The Surfer

"It is good that he is getting a good run in the team now. I have always said that he can be a match-winner if he's provided with few more opportunities. It is certainly helping him. The way he bowled in this Test, it shows he has become a complete Test bowler," Raju said. "He showed patience when the conditions were not helping him. He maintained a consistent line and length irrespective of the result. He kept bowling in the areas where he believed he would get a wicket. He didn't try too many things which also helps in Indian conditions. He showed all the qualities of a good Test bowler."

Are there any deep hidden meanings or subtle nuances? Watson is a player who monitors what is said and written about him pretty assiduously - as some of us in the media have found out over the years. He either missed these remarks of Howard's, or did not take them as the message they very clearly are, because in his own mind, as he explained yesterday, he has not been 'told either way.' And that is a growing problem in the eyes of his captain, his coach and the selectors, that, for all his powers and talents, he so often needs to be told things that are simply self-evident.

Graeme Smith is a big ''on-side Harry''. Australia must pitch up and force Smith to drive the ball through the covers. Swinging the ball into him will be like giving candy to a child. Australian bowlers need to push Hashim Amla back and bowl an impeccable length to him.

James Anderson cannot suddenly turn himself into Steyn. But, if the conditions in Mumbai are similar, especially with the old ball, he might try increasing his speed in bursts (it was mainly around 84mph in the first Test) and bowling more like Zaheer, operating to a full length, mixing up his pace and making more use of the width of the crease. He needs to be in the batsmen's face a bit more. He never throws in the towel, but he is inclined to look forlorn during a hot, enervating day on a barren pitch, where Zaheer seems to revel in giving a batsman an uncomfortable time.

They are good at determining early which players are vulnerable to sledging. The Aussies don't use sledging as a way of blowing off steam or venting anger or frustration. It is a definite tactic to break the concentration of the opponent. They are clever enough to realise that some opposition players are likely to concentrate harder and be more determined when they are sledged. Generally they will say nothing to such an opponent. They may even try some reverse psychology and compliment such a player.

When he finally arrives half an hour late, it is a much slimmer version of the cricketing Flintoff. Four months of training with former world featherweight champion Barry McGuigan and his fitness coach son Shane have knocked 40lb off Flintoff's weight and given him chiselled cheekbones, only offset slightly by a crooked nose caused by taking punches while sparring. The weight loss and the bashed-up nose dispose of the first question: this is no stunt; Flintoff intends to do it properly.

A perfect afternoon- and our guest was probably not even coming. We knew the reason, but we were immensely disappointed - for him and for ourselves. Then suddenly this tall, slightly gangly man with a gentle face, sparkling smile and sharp eyes strolled unaccompanied down the sideway.

After all that he had gone through in the previous two weeks, Meckiff had kept his promise.

Most people who actually attend sports - not just cricket but football, rugby, tennis and the rest - manage to view the action in real time without the need for any commentary at all. So why don't the broadcasters give the viewers at home the same authentic experience? Muting the sound is not a satisfactory option, since it gets rid of the atmospheric ambient noise of the crowd as well as the commentary. Since few will want to watch their cricket or football in total silence, sports broadcasters should give television viewers the option of a viewing experience that retains the crowd noise but is wholly commentary free

That the pitch at the Brisbane Test was either exactly the same or completely different to one that Australia played England on about seven years ago. Also, that it is somehow possible for one affably minded broadcaster to agree with both points of view simultaneously. That an erroneous decision made under the video review system was not the fault of the third umpire, who was somehow forced to ignore the recorded evidence in front of his face and support the earlier decision made by the traditional ump, for whatever reason.

Their selection of three pace bowlers for a pitch that is turning to dust will go down in the annals as one of the major whoopsies. It is certainly the biggest miscalculation that England have made when selecting a Test side in India for 20 years: since they beheld a turner in Calcutta, noted how India chose three spinners, and cunningly deployed four pace bowlers plus one raw leggie (the strange thing is England lost by only eight wickets.)

In the commentary box, musty cliches and hackneyed tales narrated by ancient voices didn't clog the lines. Players from the 1980s have monopolised the mike for over two decades but the recent spate of high-profile retirements has rearranged the broadcasters' hierarchy. The old boys, who seemed to have lost connect with the changing Indian dressing room and even with the evolving game, are looking out of touch. Dravid and Ganguly, together in a commentary box for the first time during a Test series, were telling cricket-watchers what they always wanted to know but didn't know whom to ask.

"Having been dismissed by (Manoj) Prabhakar, when I got to the dressing room our manager Micky Stewart started to give me a dressing down because he said 'What are you doing getting out? Why didn't you just get stuck in there, carry on? You were only 30-odd runs away from the world record'," Gooch said. "I didn't really think of that until afterwards. If I'd have thought about it at the time, I probably would have tried to go for it - without doubt."