Why so excited?

For days now, the news media been inundated with articles announcing the death of Australian supremacy. So then will some Aussie chicks burn a few bails?

Much as I would love to see that, this burning would be more than a touch premature. For some reasons, all the articles seem to acknowledge that the Aussies are still numero uno, and yet they come out with headlines that are either heart-rending in their soppy sentimentality or completely misdirected and fucked up with their superciliousness.

Ok, so there was a margin of victory that hasn't been witnessed in a really long time. So? And there was the general lack-of-threat, a directionless in the field that was distinctly un-Australian.

India have had much worse losses - some of them in the recent past. Did that vault them from a middling team to minnowhood?

India have appeared far more lackadaisical in the field, never hitting the stumps, for matches and matches on end.

True the Aussies 'have lost a few great players, importantly two match winning bowlers, and now their batting cannot stand the strain of putting larger scores up on the board. And yet, if their team plays anywhere near potential it is really difficult for any team to beat them. There is the best batsman in the world, the best (at least a couple of months ago) fast bowler in the world, and the statistical anomaly known as Michael Hussey. In combination, and with inputs from Michael Clarke and Mitchell Johnson, this team can easily make themselves near impossible to beat. It requires coordinated excellence from all quarters of a team to do so. Mohali had attacking batting, good quick bowling, some swing wizardry, spin magic, solid fielding and assured captaincy from India. In the last 20 years, only Australia has consistently ticked all these boxes.

Plus, everyone ignores the cricket superstructure in Australia. Spinning reserves might seem a bit of a problem, but why doesn't anyone acknowledge Peter Siddle's impressive performance on debut? In some way, his performance was as much a source of relief and optimism to Australia as Mishra's was to India. Siddle ran in over after over, and got the ball to lift off an uncomfortable length. Shaun Marsh is on his way here. David Hussey is an impressive guy. And Andrew Symonds is still in the picture.

So basically, let us not get carried away. Aussies are still number one, and will remain so for the foreseeable future.

Paandav kitne the? (Or the power of five)

If you're not the kind of Indian cricket fan who goes only by the scorebook, the end-of-Perth analysis of this series is this:

Bowling has been excllent. Batting has been ho-hum, but all but one have shown they are in good form. Regardless, they won a game which people are calling the greatest win ever. So, excellent.

It would be unreasonable to burn effigies now, even if they come back 3-1, even if the fourth was an huge innings defeat. Let me be clear that I think it is unreasonable to burn effigies anyway.

This means that the Indian team goes into this match with a license to thrill, and so it does not make sense to go in without the power of five. Arpy-Pathan-Ishant-Kumble-Bhajji.

Looks good on paper, and even better in the first three matches. Be sure that they won't reduce the Aussies to dust at Adelaide, but we know they can trouble their best.

Is this series a statistical anomaly for Michael Hussey (avg of 54 only)? Or will we learn that Michael Hussey is a statistical anomaly? The bigger threat is Mathew Hayden. How does one get Hayden out cheap? Especially if he just wants to score runs and nothing else will do. Well we can start with throwing five decent bowlers at him.

What of the batting? There is no doubt that Jaffer has been the weakest link, and if Kumble's thinking concurs with what I have said above, he will have to get the chop. I would have preferred it if it were a middle-order batsman, but none of Ganguly-Laxman-Dravid can be dropped at this point.

Your best batsmen or your best openers?

At the same time, everyone but Jaffer have shown some excellent form, and what is rumoured to be a batting beauty is perhaps, just what the doctor ordered. Ganguly has a point to prove and this is his best chance. And Sachin and Laxman are not without a sense of occasion - their last chance(?) against the best team in the world playing at home. And there is Dravid with all those happy meories at this ground.

But this should, by no means, be the end of the road for Jaffer. I suspect there is an even chance that it may be, but that would be very cruel to a man who made runs in England, West Indies and South Africa.

Is there a case for a parallel change to bring in Dinesh Karthik in place of Dhoni? There is, because then we can continue to keep Dravid at number three. But is this going to happen? No.

Australia does not need to play five bowlers. Also, with Brad Hogg into the batting at Adelaide, there is a lot more sting to the tail than merely that other statistical anomaly-Mitch (avg of 99 only).

I hope Mitch continues to play, and I hope he overcorrects his wide outside offstump line and bowls on the pads.