And, in the end it was remarkably easy, and relatively niggle-free.

That does not, of course, mean that the rest of the series won't be tightly fought and/or confrontational, but the niggle, unlike the sledge (which can be delivered from a distance) only works when you're close enough to really get under the opposition's skin.

That's on the playing field, anyway. Off the paddock there are all sorts of ways of getting the niggle in.

One of the best exponents was, Sourav Ganguly, whose patrician demeanour, apparent disdain for matters Australians would regard as key elements in team bonding (staying at the same hotel, for instance) and stubborn refusal to deliver himself to the toss on time were guaranteed to irritate Steve Waugh and company.

Ironically, the DRS, which I saw as a significant distractive issue turned out to be one of the key elements in the outcome, since the majority of umpiring mistakes that might have been overruled under the DRS went in Australia's favour when we were batting on Day Three.

Michael Hussey was bound to go eventually, but India needed to get him on Day Three, didn't they? And if they had, Clarke mightn't have been able to use Lyon as a nightwatchman to protect Pattinson, who was supposed to bat at Nine.

You could sense the anti-DRS case was running out of team when the criticism of the technology went from unreliability to the suggestion that grounds in, say Chittagong or Georgetown, Guyana mightn't have access to replays of the same high quality that are available here.

When you get into that sort of hair splitting the case is, effectively, lost, because you're conceding that the accuracy isn't such a great issue.

But the DRS was only one of the factors that could have brought things closer.

India's inability to remove the lower order in both innings was a significant factor in building that just under three hundred lead, as we went from 7-286 (Haddin gone) and 8-291 (Siddle) to 333 in the first dig and 6-148 (Haddin) to 240 in the second.

Much of that second innings recovery was, IMHO, down to the use of Lyon ahead of Pattinson with the bat, and suggests Clarke has a bit more tactical nous than his predecessor. Lyon might only have lasted eleven deliveries, but that was almost two overs Pattinson didn't have to face on Day Three,

Starting with a 230 runs lead and two wickets in hand, once Hussey was gone that final partnership should never have got us another fifty runs on, and the Zaheer Khan drop off Pattinson was another decisive factor. Pattinson was on 15 at the time and went on to make 37 not.

The other decisive factor was, of course, the Australian attack, and you'd almost be inclined to suspect Clarke wouldn't mind if, say, Pattinson were suspended for a game because you might well be reluctant to break up this combination to bring back Cummins or Harris.

It was interesting to hear the radio commentators invoking the old Dennis Lillee adage about retaliating first, and Clarke's gesture towards the cap badge just before the bouncer that brought Zaheer Khan's dismissal suggests there's a bit more old fashioned hard-nosed captaincy under that latte-sipping metrosexual exterior. Interesting.

It also suggests that when the niggle does arrive we won't be taking too many backward steps.

Had things been closer, we may well have seen something along the limes of the Gambhir-Pattinson incident from the first innings, many more instances of batsmen pulling away at the last minute because of talk behind the back or movement in the line of sight.

Had things got really tight towards the end with the Indian tail exposed I'm sure we would have heard much more about intimidatory bowling.

But regardless of an outstanding performance with bat and ball from the Australian lower order that's not to suggest that everything is rosy in the garden. The batting is still a major problem and the fielding, while on the way up, isn't as sharp as it should be.

And it's the batting that's going to continue to be an issue over the next twelve months.

You might, on the basis of a 60 to Ponting and 89 to Hussey be saying their places in the side have been cemented, but that's only for this series while there's no Watson on the horizon and no one making big scores in the Sheffield Shield because they're all playing Big Bash T20.

Pause for a moment, if you will, to consider Australia's schedule over the next twelve months. We've got a tour to the West Indies for five ODIs, two T20s and three Tests, five ODIs against England and one against Ireland, then the World Twenty20 in Sri Lanka before home series against South Africa and Sri Lanka.

How many of those intervening series are likely to feature Ponting and Hussey?

They're out of the T20 picture for a start, and while you might want one or both for the ODIs in England, it's a series that doesn't appear to have any real significance apart from fulfilling TV broadcast rights obligations.

You might, admittedly, think about including them in the side for the Tests in the Caribbean, but with the Windies not travelling that well at the moment and a series that's going to clash with next year's IPL, if that isn't an opportunity to have a good look at the other batting option before the series against South Africa I don't know what is.

There should be at least one full round of Shield cricket before South Africa arrives, so you'd be hoping the selection panel would be suggesting Messrs Ponting and Hussey enjoy the off season and come back refreshed for South Africa, when the side will be selected on current revealed form.

Alternatively, of course, they can hold a press conference.

Actually, a press conference might be a very good idea, even if it's just to say that they're looking forward to the break and a fresh start against the Proteas.