MasterG, you only have to compare Bangladesh's progress to Sri Lanka's. Sri Lanka played its first ODI at top level in 1975 - 21 years later Sri Lanka had won the World Cup. Bangladesh played its first ODI at top level in 1986. Twenty-two years later and what have they achieved? One ODI win each over Australia, South Africa, Sri Lanka and Pakistan, and two against India, in more than 120 ODIs played against the top eight sides. Bangladesh has played more than 50 Test matches since its admission, and has won only one of them - against Zimbabwe - while their best result against a top-eight side is a solitary draw against India. Sorry to Bangladeshi cricket fans, but after more than 20 years that's just not good enough.

Just a note to anyone here contemplating the possibility of a holiday in Australia: DON'T. Our ancestors are convicts, you see, so you will certainly be ripped off if not actually killed and raped - in that order - on a lonely outback road and buried in a shallow bush grave. There's also absolutely nothing to see here but a big boring rock, some little boring penguins, some mangy dogs with a taste for human infants, a bunch of spatially-challenged Indian taxi-drivers with a taste for awful music, some pasty-white Pommie backpackers with a taste for loud whinging and some harried and haunted Afrikaaner immigrants with no taste whatsoever. It's the wildlife you can't see that makes it worse: all kinds of nasty things that will happily crawl inside you and lay their eggs in your brain - that is, if they're not big enough to swallow you whole. Australian males are lazy, preferring to go fishing whenever they can spare time from beating up Pommie backbackers and Saffer immigrants. Australian females are all bunny-boilers, ageing feminist militants or bad soap actors who have become pop starlets - that is, whenever they can spare time from beating up Indian taxi-drivers. The food and wine in convict country are almost as poisonous as all the snakes and spiders. Even the cricket is boring, because it's no fun seeing your team routinely destroyed by lazy Aussies. No, Australia is definitely a place you should cross off your 'to-visit' list. Go to New Zealand instead. Please.

Hmm, Bangladesh is again being put to the sword by a half-strength Australian team. Eight wickets down for just over 100 in the 31st over as I write. I know Bangladesh have occasionally beaten top sides in ODIs (six times in more than 120 games) and once had the Aussies in a little bother during a Test match, but these occasions are few and far between. It lends much credence to the suggestion that Bangladesh were admitted just to give the BCCI another vote in its pocket, because they are simply not competitive against the best.

The first word that pops into my head when you mention Graeme Hick is who? Don't get me wrong, achieving a first-class average of 52.23 over so many years is quite an achievement, but Hick rarely faced quality fast bowling at Test level with equanimity and was too easy to 'think' out. While there's no shame in losing your wicket many times to fast bowlers the calibre of Curtley Ambrose and Waqar Younis (Waqar had a real hoodoo over him), there is some shame involved if you don't score any runs first. His English contemporaries had their own difficulties with these guys but their averages were certainly better than Hick's 31 or whatever it was. Perhaps the right word is 'disappointing'. I remember quite well the many calls for eligibility rules to be changed so England could select Hick earlier than they eventually did. Everyone anticipated a stunning Test career but Hick only ever showed the occasional glimpse of what might have been.

"One positive thing is that there wont be any controversies in this Ind-Aus tour with [Symonds] not playing." Oh yes, we needed emerlander to remind us that all of the controversy that marred India's tour of Australia was ENTIRELY the fault of Andrew Symonds while everyone in the Indian team was absolutely guilt-free, blameless, and pure as the driven snow.

Something we didn't see in any of the media reports was whether or not Roy managed to catch anything when he went fishing. It's not the best time of year for barramundi.

KP deserves credit for winning one Test match and two ODIs, that's it. England are certainly experiencing the high that comes with victory over a tormentor but how much KP has contributed to that is merely the subject of speculation. I have a lot of difficulty imagining someone like KP - whose shoe size dwarfs his intelligence quotient - being tactically astute or strategically innovative. Perhaps he will prove me wrong.

Damn, everyone's obsessed with perennial idiot Kevin Pietersen. That his APPOINTMENT as captain has had a positive impact on England is not in question, but whether or not his PERFORMANCE as captain has had the same impact is entirely debatable, high subjective and - in the end - largely academic. He's still an idiot.

Drizzler, if Lard can't come to convict country then make sure your mob brings that Andre Nel bloke - a South African tour of Australia just wouldn't be the same without someone in the SA team who can make a complete fool of himself without a second thought. Lard fulfilled the role admirably last time, but Nel appears to be a talented understudy.

Dazzler, I have heard of the claim, something about four runs that may have been scored by Bradman being mistakenly awarded to his captain, Jack Ryder, during the 1928-29 series (Ryder scored almost 500 runs in that series, a losing cause, in his last stint as captain). I don't believe it for a second, because I strongly doubt that any player's figures have been scrutinised as closely as The Don's. The best Bradman biography I have read was written by Irving Rosenwater, who is also considered an authority on cricket statistics. If he couldn't find those mythical four runs then they just weren't there to find.

poochandi, I've also been impressed with Zaheer - he's certainly doing more to win games for India than anyone else right now - and I think it's a real shame his left heel kept him out of most of the series in Australia.

I see that Pom shares my distaste for the modern mangling of our mutual mother tongue. I can appreciate the need for expediency with regard to texting, but those who do not use language to the full are doing themselves a disservice in self-expression and limiting their capacity to communicate. Just a thought, and really only relevant to native English-speakers. I would imagine that for quite a few posters here English is a second language, and since I'm mono-lingual I'm not really in a position to preach about it.

maxohr, I don't know exactly when they started to introduce covers for pitches, but I'm very certain they weren't used when The Don was playing. I believe that some English counties at the time may have been covering the area immediately before the wicket, but still left the middle of the pitch uncovered. It does make comparisons with modern cricket somewhat academic. I've heard suggestions that bowling in the 1930s and 1940s wasn't up to the standard of today and that this explains The Don's phenomenal figures - except that it doesn't, because no other batsman of the era was anywhere near him. There were several all-time great batsmen who shared the stage with The Don, and some of them had very high Test averages: George Headley 60.83, Herb Sutcliffe 60.73, Wally Hammond 58.45, Jack Hobbs 56.94 and Len Hutton 56.67. These are truly great averages even by today's standards, but they don't come close to 99.94. One might argue that Bill Ponsford and Stan McCabe were probably the next best batsmen in pre-war Australian teams at the time - both of them are considered to have been extremely good if not great in their own right. Add their Test averages together and you get 96.43. Add together the averages of the Chappell brothers or the Waugh twins (all of them excellent batsmen) and you get a similar result. I could go on and on quoting all kinds of statistics (as is my wont), but they all tell the same story: The Don was an absolute freak and in a class all of his own. I strongly suspect we will never again see a batsman like him.

Well, Prophet, you need to have SOMETHING worthwhile to watch at crap-cricket games, and we have a surplus of gorgeous bikini-clad girls here in convict country so I suppose we could spare a few to liven up your latest chook raffle.

Ed, perhaps Nash will make more of an impression when the West Indies come up against England next year - it's not as though games against Canada or Bermuda are riveting. Interesting: the West Indies do not have any international cricket scheduled until February 2009 now that the Champions Trophy has been cancelled.

It wasn't against quality opposition and he didn't make a huge impression, but here's a quick note of congratulations to ex-Queensland cricketer Brendon Nash for his tidy debut for the West Indies. He took a big risk going to Jamaica to further his cricket, but it's paid off.

I have to agree with Alan Tyers on the status of the Champions Trophy. It was begun to provide developing cricket nations with some top-level cricket, and to boost revenue for the ICC in between World Cups. Given that not even Bangladesh was invited to the CT which has just been cancelled, the first reason for creating the concept is no longer valid. Now it's just a meaningless money-raiser, and after the events of the past few days, it's a lot more trouble than it's worth. It's an experiment which has failed, and it's time for the ICC to ditch the tournament altogether.

"...SA is a rubbish team..." We all suspected poor old Alumrock had a selective memory, but this one takes the cake: a Pakistani daring to say SA is a rubbish team! South Africa have won the past four ODI series against Pakistan (two of them in Pakistan) and of the 52 games they have played altogether since 1992, SA have won 35 and Pakistan only 16. SA also made the semi-final of the last World Cup, while Pakistan didn't even make it past the preliminary round. SA have never lost to Ireland, either. Perhaps this is some sour grapes generated by CSA's refusal to go to the Champion's Trophy? If so it's a poor place to start from. At least CSA had the guts to make the hard call - I didn't see Cricket Australia doing it much to my disgust, but for a while now they have been brown-nosing in the BCCI's money trough so it shouldn't come as much of a surprise.

"Postponement" - yeah, right. It's a cancellation in any language other than the convoluted Munich-speak of the clowns running world cricket. This latest attempt at saving some Indian and Pakistani embarrassment is as pathetic as dhillon28's belated jumping onto the let's-bag-Ricky-Ponting-for-no-other-reason-than-he's-just-too-____ing-good-for-us bandwagon.

Without trying to appear sycophantic, that's a nice little bit of intellectual exercise from MasterG. Alas, time zone differences prevail and I must sign off for the evening. To angelina69, McGrath's average had nowhere to go but up, and I don't think Ponting would have found him any easier to face than, for example, Brian Lara did. Just a thought.

German, where was the rest of England during the World Cup? I have trouble remembering anything but an ill-advised maritime adventure. If he can get his head together and grow some testicles when he travels overseas, Harmy will be dangerous.

That's a tough one, Crimson, and it does indeed make me think but after my little brain snap over The Don's birth date I'm not feeling all that confident. Ponting's appearances for Tasmania in the Sheffield Shield are few and far between and his first-class stats against Victoria (Warne) and New South Wales (McGrath and Lee) aren't easily available. I like to think he would have handled Warne reasonably well as he is a fine player of spin (except for the obnoxious little weed who has a hoodoo over him) and I seem to remember one game when Ponting hit Warne all over the park and out of it too, but I think McGrath would have been a handful for him. His average? Definitely a bit lower, but probably not below 50. His first-class average (he has also played for Somerset so this isn't necessarily an indication) is only a fraction under 60 and in addition to his 35 Test hundreds he has 34 others at first-class level. Not a quick answer to your quick question, sorry.

MasterG, it should be noted that Pakistan has promised "presidential-level" security for the Champions Trophy, but I think it's not unfair to suggest that even this level of security may be inadequate given Bhutto's assassination. There's absolutely no doubt Pakistan's security forces have considerable experience in dealing with terrorism, but bombs continue to explode on a regular basis nonetheless and the Taliban continue to operate freely in the country, so a lack of confidence in Pakistan's security forces is entirely understandable. Why take the chance when there are plenty of safer places to hold the CT? Move it or lose it are the only two realistic options.

I prefer Crimson's team to MasterG's, except of course for Murali, but we don't need to go into the reasons why.

I'm losing it - I thought Bradman's birthday was tomorrow, but it's actually on Wednesday. My apologies!

There is considerable talk of a pending split in world cricket over the Champions Trophy saga, which is getting to be more of a farce everyday. Players from at least four teams simply don't want to go despite the reassurances offered by the ICC and the PCB (no-one in Australia gives two cents for the opinion of Geoff Lawson). Pakistan is refusing to play if the tournament is moved - who could blame them? There have been threats of law suits and legal action, but I have some late-breaking news for the ICC: there is no way to make any kind of penalty stick to a nation's board for not going to a CT held in Pakistan, especially if that nation's government recommends against its citizens travelling there. Call the damn thing off (it is essentially pointless anyway) or move it - those are the only two realistic options with at least half the teams refusing to compete. Of course realism is a very distant and obscure concept for the ICC, and once again its the malignant and cancerous BCCI trying to force the issue and showing everyone who's boss which is creating the messy situation we're in - it is extremely immature and detrimental to the game, because a split in world cricket is a definite possibility thanks to them. Pakistani cricket must be given every conceivable support to survive this little crisis, but not at the risk of players and spectators.

HE_Pennypacker, ROFLMAO at the "can do no wrong" comment, but also please note I put Michael Clarke in my side. Within five years Pup will be the undisputed best batsman in the world. What I find interesting is that no-one has selected Michael Hussey, who has the best Test average in the world of any past or current player with 20 innings or more except for The Don himself. Which reminds me: tomorrow, 23 August 2008, is the 100th anniversary of Sir Donald Bradman's birth. My dear Mum in Kiwi-land has finally sent that wine over from Hawkes Bay so I will raise a glass in his memory.

Interesting team from MasterG, who rightly raises the point about the various selection criteria being used. For the record, my criteria are a mix of current form, overall capacity and (highly subjective and therefore fallible) instinct. I've been reluctant to acknowledge that despite some great performances in Australia, the great Sachin is on the wane. Kallis appears that way too - his average is substantially inflated by big scores against also-rans, and we expected much more from his batting in England. His bowling is INCONSEQUENTIAL, because South Africa do not select him for his bowling. I will never pick Chanderpaul - he has great figures which dip only marginally against teams like Australia and South Africa, but his technique does not inspire me with confidence even if his application does. That's the instinct criterion coming into play. Tuesday made an interesting comparison re Smith and Ponting versus each other's respective nations, and a check of the figures backs her: Smith averages 22.25 against Australia with no centuries. Ponting averages 63.95 against South Africa with seven centuries (I think Ponting's finest performance was his two centuries against South Africa in his 100th Test - at the time he was indisputably the best batsman in the world by a country mile). There is an obvious factor in Ponting's favour, he has played against South Africa a lot more than Smith has played against Australia. Yes, with this sort of thing going on here at C365 it is pretty obvious that except for gormless chook raffle cheerleaders we're all anticipating a cracking series against South Africa here in convict country.

Once again the old equation rings true: cat plus pigeons equals fun! South Africans will naturally defend Kallis and so they should, but at the same time they shouldn't expect Australians to hold him in the same reverence. I have been a big fan of Kallis but as a batsman he does not quite match Ponting - especially in 2008. HE_Pennypacker is perfectly correct: Kallis has averaged 14.85 since the beginning of this year, while Ponting has averaged 53.09. It is true Kallis has taken a few wickets (10 in four Tests at 29.5, whoopie) but contrary to SAman's assertion there is little chance of him getting "into most sides on his bowling alone". If he batted like a tailender there's no way even South Africa would pick him - maybe Bangladesh would. As for the "Australia would kill for a Kallis" comment, that is not borne out by the simple fact that despite lacking a true world-class allrounder since the 1960s, Australia is still the best team in the world. That's not something which could be maintained for as long as it has been with a player whose strike rate is less than 44 and who chips in with one or two wickets now and then. South Africans really need to get over the notion that Australia needs or wants an allrounder like Kallis. If anything, we'd prefer someone more like Flintoff - someone who can take wickets and bat a bit like Gilly low in the order. This is because Australian cricket is about dominance and ruthlessness, and we have always had a preference for bowling allrounders. Anyway, I admit I have been harsh dropping a quality batsman like Kallis and leaving out Captain Lard. No doubt it's some good old Aussie bias, which I'm not going to apologise for.

Prophet, if I'm so predictable then you should have anticipated losing all those previous arguments. The problem is that you're suffering withdrawal from the shallow glitz and gimmicks of the rent-a-crowd Great Indian Chook Raffle, and it's affecting your judgement. It's quite pitiable. We can blame your addiction to crap-cricket on your gormless gullibility and nano-second attention span. I doubt your addiction is the result of anything deliberate on your part - it's probably the result of a badly compromised gene pool. I suggest weaning yourself by playing poker machines. They have all those colourful flashing lights and spinning dials that seem to provide endless entertainment for four-year-old mentalities, so it should be eminently suited to you.

angelina69, in fairness to those who hate Ponting the person and Ponting the captain of the 'insensitive' Australian juggernaut, they have usually acknowledged the quality of his batting. He's slipped down the rankings a bit recently but I don't think it's inaccurate to say his wicket is still the most highly prized in world cricket. Ponting should be an automatic choice at first drop in any current world team - speaking of which, has anyone's world team selections changed recently in light of a few individual performances (eg Kallis' lack of runs, Sehwag's glut of runs, Morkel's performance in England, Mike Hussey's average coming back to normal levels, the emergence of Mendis)? Here's my Test team at the moment (mind the obvious Aussie bias): Hayden, Sehwag, Ponting (c), Sangakkara, Pietersen, Clarke, Dhoni (w), Lee, Clark, Steyn, Mendis. Sachin misses out now after a terrible Sri Lankan tour, so does Kallis after a disappointing English tour, Mendis in for Vettori (although it remains to be seen how well he will perform outside the sub-continent). Captain Lard would be my 12th man and is unlucky to miss an opening spot - if he was going to take it, it would have to be at Hayden's expense but Queensland's favourite god-boy is just too good to leave out for now despite a recent lack of cricket and approaching dotage. Dhoni in for Boucher who has also been a bit disappointing recently. I was tempted to pick Morkel too. Interesting: South Africa win a big series and I'm dropping their stars from my side.

No surprise the first South African medal of the Games was silver. It seems they choke in athletics as well as cricket...and that's definitely my last Olympics post (until the next one, apparently).

Dhoni should have been in Sri Lanka for the whole tour, and appointed captain in place of Kumble, if his decision to bowl first in this ODI is anything to go by. Zaheer Khan has destroyed Sri Lanka's top order, six wickets down before the 20th over! Can Sri Lankan fans - provided they aren't in therapy at the moment - enlighten me as to the qualities of the pitch? Jayasuriya says it's not known as a great batting wicket?

Just a quick note of apology on the mix-ups with 'to' and 'too' - I blame a dodgy 'o' key on my laptop.

My sympathy (and this time it is TRULY sincere) to Pakistan cricket fans. Things just go from bad to worse at the moment, due in part to circumstances beyond the control of the PCB (although the PCB has no-one to blame but itself for Akhtar's behaviour and Asif's drug/steroid habit). I'll state for the record here that I would have preferred Australia defend its Champions Trophy title in Pakistan regardless of any perceived threat or misgivings about the security situation - but then I'm not being asked to go to Pakistan, am I?

Poor old Ricky Ponting, about as popular as Robert Mugabe at a convention of the Ku Klux Klan, or Prophet's opinions on the C365 forum. Too everyone who "hates" him as delcricket has so delicately phrased it: tough sh_t. We're keeping him, not only for his brilliant captaincy (75% win record in Tests, undefeated in World Cup ODIs) and incomparable batting (more than 10,000 Test runs at 58.37), but also for the simple fact that you just don't like him (cue cheeky grin from yours truly).

Okay Ed, definitely the last Olympics post: Emerlander, it's not a matter of being positive, just recognising the inevitable. India's growing prosperity is necessarily focused on the oft-stated aim of alleviating poverty - and I'm given to understand that tremendous strides have already been made - but it's only a matter of time before this translates into greater Olympic success. A quick note to the Australian Olympic team, sitting fourth on the medal tally as of 11.26am Adelaide time, August 20 - great effort!

I must confess to some concern following the latest posts of my most excellent friend on this forum, the eminent Prophet_PBUH, who is now expressing murderous thoughts in his hope that someone will put me out of my "misery". Ah, inciting homicidal violence - the last refuge of the incompetent. Incompetent because Prophet has misinterpreted delight as misery. He's obviously still a bit bruised from losing the Zimbabwe argument a while back, and also by the fact that he's well and truly on the outer here when it comes to opinions about what is the "ultimate form of cricket". Meanwhile, along with everyone else this tired old coot has been enervated right out of his wheelchair by some great competitive Test cricket in England and Sri Lanka - never mind the regulation Australian drubbing of the West Indies - which has established beyond doubt why TEST IS BEST and crap-cricket is, well, just crap. I sincerely hope Prophet is getting some professional help regarding his homicidal tendencies and inability to deal with personal failure. We wouldn't want him to go postal and be presented with the sad spectacle of Prophet being dragged from a book suppository building screaming "Crap! Crap! I can't get enough of crap!" I warned everyone that too much crap-cricket rots the brain. I am sorry this message was clearly to late for poor old Prophet. I'm sure I speak for everyone here in expressing our most sincere wishes for a full and speedy recovery.

Sigh! The problem with crap-cricket being the format some people want to introduce to the Olympics is that the Olympics is supposed to be sport at the elite level - in cricket's case, that can only be Test cricket. The only way to introduce a Test cricket competition to the Games would be to play a lot of the matches before the event even starts, and only have the semi-finals and final (plus a bronze medal play-off) take place during the event itself. Anyone could win gold if the format was crap-cricket - even an under-12 girls team from Katmandu would have a chance. The Olympics can wait.

Lungz, it was indeed a great race and no surprise a Jamaican has won it. He probably could have shaved another couple of hundredths off the time but he was too busy chest-thumping. Amazing. Can he play cricket? How fast could he run with pads on?

Well, it turns out that wasn't my last Olympics post. Tuesday, it is completely misleading to compare South Africa's Olympic record to Australia's or to that of most other countries in the world. South Africa's record - built mostly on athletics and boxing - was almost comparable to Australia's until 1956, when we first hosted the Games and came third in the tally with 13 gold (host nations invariably win a disproportionate amount of medals, and we've hosted the Games twice). After the Rome event in 1960 South Africa was excluded from competing until the Barcelona games in 1992. They didn't do too well in that event but in Atlanta they won three gold - I seem to remember a gun female swimmer who gave our ladies a run for their money? In any event, South Africa does not have the luxury of investing in Olympic development at the level that Australia does. They have different priorities, and so they should. Considering those priorities and the circumstances in which they find themselves South Africans should be damn proud of their record, which includes 20 gold medals. Do me a favour and stop putting me in the position of defending South Africa, okay? Emerlander: I also reckon we'll be seeing a lot more Indian gold medallists as time goes on, it's only a matter of time. India has a peculiar record - Bindra's gold medal in Beijing is the first individual gold medal the country has won, with the men's field hockey team responsible for every other gold medal (eight of them). I don't know if this is an Olympic record or not, but India's hockey team won gold in five consecutive games: Amsterdam 1928, Los Angeles 1932, Berlin 1936, London 1948 and Helsinki 1952. Maybe the US mens and womens basketball teams could do this now that professionals can participate.

Well well, it seems the New Zealanders won't be going to the Champions Trophy following the failure of the pretty-please-come-to-Pakistan task force to convince them it's safe. The ICC may as well move it or abandon it if the world's no.3 ODI side (and a former title holder) doesn't want to go and with the world's top two teams also expressing their reluctance.

Ed, this is my last Olympics post and it's an altruistic one, providing Sunith with a little essential education. Sunith my friend, you would be well advised to check your facts first before making ridiculous claims like "Australia sucks at every sport at the Olympics except swimming". Once again on this forum, a lack of appreciation for history is crippling critical analysis and making someone look a bit silly. Australia has indeed won more medals in swimming than any other sport (54 gold and 157 medals total). Swimming accounts for 39% of our total medals and 45% of gold medals (this includes medals won in the PRC this week). However Australia also has a very strong record in athletics (18 gold and 64 medals in total), cycling (13 gold, 41 total), rowing (eight gold, 29 total) and equestrian (six gold, 11 total). We've also won gold in sailing, field hockey, shooting, diving, canoeing, tennis, weightlifting, taekwondo, archery, volleyball and water polo. We've even won three gold medals in the Winter Olympics. Hell, we even won four gold medals before we were officially an independent nation and still a series of autonomous British colonies (the IOC recognises them as ours nonetheless). These days Australia regularly fields Olympic teams with more than 400 athletes across every sport there is (in Sydney we fielded 630 athletes) so Sunith is also wrong about where we invest Olympic money. Sorry Sunith, but whether it's the Olympics or cricket, Australia is still the all-time world-beater punching well above its weight when you take its small population into account. Our relative prosperity and obsession with international sporting competition are certainly factors in our favour, but that's nothing to apologise for. Deal with it. Here endeth the lesson.

I don't mind the moronic midget comment, Dazzler, as it is essentially harmless, midly amusing and about as accurate as the Captain Lard references. Just keep cheating out of it - I have no sense of humour in that regard.

SAcricket, I think South Africa has a better chance than anyone else at cracking the Australian fortress, because as you sort of pointed out, your bowling attack has considerable potential while our batting line-up isn't entirely settled just yet. I still reckon you will be slaughtered, but that is probably my patriotic arrogance coming to the fore. I don't want to go into the Cronje saga - but I expect every South African here to just keep him mind next time they want to throw around the 'cheat' word.

Dearest Tuesday, Australia's Olympic record is indeed impressive compared to that of other cricketing countries (although Britain has actually won more medals than we have and most of their athletes are English). However because cricket is not in the Olympics, the record is essentially meaningless. The Olympics is a glorious celebration of a bunch of sports that people only give a sh_t about for two weeks every four years - that girlie soccer game is the only exception, but its popularity is merely proof that most of the world has extremely poor taste when it comes to football codes. Now, about KP. I can certainly appreciate why you rate him, but he is a prize idiot and a complete w__ker. One victory in a dead rubber over an underdone South African team does not make a brilliant captain. Smith on the other hand has done everything that could be expected of him - a comprehensive series win away from home and a couple of excellent personal performances. He also managed to keep his chubby foot out of his Grand Canyon mouth, unlike in Australia last time. I love the Captain Lard references, but your continuous bagging of the bloke is obviously wearing a bit thin these days. To all Saffers: well done to Lard and the boys on a great series, but oh man they are going to be utterly destroyed when they come to convict country. To Dazzler: South Africans are the very last cricket fans in the world to be calling captains of other teams 'cheats'. Ponting doesn't throw matches for money.

Come on people. It's much too early to be talking about South Africa's tour of Australia this coming (southern) summer. Australia has to defend the B-G Trophy in India first. Australia's team remains relatively unsettled and we could see a few changes before it's time to take on the Proteas.

Wouldn't you know it, I put the kiss of death on Dravid and Laxman. Sri Lanka have exposed India's tail so it's only a matter of time now. It's not easy to win in Sri Lanka, and this Mendis bloke has added another dimension to the hosts' game.

Will Dravid and Laxman pull off a mini-Kolkata effort here? The partnership is 85 and climbing...

I'll keep standing by him for now, but Sachin's been a big disappointment in this tour of Sri Lanka. I'm starting to see where Enigma is coming from. Actually there have been a lot of disappointments for Indian fans in this series, not least MS Dhoni's decision to stay home. India's stand-in keepers have been woeful: dropped catches and missed stumpings all over the place. By contrast, Prasanna Jayawardene has been fantastic. For pure keeping ability he may very well be the world's best at the moment. India's fielding has also let them down again, and the only things which have kept them in this series are their bowling line-up and the incomparable Virender Sehwag.

"Personally, I can't do more than 15-min bursts." I'm sure your girlfriend/wife/same-gender-life-partner is very disappointed, Prophet, but it's not something the rest of us need or want to know. Seriously though, one cannot help but sympathise with those poor souls bereft of the ability to appreciate the subtleties and nuances that make the ultimate form of the greatest game on earth - Test cricket - the most entertaining and riveting form too. We who are blessed with the necessary intellect and attention span to understand this (and hey, it's not quantum physics or rocket science) should spare a thought for those unfortunates whose mental faculties lend towards them being hypnotised by manufactured glitz and gimmicks, being gratified by meaningless slogging, and being enamoured of a poker-machine form of cricket with all the intelligence, charm, finesse and elegance of a charging three-legged rhinocerous who's drunk 14 kegs of beer.

"I think we'll clean England up in the Ashes despite their improved showing here." I couldn't agree more, Tuesday. Something piqued my interest about the English line-up in this Test, so I went back to the records to check and found that except for Ambrose and Broad, this team is no different from the one which got their collective behinds handed to them in the last Ashes series. England's struggle with a lack of depth has been no secret, but persisting with a losing team two years after the fact isn't the way to address the problem, and I don't see them taking the Ashes back next year especially with Vaughan out of the picture.

Aussies already play fair. Australians taught the rest of the cricket world the meaning of "fair". Fair means playing by the rules set out for everyone (that's also Ricky Ponting's definition), and as has been stated, the rules already cover sledging. Have no fear, however: while it certainly won't stop Australians from sledging as they have always done, it's the BCCI calling for a total ban so there will be a total ban.

Australia do seem to have a knack for dropping dead rubbers, and I'm at a loss as to why. They claim they do not take their foot off the pedal after winning a series, and this is partly borne out by them fielding their strongest available side in the last ODI and the result of their most recent Test series.

yoyoma, after the way he's been treated, and the way he's made India pay for that treatment, Symonds is entitled to say anything he likes about India's over-the-top celebrations after the T20 circus. I thought Indian fans knew their cricket pretty well. This is why I - and possibly Symonds too - find it perplexing they couldn't put the T20 result into perspective without first being crushed by the ACTUAL world champions of cricket.

This is like talking to a kindergarten student. ibtisam, you're getting it wrong again. Why do you constantly live in denial? It was Pakistan, NOT PAKISTAN 'A', which was bowled out so cheaply by Australia five years ago. 'A' sides do not play Tests. I'm happy for you that you are able to take comfort in Pakistan's performance during the T20 circus, because South Africa is soundly beating Pakistan in REAL cricket.

callmenuts, making such comments only reflects poorly on your own intelligence.

yoyoma, Symonds can say whatever he likes about India's over-the-top celebrations for getting lucky in a 20-over circus after the way he's been treated and the way he has made India pay for such treatment. It's a cultural thing - sub-continent behaviour when celebrating or lamenting their cricket teams' performance is quite unfathomable from an Australian perspective. Symonds is on record saying T20 is an unimportant novelty which his team does not take seriously.

callmenuts, I said that being captain of Australia was more prestigious, I did not say it was a higher honour. That you could make such a childish comment reflects poorly on your own level of intelligence.

No, it was a Test match in which Pakistan was bowled out for 59 and 53 by Australia. It was not Pakistan A ('A' sides cannot play Test matches), it was Pakistan, which set a new record for being bowled out for a low score, and then beat that record in the very next innings! Matthew Hayden made 119 in that match, outscoring the combined total of Pakistan's two innings. As usual, you are wrong and have nowhere to hide Pakistan's continuing failure at the elite level of cricket.

438/9, I think a few reasons behind Australia's success are pretty self-evident. There's no doubt that just like the West Indies side of the 1980s, Australia has been fortunate to have a wealth of unique talent come together at the right time (don't forget that some of that talent is now gone and more will soon follow). Apart from that, Australia covers all the basics with considerable diligence. The team's training resources and facilities are second-to-none, no expense is spared. The team's work and fitness ethic (with the possible exception of Warnie and Boof when they were still playing) is exceptional - I strongly doubt there is any team that trains as hard or for as long as the Australians. Individual achievement is subordinated to team achievement. Initial success resulted in public support and expectation not seen since the days of The Don, as well as a strong sense of self-belief among players that they can - and probably should - win every game they play. I can only imagine that opposition teams find this self-belief to be more intimidating than anything else. Except maybe for tennis during the Australian Open, there is no domestic sport that can come close to competing with international cricket's popularity during the Australian summer. The domestic first-class and List-A competitions, while poorly attended and rarely televised, remain of a high quality (based on only six teams) and there are programs and mechanisms for recognising and nurturing new talent - Mitchell Johnson was spotted by Dennis Lillee almost 10 years ago, for example. I think one of the biggest factors has been long-term planning, something the other major cricket countries seem to lack. This started in the days of Allan Border's captaincy and Bob Simpson's stint as national coach after we hit the bottom of the barrell in 1984-85 - it was decided we would never sink that low again.

Strauss has the results under his belt while Flintoff looked lost as captain while touring Australia - it's only fair to say the under-preparation and injuries and Ashley "the-worst-selection-in-Ashes-history" Giles weren't his fault but there were still some match-losing errors on Freddie's part, the Aussies didn't have it all their own way. What a tremendous cricketer, it will be great for the game in England and globally if the big bloke can get back to his best like 2005, take the leadership pressure off him and he may just do that. Hope it's a tight series, but I reckon the Poms will take it 2-1 or 2-0 or better if Steve Harmison hits form too. So happy to see some real cricket again after that fiasco pyjama party in the Windies.