Adelaide 2012: Day Three

Going into Day Four it seems we're back to two possible results with the prospect of a genuine nail-biter lurking just on the other side of the horizon.

Of course, as is so often the way with these things, having said that we'll probably see things very close to wrapped up today with a comprehensive victory to one side or t'other early on Day Five, but that's the nature of the beast, isn't it?

A 273 run lead with five wickets in hand means an Australian victory is going to depend on how many runs Clarke, Hussey and Wade can chip in with, and how well Siddle, Hilfenhaus and Lyon can bowl. From the South African side of the fence it'll come down to the size of the run chase and how well their top order fares against a depleted bowling attack that's minus one of the key strike weapons.

Take that Protea formula and scrutinise it closely and it'll come down to how quickly they can get rid of those three bats and how well those three bowlers are allowed to bowl. Smith and Amla are class players, Petersen and Du Plessis look like they've got potential and Kallis and de Villiers might have question marks over the fitness level but they've got class on their side and plenty of time if the leg and the back can hold themselves together.

Oh, an Rudolph can bat a bit as well.

Looking back on Day Three, you can see the turning points pretty clearly. Rudolph and Smith went early, de Villiers, Steyn and Kleinveldt didn't stick around, Kallis and Du Plessis added the runs that took the Proteas out of follow on territory (not that it was ever going to be enforced) and then, once the initial breakthrough had been made Steyn, Morkel and Kleinveldt lived up to the pace attack pecking order and made the Australian supporter rather glad Philander and Kallis weren't part of the equation.

Looking forward, everything's going to come down to the amount of pressure that can be exerted in the first session. That, I think, will determine the result and dictate how long it's likely to take. If two out of those three bats are still there at lunch with the lead around 350 you can probably rule the South African victory out of calculations, though a quick run through the tail after the resumption would make things interesting.

Chasing around 400 in four and a bit sessions in circumstances where Clarke, Hussey, Warner and Quiney are going to be doing their share of the bowling would appear quite doable when you've got Smith, Amla and Kallis likely to spend a lengthy spell at the batting crease.

The key factor, from what I can see, is going to be the old DRS, which is going to figure increasingly in the calculations as things get tighter and tighter. That's an interesting one, because regardless of the intention when it was introduced it's now a significant factor in determining the outcome of a particular match. Sure, it might have been meant to eliminate the howlers, but nowadays it seems equally important as a second chance to knock over a batsman, or for a batsman to avoid being knocked over.

You used to rely on the umpire's competence, eyesight and judgement, working on the principle that mistakes will eventually even themselves out. Everyone on the field has hid own take on the merits or otherwise of a particular decision, and I'd like a dollar for every time I've seen an inconsistent response to what could be seen as an umpiring mistake.

There were a couple of times when I signalled Byes in a kids game, only to be informed that the batsman had hit the ball. Fine, was my standard reply, if the keeper had caught it I would've given it Not Out. That usually seemed to remove the grievance.

Equally interesting was the response from a notoriously temperamental senior cricketer in Bowen who had never, ever, been dismissed LBW. In a situation where the batting side provided the decision maker you couldn't help feeling there was a bit of bias entering into the equation and I always suspected that when this bloke got rapped on the pads the benefit of the doubt might have gone to the bowler, even though the decision usually came from one of his team mates.

If that seems strange, I was sitting beside the rest of his side when the finger went up on one occasion and noted the hilarity with which the decision was greeted, though I also noted the group scattered as he made his way back to the side line.

When he was bowling, of course, anything that went anywhere near the pads was Out by definition, and a decision to the contrary was usually followed by a remark about large amounts of money influencing the decision.

Things are likely to get rather tense in Adelaide over the next twenty-four hours, and it'll be interesting to see what happens when Smith, in particular, gets a verdict he doesn't agree with. He obviously wasn't happy with the referral that cost him his wicket being turned down, and in a situation where a clear head will help the decision making process it's easy to be distracted by issues that you can't, in the long run, do very much about.

The outcome of the next two days will have a lot to do with focus and careful management of resources, and no one will be wanting to get distracted.

Adelaide 2012: Day Two

Day Two in Adelaide provided, yet again, another opportunity to remark that there's no game that's quite like Test cricket.Watching Smith and Rudolph grinding out the runs late in the afternoon, of course, you might take that commentbin a negative sense, but consider the way things have turned around in the past twenty-four hours.

Yesterday morning, at 5/482 you'd have thought anything less than 600 would be unsatisfactory, and 700 quite achievable, but South Africa obviously sat down after stumps, took a good analytical look at the situation and decided to take it back to basics.

The formula, one imagines involved keeping it tight and building pressure, and didn't it work like a charm.The bowling looked like the paper rating was accurate, knocking Clarke over early took the 700 out of the equation, getting Wade not long after removed 600 from the calculations and at 9/504 you'd be reckoning on getting change out of 525.

Pattinson tonked and got us past that and his 42, the highest score for the innings that didn't stretch to three figures, got the total to 550 with a little four over cameo before lunch to keep things interesting.

That four over spell coincided with The Actor arriving to fit the aluminium gates into the fence, so I missed that cameo, and, indeed, much of the middle session, so I can't really comment on how we bowled.

I got back to the TV in time for the Petersen run out, which was one of those things that happen when you veer away from the basics and have two batsmen running on the same side of the pitch. That's not an issue when you've got a right arm bowler operating over the wicket, but Lyon, from what I recall, was going round the wicket, which put Smith on the right side to interfere with Petersen's running path.

It was rather sloppy work from Petersen as well, too casual, failed to stretch out and slide the bat after covering extra ground, more than likely expecting the throw to go to the other end. A timely reminder that you ignore basic principles at your own risk.

It was one of those little reminders that you don't always need ten good balls to wrap up an innings.

The stumping that took care of Amla wasn't the sharpest bit of keeping I've ever seen, but in the end Amla was far enough down the track to make the untidy glove work immaterial.

So, having missed a chunk of the day, where do we sit now?

Day One had two results possible, with a South African victory more or less ruled out. Australia bats long, gets a long bowl at a follow on target between 450 and 500, and the worst outcome is a draw.

Now, with the Proteas sitting semi-pretty on 2/217 and Smith on 111 there's the rather unnerving stat indicating they've never lost a Test where he's scored a ton, and the distinct possibility that if they can bat long and end up around par by stumps, with two days to play they could bat on further and set up a nasty little second innings scenario on a wearing pitch.

Adelaide 2012: Day One

It seems something strange happens when a cricket team hits the top of the ICC World Rankings. Maybe not quite a Well here we are, chaps, let's sit back and enjoy the view, but one has to suspect there's a bit of relaxation when it comes to the aspirational drive that landed you there.

In recent times we've had four sides hit that #1 Ranking in the Test table, and all of them are currently engaged in a series with one of their erstwhile rivals.,

Here are the rankings from 3 September this year (grabbed from here)

                        Matches     Points     Rating
South Africa 25 3002 120
England        36 4195 117
Australia        34 3952 116
Pakistan        29 3148 109
India        32 3394 106
Sri Lanka        29 2834 98

Astute readers will noteIndia, recently #1 has slipped to #5, though they've just finished a nine wicket demolition of England, ho appear to experience a double digit degree of difficulty (add a decimal place and it'd be three) in anything approaching subcontinental conditions.

Which brings us, of course, to the rather remarkable events at Adelaide Oval yesterday. I don't recall ever seeing a day's play in a Test match that was quite like that one.

I've been out checking the neighbourhood for a missing cat, and I've got an hour-long walk coming up, so I haven't had a look at the morning media, but I've got a fair idea what would be in there. I've also missed the entirety of the Gabba Test apart from the odd score update while I was in Japan, so when it comes to revealed form out of there it's a case of not seeing, cannot say apart from a remark that Australia seemed to have managed to dig ourselves out of a rather nasty hole, and we seem to have done it again this time.

So, the batting. Day One of a Test, and you're always likely to lose an opener in the first session, so Cowan's dismissal doesn't come as a great cause for concern. The delivery in question wasn't a jaffa, but they don't all need to be, and while the mode of dismissal was, um, different (what with the possibility of LBW thrown in with the caught and bowled) it can probably go down as one of those things that do happen.

In any case Cowan and Warner had negotiated the first ten overs. It's the sort of situation that calls for your best bat to come in at Three, hopefully to negotiate his way through to lunch. Somehow, I don't think Quiney is the right man for that slot just yet, but someone has to do it.

That someone probably isn't Ricky Ponting either. I don't think I've seen a top ranked bat done over as comprehensively as Punter was by the one that took out the stumps. The mode of dismissal suggests someone in the South African camp may have done their homework. It could have been a complete accident, of course, but when you're looking for a descriptor you'd have to go for comprehensive.

So there we were at lunch, 3/102 off 25 overs, Warner 67, Clarke 18, with a fair bit of rebuilding to be done. The fifty partnership came up shortly after the resumption, though you'd probably have missed that little milestone in the rush of runs. 76 balls for the fifty, by the way, which wasn't too shabby at all, but consider the stats torrent that followed (looking at the Day 1 Match Notes).

The Australian total flew past the 150 off the first ball of the thirty-first, Warner reached his ton off 93, 76 of them coming from balls that crossed the boundary, the century partnership arrived a mere thirty deliveries after the fifty, Clarke's half century came off 57 and the total passed 200 half way through the thirty-fifth.

Drinks came when Warner departed, 108 runs having come in 12.2 overs.

One could continue to reel off the stats, but I think that's enough for the moment because, regardless of how well Warner and Clarke batted, there was definitely something amiss in the South African attack, and it was something beyond the injury to Kallis.

On paper this South African attack has to be the best going around at the moment. The bowling rankings have Steyn at #1, Philander at 2 and Morkel at 9. By contrast we've got Hilfenhaus and Siddle at 6 and 8 respectively, with the other five spots in the top ten going to a Pakistani, a Sri Lankan, an Indian, an Englishman and a West Indian.

Add in Jacques Kallis as a fourth quick and you've got what should be a very handy outfit, even on a reasonably flat Adelaide track.

Then, of course, things start to go wrong. Take Philander out of the mix and you're drawing on your reserves. Based on yesterday's performance there's a significant gap between Kleinveldt and Morkel, who wasn't that impressive on the day anyway.

Have Kallis break down on you as well, and have Steyn getting twinges that may or may not merit cotton wool treatment and things start to go drastically wrong.

But that still doesn't explain a day when 380 runs were scored in four and a half hours after lunch for the loss of two wickets. Yes, the bowling attack was reduced. Kleinveldt doesn't look like muscling any of the other three aside on form, and Imran Tahir might be able to draw on considerable experience but doesn't look like a threat at the moment.

But batsmen and bowlers perform, by and large, as well as they're allowed to and the South African performance suggests a side that came into the game significantly underdone, which  brings me back to where I started.

With eight days between Brisbane and Adelaide why would you break up the side for a couple of days and then expect things to fall back neatly together when you reassemble at the next venue? And why, once the team has reassembled, do you have two full practice sessions that coach Gary Kirsten did not attend because he was flying back to Australia?

The presence of the coach would, one suspects, be a key element in getting things to fit neatly back together.

The days of the traditional tour, where the visitors played a couple of state games before the first Test, and then took a fortnight between successive Test matches, usually with a state game on the intervening weekend and a midweek country game or two as well kept a sixteen or seventeen man touring party together in an environment where cricket wasn't always the direct focus, but was definitely on the horizon somewhere.

Those days are long gone, but you'd have thought it'd be possible to fit in a game somewhere. Possibly, given a crowded Australian summer, not against a state side, but maybe the ACT?

I'd point out, at this stage, that the longest running #1 side, that great West Indian outfit that ran through the late seventies, the whole of the eighties and well into the nineties dominating almost every side they ran up against, had a couple of strange little habits.

One of them was that when they travelled, they travelled as a team, right down to the maroon blazer. I sighted them in a Brisbane departure lounge the morning after a day-nighter. Seventeen of 'em, no one out of uniform, travelling as a group.

By contrast, the Australian side were scattered across the horizon, some of them hiding behind newspapers in an attempt to maintain anonymity. A bunch of highly excited Aitkenvale Swimming Club kids on their way back from the State Championships put paid to that, to the point where Greg Chappell, standing in the middle of the concourse, asked some underling whether there was a private lounge available because this (i.e. kids with improvised autograph books) is giving me the shits.

By contrast, the Windies were over there, closed ranks, not exactly hostile, but not encouraging autograph hunters to queue up either.

Those days, of course, are long gone, and one shudders to think what the response would be if you started to insist on group travel in uniform.

One also shudders to think of the likely response if the coach announced that, while there might be a fairly comfortable window of time before the next game there were a few issues with the fielding (or whatever) that needed attention, so that's the agenda for the next couple of days rather than giving the boys a break to take in the sights.

Bob Simpson did something like that in the '87 World Cup when a couple of Australian players suggested a side trip to have a squiz at the Taj Mahal.

No, team unity is a very fragile thing. When you break it up it's not always easy to put the pieces back together, and that's BEFORE you start looking at injuries and other issues. It's one of the reasons most of the successful school-kids' Rep coaches I ran across insisted the team sit together as a group while batting, rather than dispersing across the countryside to spend quality time with parents, rellies or billets.

But more than anything else, I suspect that once you hit the top you tend to become complacent and relax. Listening to (I think) Neil Manthorp on the ABC Radio commentary talking about Kallis, it seems to be a case of Jacques doing as much (or as little) work as he feels like. Well, after all he is thirty-seven and you can't expect him to go on forever. Point taken.

But there is, I think, a tendency to ease back when you've reached the summit. A degree of we know what we're doing so we can take it easy because we'll be all right on the day. We know how to prepare. Trust us.

That was, at least from where I was sitting, a significant element in losing the Ashes in 2005, and looking at the Cricinfo window behind the one where I'm typing this there are three video headlines:

Clarke: Counter-attacking has always been my .. (that's what it reads, the Astute Reader can probably fill in the rest);

Warner: Facing lots of balls in the nets helped, and

Kirsten: Bowlers didn't apply pressure consistently.

How little training is too little for South Africa? is the headline here in a story that says it better than I can.

After all, when you think about it in the to and fro of international competition you know there's going to be attack and counter-attack, and you need to have contingency plans in place to allow for the ebb and flow of advantage. From where I'm sitting, it definitely looks like South Africa have come up short in the planning department, though you probably wouldn't be anticipating injury taking out half of your preferred four prong pace battery.

At 5/482 with Clarke to resume on 224, Wade to come and a tail that has been known to chip in with handy runs you'd figure on somewhere around 600 by lunch, with 700 within the bounds of possibility by tea. A session to bowl at the end of Day Two with the follow on margin set at 500 would suggest two possible results, neither of which would be a South African victory.

Of course, there's many a slip between the cup and the lip...

Punter's Presser....

In a way Ricky Ponting's press conference yesterday didn't tell us much and, in another way, it did.

If you were waiting for an announcement regarding retirement, as the reader might suspect could have been the case here in The Little House of Concrete, the lack of such an announcement would have been a disappointment, and if you're still waiting for such an announcement I wouldn't be holding my breath, since there's a strong possibility there won't be an announcement at all.

It's quite possible that there'll be a low key press release at some point down the track along the lines that Mr Ponting has asked not to be considered for whatever squad he was still playing for at the end of last season.

What was remarkable, as I sat down to watch the announcement yesterday morning was the change in tone from the confident predictions being made around twelve months ago regarding the next Ashes series and points beyond. It's obvious, after the Argus Review and the Haddin imbroglio, this selection panel will make some hard nosed decisions when hard nosed decisions need to be made, and the interesting part from where I'm sitting is the path we're going to be following on the way forward.

Ponting obviously expects to be going to the West Indies next month, and you'd have to assume this expectation has some sort of base in selectorial advice.

That's presumably something like You're good for the Caribbean, Ricky, but we can't guarantee anything after that.

Jimbo and I were discussing these matters (or rather Hughesy was expounding the themes being pursued here with interjections and wry observations from Jimbo) on the morning walk today, and here's the way I'm hoping things will go from here.

Now, for a start it seems fairly obvious that Ponting and/or Hussey will be winging to the Windies, along with Messrs Haddin, Wade and Forrest, who seems to be the next cab off the batting rank.

Personally, I'd rather see Forrest and another up and comer thrown in at the deep end with the whole side being told they can't be depending on Ricky and Mr Cricket to be digging in when the rest of the side gets themselves into a hole. If a Ponting and Hussey-less side can't handle the West Indies (that's not putting the Windies down, it's looking at relative rankings and recent form) they're not going to handle second-ranked South Africa six or seven months later, are they?

No, I'd prefer to see incumbents, hopefully with some reasonable Test form behind them facing challenges from two old blokes who've been rested for the winter and want their old spots back and a couple of younger hungry blokes who reckon it's about time they got a go, and that contest would be staged against a pack of fast bowlers jostling for four berths (five, if you look at one of them being twelfth man and there's an all-rounder in the mix).

As stated last time around, this would be something like Warner and Cowan being pushed by Hughes, Quiney and Marsh for the two opening slots and Ponting, Clarke, Watson, Hussey, Forrest, Khawaja, Christian, Ferguson, Cooper, Smith and anyone else who sticks his hand up in the meantime slugging it out for four spots in the middle order.

Under this scenario there may well be a side walking on to the Gabba without Ponting and/or Hussey.

Assuming that both go to the West Indies and don't do enough to stake a solid claim to a continuing berth in the batting order even if they are there it may just be a matter of skin and teeth.

Somewhere along the next twelve months there's going to be a day of reckoning.

What I'll be interested to see is what happens when that day comes. From the Ponting presser yesterday you could hypothesise a situation where Ricky, rested or replaced, is having a go at getting his place back. Is there a way to ensure this scenario, if that's the way it pans out, can be turned to everyone's advantage.

Actually, there is.

Go back to that list of names trying to shoe horn their way into the batting order by monstering attacks that include (assuming they're all fit, and working clockwise from Queensland) Harris, Cutting, young McDermott, Cummins, Copeland, Starc, Pattinson, Siddle, McDonald, Hilfenhaus, Faulkner, Bird, Christian, George, Mitchell Johnson and Coulter-Nile. That was just to get a spot in the Test at the Gabba. Once that squad has been named there'll be plenty of jostling as those who missed out in both departments try to work their way towards next cab off the rank.

Ricky Ponting and Michael Hussey, setting out with a point to prove would only be able to do it by monstering attacks that are going to bristling with tyros jockeying for position, and those blokes jockeyng for position are going to know the only way to work their way up the pecking order is by taking wickets a\gainst a Tasmanian side that includes Ponting or a warriors side with Hussey wanting his old spot back.

It probably won't work out that way, but in those circumstances we'd be looking at a situation where anyone  staking a claom is going to be doing so on the back of good form against decent opposition.

As I remarked to Jimbo a few days ago, back in the days when I was involved with school cricket I was on first name terms with the panel charged with selecting the state rep squad, and in one particular case that acquaintance went back over fifteen years. Discussing things relating to selection, I frequently heard comments along the lines of not being sure whether a kid would be able to handle the rise to the next level.

Fair enough. You start with a kid playing for his school. He may or may not handle the step up to district level. From there it's a case of further steps to Zone and Regional rep status before you're even looking at State selection.

Just because the kid went from here to there doesn't mean he's going to handle the next step up.

Fair enough. I've used the I don't think he's good enough for the next stage plenty of times myself.

Go back to that selection scenario before the Gabba Test, however, and there's no way you're going to look at Forrest, Khawaja, Ferguson, Cooper or anyonr else who's coming off a couple of big hundreds and downplay the scores because they were made against under strength opposition.

The same way, assuming young McDermott, Bird or Coulter-Nile (to pick three names that are probably well down the pecking order) manage to pick up a couple of five-or six-fors you're not going to be sufggesting that anyone could do that against that batting order,

Over recent years there have been a number of suggestions that Shield cricket hasn't been the strong platform we need to deliver quality players to the top level. For the next domestic season, that might not be the case...

There are reasons why players aren't selectors

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought the situation regarding Australia's wicketkeeper went something like this. Brad Haddin is the incumbent in the Test side, while the selection panel wanted to use Matthew Wade for the T20s and the first part of the three way ODI series.

Beyond that (and we're not going to be searching back to find the verifying links, so the old memory might not have it exactly right) Wade was going to be headed to the West Indies with the limited overs squad and would stay on as reserve wicketkeeper and reserve batsman in a situation where flying in replacements at short notice will be nigh on impossible.

Now, without having access to a convenient phone tap or getting fly on the wall status you're not going to know exactly what had been said in any conversation between wicketkeeper and national selector, but one suspects the comment from Inverarity was along the lines of we want to have a look at Wade behind the stumps for the first part of the one day series at least.

On that basis, it might be safe to conclude that the selection panel are still looking. It's not as if there's a whole lot riding on this particular series.

Actually it would have been interesting to have been able to check in to that conversation to see whether Tim Paine was mentioned in despatches, because had Paine been fit at the start of the series against New Zealand Mr Haddin may well have found himself on the outer.

That prospect of a spot in the outer seems to have behind recent remarks from Shane Watson as well, and one starts to suspect that Messrs Ponting and Hussey are definites to go to the West Indies. At least that's the way it seems to look from where Watto's sitting.

He seems to be assuming Shaun Marsh will force his way back into his spot at Three through weight of Shield runs (should make the Shield game that starts later today at the WACA interesting, that feller) and with Punter and Mr Cricket in the XI the only spot for Watto is going to be one of the two opening positions.

From where I'm sitting, however, things aren't quite that cut and dried.

We've got a series against South Africa coming up later this year, and it's going to be a case of dealing with a four man pace attack that will more than likely include Morkel, Steyn and Philander. Should be interesting.

Player self interest, of course, means they'd prefer to see the squad selected from no more than seven batsmen, with the incumbents there until they either lose the desire or encounter a run of form that's too horrendously bad to ignore.

Assuming Watson stays fit and Marsh doesn't score a squillion Shield runs in the next couple of weeks, on the other hand Watson for Marsh would seem to be a logical move for the Caribbean. On that basis you could also move Ponting to Three with Watto to slide into Four or Five, depending on where the captain sees himself.

All well and good, I hear you say, but what about Hussey?

From the comfy chair in the office at the Little House of Concrete the answer's straightforward. He stays at home. Forrest appears to be the next cab off the rank (or maybe Christian if we're looking for an all-rounder to cover a non-bowling Watto) so he goes to the Caribbean to bat Six. Hopefully he scores enough runs to stay in contention at the start of the South African/Sri Lankan summer, which would result in the following rather interesting scenario.

You would have Warner and Cowan, the probable incumbents, being pushed by Hughes, Quiney and Marsh for the two opening slots.

With four batting berths in the middle order you'd be looking at Ponting, Clarke, Watson, Hussey, Forrest, Khawaja and Christian, along with Ferguson, Cooper, Smith or anyone else who sticks his hand up in the meantime.

And the whole dozen or so candidates for the six positions in the batting order would be setting out to stake their claims against a fast bowling lineup that would include (working clockwise from Queensland) Harris, Cutting, young McDermott, Cummins, Copeland, Starc, Pattinson, Siddle, McDonald, Hilfenhaus, Faulkner, Christian, George, Mitchell Johnson and Coulter-Nile. I've probably missed a few on the way through but that's enough to make the point.

That's fifteen possible contenders for four quick bowling slots. You wouldn't, under the circumstances, be overly keen on being a batsman would you?

So what else have we learned since the end of the Test series against India?

Well, for a start there have been a couple of interesting Shield clashes between South Australia and Victoria that saw a couple of centuries to Quiney and five wicket hauls o McDonald and Siddle. Faulkner took wickets for Tasmania against New South Wales in a game where Bailey and Steve Smith got runs and the Tigers ended up winning. Shaun Marsh got runs for the Warriors at the Gabba and they just scraped home with one wicket in hand as young McDermott took 7-24). Cutting got wickets as well, as did Coulter-Nile.

Meanwhile we've got Queensland taking on Tasmania at Bellerive and Western Australia at home to New South Wales. Cricinfo doesn't have teams up for those games just yet, but there'll be a number of players with points to prove.

On the ODI side of things we've got a reasonably close competition where no one's firing at 100% and the result could go any way, right down to a Sri Lankan win in the final. Without much riding on the series the main points of interest from here has been Wade, who has been long on promise and potential and short on actual delivery and Forrest, who looks to have potential but won't have too many opportunities to demonstrate it.

Among the opposition I'm rapidly cooling towards Dhoni, whose attitude with bat in hand seems to be a little too casual for mine, almost a case of I don't want to win this until the last over, so I'll take my time.

But we'll see, won't we? They're on again at the SCG this afternoon, with a squad that includes Clint McKay and Mitch Marsh who I conveniently left out of that clockwise fast bowling lineup a few paragraphs back.

Interesting times, indeed. Maybe that's why Hads and Watto are concerned about their long term prospects.

Heading towards the short forms

If you've been reading this blog and looking forward to lengthy in-depth analysis of the short form international season I'm afraid you're likely to be disappointed.

It's not that two T20s and a three-way ODI series are totally meaningless, more a case of limited relevance and lack of recent exposure to domestic and international competition in both spheres. Looking at both of the short forms it's hard to see them as anything other than exercises in getting bums on seats while raking in the dollars from the TV rights.

Given the fact that the Ryobi Cup and Big Bash competitions have been broadcast on pay TV, which we don't pay for these days it's not as if I've been able to watch a lot (read any) of it.

Sure, in the big picture there's some relevance in both forms, but that relevance largely stems from the ODI World Cup and the World T20, with the latter on the horizon later in the year.

There are also two T20s in the West Indies, though we've already been told there'll be a combined short forms squad heading towards the Caribbean, probably with Wade rather than Haddin looking after the keeping duties, with both Wade and Haddin in the squad for the Tests. Makes sense, given the difficulty of flying in replacements before the next Test if someone comes down with an injury.

The 'keeper's role has attracted some media attention with Haddin's recent admission that omission equates to being dropped, which, if you want to look at it that way, it does.

And at the same time it doesn't. Returning to a recurring theme, and running on from the references to the limited overs World titles, they're obviously the pinnacle as fat as ODIs and T20s are concerned, and you're going to want to be sending your best side to those competitions.

In much the same way the Test series rankings mean that while every series matters, some matter more than others and the ones that matter involve England, South Africa and India along with anyone who looks like tipping us out of the Top Four in the rankings.

You want to have your best possible side for those campaigns, and, as a result if you're going to be rotating players the aim is to rest your key players through the other matches and then select your best combination from a wider pool.

If Haddin wants to view Matthew Wade's role in the T20s and the first batch of ODIs as a threat to his position, he's got every right to think that way, just as the selectors, who've inherited a situation where Haddin's the incumbent and his anointed successor, Tim Paine, is on an extended break through injury have every right to assess the options in case something happens to Haddin.

Those injury concerns raise their ugly heads again with the news that Nathan Lyon will be out of action for a while because he's been carrying an injury through the Test series against India.

And why did he play through the series? Quite possibly because, having run through a string of spinners over the past couple of years under the old regime the new selection panel hadn't established an obvious alternative.

We need, in my very humble opinion, a first choice spinner in each of the sub-disciplines of the art, and at least one shadow for each of those, so let's do a bit of looking in the cricketing larder and see what's sitting on the shelves.

For a start, in the T20 and first bit of the ODI series squad we've got Doherty (left arm orthodox) and Brad Hogg (left arm wrist spin) as specialist bowlers, with part time leggies from Warner and offies from David Hussey.

Lyon was down to play for the Prime Minister's XI on Friday, and his replacement is Queensland leggie Cameron Boyce. That seems to deliver a first choice in each sphere, but there's still a way to go.

Which brings us to an interesting consideration.

Assume, changing focus slightly, that in the Test arena we've got a (fit) pace bowling battery of Pattinson, Cummins, Siddle, Hilfenhaus, Harris, Starc, Copeland, Cutting and Johnson. That's eight contenders for a maximum of four spots in the twelve.

Then take a squiz at the all-rounder options, which would be a fit Watson as first choice with Mitchell Marsh and Christian as contenders as well.

There'll be a degree of rotation in all of this, but how do you work your way up the pecking order?

Simple. You do it by taking wickets in the Shield and Ryobi Cup games to push your name forward. Nothing new there, just say the selection panel has been talking to these dudes, as well as the guys who are looking to force themselves into contention (Clint McKay in the T20 squad, for example).

Say, in addition, you've got a clear directive of what the selection panel is looking for from each of them, and input from bowling coach McDermott as well.

Suddenly you've got a group of quicks going out to give the batsmen in the domestic comps a thorough going over, because that's what they need to do if they're going to get themselves moving up the pecking order. That brings every batsman in those competitions under close scrutiny, which isn't going to do the search for the next generation of bats any harm, is it?

There's no reason why the same thing can't happen in the spin department. At the moment we've got some combination of Lyon, Hauritz, Kreja in line for the offies' spot, Doherty and Beer as the left arm tweakers, and Boyce as the leggie.

There are others around the state squads, but they're going to need guidance and directives. Deliver those and suddenly we've got a wave of spinners looking to deliver the slow bowling equivalent of a thorough going over which isn't going to be doing the quest for bats who can handle conditions in the subcontinent any harm.

Behind all this there's a slight snag, which brings us back to Mr Haddin.

If competition for spots in an Australian team is going to be encouraged opportunities have to be provided at the top level, which means incumbents need to be rested so that the competition is there.

At the same time, treating the ODI series as a format where contenders for a spot in the squad for the West Indies can stake their claim means that the one-dayers suddenly become a bit more important than they might have been if we selected a squad drawn entirely from the established players, with the odd newcomer included when one of the regulars drops out through fatigue or injury.

Imagine, if you will, a situation where Messrs Ponting and Hussey have been rested from the West Indian tour, and their replacements (let's call them Forrest and Khawaja but the names aren't that important) have fired in the Caribbean.

Add to that the pace bowling lineup listed above looking to secure one of four spots for the First Test, which will presumably be at the Gabba, so there's every possibility they'll be looking for an all-rounder as well.

Ponting and Hussey with points to prove taking on the Shield bowlers. Forrest and Khawaja the same, with Ferguson miffed at not being considered good enough to go to the Caribbean. That's a serious contender for a spot in the middle order from five different states, with Watson, Christian and Mitch Marsh looking to stake a claim in there as well, remembering that it is the Gabba and a fourth quick would be a handy option.

Now, wouldn't that make for an interesting start to the Shield Season?

And speaking of Shield seasons, Hughesy's New Year's resolution involves keeping a much closer eye on the Shield comp, so readers can look forward to some sort of summary at the end of each Shield game with a headline of ShieldWatch: Whoever v Whoever…

All part of the service, folks.

Also as part of the service and for my own reference, here are the squads for the next bit of the international season.

Australia T20 squad
George Bailey*, David Warner, Travis Birt, Daniel Christian, Xavier Doherty, James Faulkner, Aaron Finch, Brad Hogg, David Hussey, Brett Lee, Clint McKay, Mitchell Marsh, Shaun Marsh, Matthew Wade†

Australia ODI squad
Michael Clarke*, David Warner, Ricky Ponting, Peter Forrest, Daniel Christian, David Hussey, Michael Hussey, Matthew Wade†, Brett Lee, Ryan Harris, Mitchell Starc, Xavier Doherty, Clint McKay, Mitchell Marsh

Prime Minister's XI squad (as announced)
Brad Haddin *†, Peter Forrest, Wes Robinson, Mitchell Marsh, Adam Voges, Kurtis Patterson, Dean Solway, Nathan Coulter-Nile, Ben Cutting, Michael Nesser, Nathan Lyon, Aaron Ayre (12th man)

India squad
MS Dhoni*†, R Ashwin, G Gambhir, RA Jadeja, Z Khan, V Kohli, P Kumar, PA Patel†, IK Pathan, SK Raina, V Sehwag, R Sharma, RG Sharma, SR Tendulkar, MK Tiwary, R Vinay Kumar, U Yadav

Sri Lanka ODI squad
Mahela Jayawardene (capt), Angelo Mathews (vice-capt), Upul Tharanga, Tillakaratne Dilshan, Kumar Sangakkara (wk), Dinesh Chandimal (wk), Lahiru Thirimanne, Thisara Perera, Farveez Maharoof, Rangana Herath, Sachithra Senanayake, Lasith Malinga, Nuwan Kulasekera, Chanaka Welegedara, Dhammika Prasad
Stand by: Thilan Samaraweera

Out of the entrails

Having previously commented that a 4-0 result in a four Test series is the only result that mightn't have comments being pencilled in under Things that should have been better, overnight news Pakistan had rolled England for a rather measly 72 was something to note with interest. They'd needed 145 to level the series, and the defeat mightn't be enough to remove England from #1, but it's certainly going to have Pakistan moving upwards.

That result is a timely reminder that Australia still has a way to go before we're guaranteed a spot in any Test cricket championship series.

Restating an earlier point, if and when this Test championship series kicks in, it'll only involve the Top Four, so hat's where you want to be, isn't it?

Actually, if you're not sitting pretty in the #1 spot you want to be #2 or #3 so you're not looking over your shoulder at a threatening #5. Pakistan are currently edging ahead of Sri Lanka) but in a system that determines your ranking by dividing points scored by the number of games you've played things could change rapidly if you're not playing while your rivals are. 

I must admit I hadn't been watching things too closely over the past year and a bit, so saying news that Pakistan are unbeaten in seven series since the spot betting scandal during the 2010 English tour came as a bit of a surprise is a considerable understatement.

There's nothing involving Pakistan on Australia's horizon at the moment, and we'd be looking at a home series rather than a visit to the Emirates when we do, but you can bet your bottom dollar that when we do face them if David Warner's in the side he'll be coming under close scrutiny from off spinner Saeed Ajmal or whoever takes his place in the Pakistan XI. As Ashley Mallett has pointed out, Warner struggled against Ashwin, and Ashwin ain't no Harbajan Singh.

Fair enough, it's England's first series defeat since the West Indies in 2009, but that's where we're headed next, and we've got series against South Africa, India and England in the offing, so that move up the rankings will have to be done by winning series against sides ranked above us on their home turf (England, India) or under home conditions that'll suit the South African pace attack early next summer. 

There's a series at home against Sri Lanka there as well, but, significantly, 4-0 against India wasn't enough to lift us out of fourth place. The Future Tours program has India hosting Pakistan and New Zealand with an away series against Sri Lanka that may or may not take place before the World T20s and a home series against England that coincides with the Australia-South Africa series, so that climb out of fourth spot might not be as easy as you'd think.

A cynic, of course, would suggest that if India looked like slipping too far they can just snap their fingers and arrange a little series at home against Sri Lanka (who need the money), New Zealand, Bangla Desh or Zimbabwe and they'd be back on the ascent again.

No, from here our fate is in our own hands and you can't go living in hope that events elsewhere are going to work out in ways that'd suit Australia.

So what have we got out of this summer?

Well, as far as the bowling goes, things are rosy, aren't they? 

While the formalities were being wound up in Adelaide yesterday the ABC Radio commentary had Geoff Lawson picking an eleven to take on South Africa in November, and gave him the additional task of pencilling in covers for the members of that side in the event of injury or loss of form. Given the state of the fast bowling stocks at the moment his third XI would still have had a formidable lineup.

Take three or four quicks out of Siddle, Hilfenhaus, Harris, Pattinson, Cummins, Starc and Cutting and throw in Mitchell Johnson looking on from the sidelines and Watson and Christian as potential all-rounders, and things are looking much better than they were twelve months ago.

The batting, of course, is more problematic. Shaun Marsh is in for the T20s but probably needs to go out and score runs in the Shield competition if he wants to be in contention for the West Indies tour and the South African summer, and his current run of poor form is a timely reminder that it mightn't be a good idea to bring injured players straight back into the Test side.

Warner and Cowan have looked OK up to this point, though neither of them have cemented a place at the top of the order, and one suspects Ponting an Hussey will stay in calculations because we're likely to need them. Again, I'd be inclined to give them the winter off, give the likes of Khawaja, Christian and maybe Smith (they're not the only candidates, but they'll do for the purposes of the current discussion) a run against the West Indies.

Why those three? 

Well, we've looked at Khawaja at Three and discarded him for non-performance while Hughes was opening and getting out cheaply. On that basis he might deserve a second chance. 

Christian and Smith, on the other hand, could bat Six and throw in a bowling option against India at home on flat decks that aren't going to suit the pace battery. You'd question whether Christian's medium pace or Smith's leggies are up to it on subcontinental surfaces, but you're looking at an eleven that might have three quicks and a spinner at Eight, Nine, Ten and Eleven with Watson somewhere in the first six so it's another string to the bow rather than an important strike weapon.

West Indian decks will be closer to subcontinent conditions than anything in these parts, so I'd be inclined to give them the run and see how they look.

In that scenario you could possibly have a confident, form behind him Khawaja, Christian or Smith (note deliberate ranking of pecking order) coming into the early rounds of the Sheffield Shield against Ponting, Watson, Clarke and Hussey for those four slots between Two and Seven.

The other significant development has been the lift in the Australian fielding and fielding coach Steve Rixon has, apparently, brought an old-time thoroughness and enjoyment to the fielding and catching drills as expected. It was one of the factors that had Clarke endorsing him for the top job, though Mickey Arthur looks to have been the right appointment there in one of those win-win situations, a trait Clarke recalled from his early days with New South Wales when he sought Rixon's addition to the coaching staff. 

Looking over at the Indian camp, I was going to leave things alone, apart from noting Harsha Bhogle's explanation of why there's unlikely to be an Indian equivalent of the Argus Report, but couldn't let this quotation pass without comment.

Now is the time we need the support from fans and everybody. They should back their own team. Which [is what] every media did. Even England media or Australia media or South Africa media, they back their teams. They criticise in such a manner that the player will not go down. They criticise their performances but they don't criticise in such a manner that the team will go down when they read the articles and see the television.

Now, if you're going to say that, you've obviously never seen the tabloid headlines pillorying the English side during home Ashes series before 2005. Part of the fun of watching Australia demolish the Poms off the field used to be watching their home press sledge them in ways Australian players would probably regard as a little over the top.

I also noticed the big time playing down of retirement rumours, which combines with the previous quote to suggest a mind set that's not inclined towards upsetting the apple cart, which is fine with me.

After all, they've got Pakistan, New Zealand and Sri Lanka before England, so maybe they can afford to take it easy. 

Like I said, that's fine. It might just make them a little easier to roll in their home conditions...