lunch break, polished off a spot of lunch and was about to settle back into watching the unfolding drama when Madam announced there was a network problem associated with printers and changed passwords.

That, predictably, was around the time Clarke brought himself on to bowl to Tendulkar, wasn't it?

Equally predictably, resolving that issue took most of the hour that saw the Indian middle order removed, didn't it?


All of which explains why we're rather light on for opinions about much of what went on yesterday, but there are a couple of things that have come out of it.

For a start, regardless of public perceptions, The Pup has a fair streak of old-fashioned hard-nosed mongrel in him, and a willingness to trust his doggy instincts rather than play things safe. Good.

I'd opined on the morning walk that the only major argument for batting on after a lead over 450 was to wear down the bowling attack, and the fact that Sehwag and Ashwin had bowled a hefty chunk of overs between them probably suggested Dhoni wasn't going to fall into that little trap.

In the end we're left with a fairly tidy performance and the predictable fast bowler fitness issues as we learn that young Mr Pattinson has potential stress factors in his foot and Mitchell Starc has been called into the squad for Perth. Kind of predictable, wasn't it?

We have, however, seemingly found the depth in the fast bowling stocks to cover for pattinson in the short term. You'd be inclined to suspect we'll be going into Perth with Harris in for Patto and Starc in for Lyon, which seems a fairly predictable horses for courses move, and adds a backup if Harris breaks down during proceedings.

In that event, with one Test to go and, hopefully, a three-zip series lead, Lyon back in for Adelaide and the other three quicks unchanged could work, and you'd be inclined to think that a fit Cummins or the sidelined Copeland would be cover if changes to the pace side of things needed to be made.

Those issues, however, lie well into the future, so we'll be putting our feet up on the Sports Desk for the next couple of days, returning to the Blogosphere some time around Thursday when the outlook for the WACA is a little clearer…

Pause for a moment among the celebratory tumult and consider what may have happened had things gone differently at the toss of the coin.

With a track that was going to offer early life on Day One, flatten out on Days Two, Three and Four and offer some assistance to the spinners on Day Five you'd have to think a captain would give at least momentary consideration to winning the toss and inserting.

That, by the way, was the groundsman's assessment of the SCG pitch, presumably available to both camps, You should always, as I've mentioned elsewhere, talk to the groundsman.

Dhoni could very easily have sent us in, and, given the fact that we slumped to 3-37 later in the day when the early juice in the pitch was draining away you'd have to guess Australia's top order batting could have been in equally deep water if we'd been called on to bat in the morning.

While you ponder yesterday's batting heroics, pause for a moment and consider what may have ensued had our three quicks and a spinner attack been called on to spend Day Two bowling to some subset of Sehwag, Dravid, Tendulkar and Laxman.

Under those circumstances one may well have been demanding what the selctors thought they were doing by going into the game with only four specialist bowlers and demanding Daniel Christian's recall to the squad to bat at Six and do his share of the bowling...

As things turned out, by stumps the Indian attack were, to use the vernacular, pretty much stuffed. Remarkably, given the amount of commentary about slow over rates, they managed to get the full ninety overs bowled without going into overtime. Maybe they just wanted to get off the paddock.

That's not to take anything away from a masterful innings by the captain and a useful century from his predecessor which presumably has a fair chunk of the cricketing commentariat suggesting there's life in the old boy yet.

Similar comments will presumably follow the Hussey century that looks about as inevitable as a score around the same level as India's seven for seven hundred plus at the same ground eight years ago.

If Hussey doesn't reach the magical three-figure score there's every possibility that Haddin, faced with a tiring attack and with significant question marks over his own career, will.

It's only a couple of years since a remarkable result in the equivalent Test against Pakistan had the Australian brains trust thinking everything was fine. That, you may recall, was just before we headed over to England to hand back The Ashes.

There'll be plenty of learned opinion along the lines that Ponting and Hussey are now safe for the foreseeable future. Well, maybe they are. Depends on what the selection panel is thinking.

One element in the case for a dual retention is the lack of talent on the horizon and the continuing question marks over the top order batting. Fair enough, and we're not going to be able to assess the possible alternatives while they're playing Big Bash either, so the only opportunities to evaluate the alternatives will be in the post-Bash Sheffield Shield and the tour to the West Indies.

With Australia's international summer running into early March and the West Indian tour kicking off with the first ODI in St Vincent on 16 March, and the Test Series running through April, there'll be a fair chance to assess Shield form between the resumption on 2 February and the Final, which coincides with that first ODI.

You'd guess the two limited overs touring parties would be named towards the end of the ODI series here, followed by the announcement of the Test party towards the end of the Shield season.

The IPL, in case you're wondering, kicks off on 4 April 2012, and runs until 27 May, so you can rule any West Indian players with IPL contracts out of the Test series. They're probably going to be missing for the T20 games wedged between the ODIs and the Tests as well, so you're probably looking at playing a weakened Windies side.

They're currently ranked considerably below Pakistan and Sri Lanka, and they're not that far ahead of New Zealand.

Under those circumstances you'd suspect that an Australian bat who wasn't able to hold his form through that series would have to be in serious doubt for the Test series against a full strength South Africa, wouldn't you?

On that basis, regardless of any other considerations you could possibly sell the idea of a winter off to the two elder statesmen because here's a chance for some of their potential rivals to rule themselves out of contention. It's also feasible that a loss of form on tour could rule either Ponting or Hussey out for the South African series.

But that's n the future. Turning the gaze back to the SCG we're looking at batting long, with the key question involving the timing of the declaration.

This one could, of course, be simplified by a rapid termination of the Australian innings but on yesterday's revealed form and today's likely conditions that would seem about as likely as a double century from former Victorian and Australian leggie Jim Higgs.

You may not remember Mr Higgs. He was the guy who made Chris Martin look like Don Bradman, was bowled by the only ball he faced on the 1975 tour of England and received a standing ovation when he hit a ball in an MCG Test against the West Indies.

No, you'd have to assume we'll still be batting at the tea break, and the key decision will be whether to have an hour at them before stumps today or bat into tomorrow and wear them down further.

There is, after all, every possibility that one of their bowlers will break down, so even if India were to escape with the draw, they'll be weakened going into Perth next Friday…

Gazing into the crystal ball, one suspects that much of that will depend on the Indian over rate. Assuming we're looking to bowl close to the scheduled hundred and eighty over the last two days, if they've been slowing things down through the first two sessions I'd be inclined to bat on, and on, and on…

But we'll see.One swallow does not make a summer. Nor do two, three or even four, even if one of them is a substantial record-breaking triple swallow.

And one should also be perpetually aware that around the next corner Fate may, even as we speak, be slipping the lead into the boxing glove.

The problem with wide-ranging discussions lies in the definition, along with their tendency to leap from topic to topic without necessarily reaching a conclusion.

We were half way down the Jonah bottle when Angry raised the question of Australia's batting coach, and at 3-37 it was definitely a subject that needed to be raised. As almost invariably happens in these circumstances my dunno was followed by a brief discussion during which I meant to mention the Invers batting drills and Rod Marsh's redefined role as Selector responsible for State Coach liaison, but we'd shifted to something else before I managed to get those mentions in.

I was forcibly reminded of the issue when I sighted this headline (McDermott's vigilance needs emulating) at Cricinfo this morning.

Both Angry and I had noted Craig McDermott's presence on the boundary in the second half of the morning session, and on the strength of the first hour the presence was justified.

We had, admittedly, got India to 2-30 reasonably quickly but the bowling had been, for my money, possibly a little too short and definitely a lot too wide.

India had gone into the game, from all accounts, intent on avoiding offering the bat whenever possible and in that first hour we were definitely giving them plenty to leave.

Things tightened up shortly thereafter, and you might have been looking at 191 all out as a reasonably solid day's work, with the uncharacteristic drop by Ponting and some wayward early bowling going relatively unpunished.

At 3-37 in reply, on the other hand, you'd have been feeling decidedly uneasy.

Yes, the Australian bowlers are doing a good job, but it's not perfect yet, probably never will be and definitely needs to get as close as possibleto that unattainable goal if we're going to avoid the possible consequences of the ongoing batting heebie jeebies.

Asked to define perfect, Hughesy would suggest a ten over opening spell where every delivery demanded either the use of the bat or last minute evasive action.

With the chance of afternoon and evening showers and thunderstorms you'd have to be hoping we still have two of Ponting, Clarke, Hussey and Haddin at the crease at stumps today, and batting on into tomorrow, rain interruptions of not, should deliver a lead somewhere over the two hundred and fifty mark, which would give the attack something to bowl at in the second dig.

From there, all other things being equal, you should be able to rule out an Indian win and given Perth as the next Test venue you'd probably be looking at a drawn series as the worst result that could come out of the four Tests.

If anything is going to go wrong, however, you'd expect it to go wrong with the batting, and that's where we keep coming back to the old Ponting/Hussey quandary and Justin Langer's presence as the batting coach.

Langer's continued presence is, as far as I can see, a continuation of the old specialist coach/advisor paradigm.

McDermott has been able to redefine things, where Langer (and, dare I say it, the much vaunted batting camp) represents a continuation of a this is the way we play attitude rather than a this is where we need to be headed policy.

Someone, somewhere along the line needs to reassess what is seen as desirable batting technique, and it'll need to be somebody with sufficiently strong credentials to have batsmen and coaches around the country sit up and take notice.

Had anyone other than McDermott suggested the bowling approach needed a serious rethink he would more than likely have been ignored. Until whatever recommendations Rod Marsh may be making to state coaches and players have had time to take effect I'm hoping the selectors will grit their teeth, rule Messrs Ponting and Hussey out of the forthcoming tour to the West Indies and state quite categorically they are looking for players with much tighter and considerably more orthodox techniques at Test level.

Without actually having seen the Invers batting drills video, I can't really comment on the content, but I was going to mention the existence, and suggest that Inverarity has some background in the area.

As far as getting people to listen, of course, you'd expect something along the lines of Remember we're the blokes who decide how long you're going to be in the side would tend to command attention.

We have Watson to come back, and we're still looking for batsmen who are consistently good enough. Warner, Cowan and Marsh are still under assessment, and must be persevered with through the rest of this series. Once it is over we need to start looking further afield in the quest for a successful long term batting order.

In ancient Rome soothsayers examined the entrails of slaughtered animals in an attempt to predict the future in much the same way in much the same way as the modern cricket scribe approaches a Test match, probing through the records and recollections of previous Tests at the venue and earlier encounters in the series to gain an insight into what might happen this time around.

Press coverage of the New Year Test at the SCG has, predictably, tended to focus on three aspects of the game, and that's fair enough since a close examination of those factors brings just about everything else into play.

First, of course, there's been the speculation on the nature of the pitch. Is it the raging turner we've come to associate with the SCG, and if it isn't, how much will it actually turn, and when will it start to do so?

Well, boys and girls, when you've read all the column inches devoted to the subject it's a matter of having a look at the pitch report and then waiting to see how things shape up isn't it?

The second, and it flows on neatly from the state of the pitch is the role of the spinner, and the associated question of whether you play a spinner at all. The observer might be inclined to question whether Lyon' spot was up for grabs, and I'm inclined to see Harris being slotted into the twelve as cover if something happens to one of the three quicks. At the same time, while he's in the squad they can keep a closer eye on his fitness can't they?

No, I suspect Lyon was always going to play unless the SCG track turned out to be something akin to a Gabba green-top.

That was never an overly likely scenario, though one also noted the fact that the old style Sydney turner has tended not to bother India as much as it has affected other sides. On that basis you might have looked at Harris even if there wasn't a greenish tinge, but a four man pace attack will have inevitable consequences when it comes to over rates.

So Lyon will be looking to contain and relieve in the first dig, and will be a more important component later in the game if and when the track starts to turn. He's still, as previously remarked, a work in progress, and it's interesting to compare him with Ashwin, because the comparison delivers a few clues when we're looking at the role of the spinner.

Given the rather irregular path Lyon' career has meandered along I'm inclined to see him as coming very much from the traditional spin bowler school rather than the late twentieth century finger spinner as dart thrower approach.

Given the fact that Lyon spent his formative years in environments where everyone down to Eleven is inclined to slap, and even dart throwers get carted, a slightly built youth is going to learn very quickly that loop and guile are more likely to achieve results through mishits and deception in flight.

That's where I see him coming from, and while it doesn't really prepare you for an encounter with a batting lineup that regularly devours two or three spinners before breakfast, it's a better background than dart throwing.

Ashwin, on the other hand, seems to have come from the recent ODI/T20 school of thought that emphasises variety and six different balls an over rather than consistency, a stock ball and subtle variation.

The actual part either of them will play will depend, among other things, on the track, the toss and the third factor under discussion in the press, namely the approach of the Indian batting order.

After Melbourne it seems it'll be a case of same order, different batting and the forecast seems to be based on limiting the range of shots played and leaving rather than sparring at deliveries that don't demand a response.

That may have been a workable strategy against an attack operating on the old back of a length principle, but things may just be different in the era of pitch it up and give it a chance to swing.

Under the old regime back of a length equated to won't be likely to hit the stumps anyway, whereas pitched up around off stump and doing a bit both ways is going to demand a bit more full-bladed respect.

In any case, both sides will be looking to bat long, and in both cases that'll wear down the three quicks and bring the spinner and the part timers into play. From an Indian perspective that'd also involve carting Lyon as much as possible, shifting the workload back to the quicks, and when they tire dining out on the spinner, Hussey, Clarke and Warner.

From an Australian point of view batting long will deliver a number of benefits if we can manage it.

For a start, batting second and batting long would look like a handy win the game scenario which would, in turn, mean that the worst result that could come out of Perth and Adelaide would be a drawn series.

Then there's the not insignificant point that batting long will answer a few of the question marks over the current batting order, particularly if batting long translates into big hundreds to one or more out of Warner, Cowan, Marsh and Clarke. A big ton to Ponting and/or Hussey might be helpful, but big scores to both with relative failures to the other four is the stuff nightmares are made of when you're looking at rejuvenation, innit?

As far as the bowling lineups go, I reckon we're close to level pegging. Sure, Australia looks stronger on paper, but we'd be looking even stronger if the bowling were lining up against our own top six rather than Messrs sSehwag, Dravid, Tendulkar and Laxman.

The other bit about batting long, of course, is the possibility of one of the quicks breaking down, and given recent injury issues with Zaheer and Ishant Sharma…

Having looked at all those factors we're really only left with two remaining issues.

As far as the captaincy goes, we can look forward with interest to what happens when India tries to belt Lyon out of the attack, and what happens if Australia bat long and Dhoni is forced into giving his ageing superstars extended spells in the outfield.

That, in turn, brings us to the fielding, where Australia's definitely on the upswing and India are definite question marks if asked to spend two consecutive days chasing leather.

So, until we know the result of the toss, that's it from the LHoC Sports desk...