Umpiring standards seem to have been declining for years now...more likely the TV's abililty to spotlight the slightest mistake has become more and more efficient.

I would question the wisdom of having umpires stand in only one Test to "ease the pressure" as Peter Willy suggests. What does that do? Spread the blame? If an umpire makes a bad decision he's human, if an umpire has a bad Test, that's five day's worth of bad decisions, he's a bad umpire, or his name is Rudi, or both!

Moving him in an out of countries, one Test at a time won't help that, not to mention the cost and scheduling complexity such an arrangement would incur. Gid rid of the ageing sub-standard umpires and get some new ones. That's all we need.

The other thing to consider has to be scrapping the completely neutral umpire rule. You can't tell me an umpire as good a SimonTaufel is going to be "biased" if standing in an Australian Test. He's a professional. He's the best around and it is insulting to him to suggest otherwise, let alone how obvious it would be if his standards slipped in Australian games.

Should he stay or should he go?

There are two types of Australians - those that think Ricky Ponting should stay on as Test Captain, those that don't.

What should happen, and what will happen are two different things.

It should be possible for Ricky to step back with dignity and say, "clearly I've lost the Ashes twice, I'm going to throw my full support behind (insert the new guy) and do what I do best, make as many runs as I can for my country in the next few years so that this doesn't happen again in 2013" but I don't feel the Aussie culture is going to let that happen. It's a shame. I'd really like to see Australian Cricket embark on the "Ricky Ponting succession plan" right now in a way that provides one of the games greatest ever run scorers with the dignity he deserves, and without losing his services.

The Great Australian Sporting Ego is a zero sum game. It seems to have everybody in Cricket Australia administration at least, saying, "no, we're going to back Ricky Ponting". "He's the man for the job". Ricky, it's fair to say, "enjoys the full support of the board" - and we all know where that gets you - right?

I had it pointed out to me that this sort of things was possible in the past. True, Benaud, Chappell(i), Chappell(G) and of course Kim Hughes. I don't think you can argue that the latter was a raging success can you? The former names were certainly in a different era, attitudes of which, righly or wrongly have changed over two decades of extreme success.

So I believe Ricky will stay on. That being the case, I think he needs to stop captaining like he's trying to be Steve Waugh - the great motivator and team man, or Mark Taylor the great tactician, and start captaining like he's Ricky Ponting - the master batsman. He leads best by example. He leads worst when he's trying to do things he doesn't do well. WE all know that "dear in the headlights stare don't we.

I think he should back right away from as much public relations work as possible and be the captain that talks behind close doors and out in the middle, with his bat. Let others in Cricket Australia do the talking. And for goodness sake, quit the TV commercials...for all our sakes.

Clearly Andrew Strauss, as a captain lacked a lot of the skills the English public and media expected from a captain, I suspect, mostly because he's not...Michael Vaughan. He was chastised at the beginning of this series and pretty much useless, but now he's defined the role of English captain, not with press conferences and master tacticianal moves, but with a couple of gritty innings at key moments, and a little urn!

Selectors admit they can't do their job

So, Hilditch has been around cricket at the top level for what, 30 years? More? And his excuse is "we all misread the pitch" !

I would've thought that's what they pay you to do Andrew!?

Having said that (as the article really says), I still think it wasn't a matter of going into the match with 4 quick bowlers, or 3 and a spinner that lost Australia the Ashes at the Oval - let's not forget, we were bowled out for 160! In fact we lost 10 for 80.

I don't care if Shane Warne came down from the commentary box and bought Clarrie Grimmet and Richie Benaud with him, after that happened, the Ashes were gone!

England vs Australia - Fifth Test - Day 1, 2 and 3

What annoys me the most about Australia's Ashes losing predicament at the moment is not so much that the urn is most definetly heading back home to England (not that it ever really left) but how incipid the Aussie batting was, come their moment of truth.

With some Strauss like batsmenship, the Ashes could've been saved on Day 2. Then, the ball started moving a bit, and once again, we were found completely wanting! It's extremely infuriating. It's like the current batsmen, Hussey, Ponting and to a lesser extent North, Haddin and even a lesser again extent (is that english?) Clarke, don't realise that the explosive batting of their forefathers, Hayden, Gilchrist, Martyn, Waugh(s) etc was different in many facets. They couldn't bat like millionaires all the time. When innings had to be ground out, or those important sessions just batted out, it could be done.

The current batting line up in so one dimensional. Front runners! Flat track bullies even. Very disappointing. Let's find some guys with classic footwork, guts and fight. At least Shane Watson, less likely than most and possibly out of his comfort zone opening, has the fight about him. At least he values his wicket, gets in behind it and bats like his life depends on it. Never thought i'd say that but it's true. He copped a few wacks, and made himself hard to get out. It's a pity a few others didn't follow suite.

Anyway, like everyone else i'll keep watching through Day 4 (and hopefully 5) daring to dream everytime they hit a couple of fours, keep reading those "world record last innings statistics" they trott out every few overs, then be annoyed when we're bundled out for 220 and watch with disdain as Flintoff is chaired off the field and paraded around London.

Good luck Freddie.

England vs Australia - Fourth Test - Day 1, 2 and a bit of 3

Woohoo! All is well with the world again. I take one week's holiday and look what happens.

Australia smash England and England panic. I hear now they're thinking of picking Mark Ramprakash - please do!

Seriously though, the stage is set for a cracker of a fifth Test isn't it. Mitchell J back in town, Freddie Flintoff ready to be England's saviour in his last, Ashes regaining Test? Who wrote his script? (Shane Warne?)

It's all so exciting. My tip is the Aussies - but not as easily as T4 - somewhere early on Day 5, the Ashes will be ours.

England vs Australia - Third Test - Day 1

Rain, rain rain! Again I ask, how did they manage to invent this great game, in England?!

Ah well, Aussies managed to make a little hey. 1 for 126 from 30 overs. That's a flyer surely! Shane Watson making us all eat our words - if nothing but temporarily I fear...

From all reports it's not going to matter that much, as rain will probably rob us of the chance to capitalise. Hopefully not, I'm getting a bit sick of everything going England's way just at the moment.

Finger's crossed, although one suspects, they get the weather calls pretty spot on in that part of the world :-(

Speaking of weather, I'm off for a "well earned" (believe me really, I've earned it, honestly...) Queensland break next week. Won't be blogging, Twittering or Facebooking too much but I'll certianly have an eye on the TVwhile I lap up some warmer weather...

Panic Stations

England's "Jedi mind trick" on the Australian team is almost complete as rumors now circulate that Phil Hughes will be dropped for the third test and replaced with...wait for it...Golden Boy Shane Watson.

Someone explain to me how this makes sense. Phil Hughes hasn't lived up to the initial hype that surrounded him sure and his long term future in the Test side maybe at risk but how is dropping him for Watson of all people going to help anything.

They say they need to sure up the bowling to cover for out of form Mitchell Johnson. Great move, weaken the batting line up AND bring in another pedestrian bowler that can go for 4 or 5 an over, which maybe better the Mitchell Johnson's 8 per over, but won't win us the two Test Matches we need to win, to lead this series.

Crazy talk. If Mitchell Johnson is the issue, deal with that! Bring in Stuart Clark for him. Don't plug leaks by creating new ones. If you're going to back Mitchell Johnson, which I believe they should, then back him!

The only change needed for this Test is Clark in for (as harsh as it may be) Siddle. Mitchell Johnson no longer takes the new ball, Hughes gets the runs he's due for and we win the match. In general play, over the entire series Ausralia aren't far behind England if at all (except of course where it counts...at the moment). One innings from Strauss and Cook aside, their batting hasn't impressed much, and one bad innings from Australia aside, ours hasn't been real bad either, probably better.

A few decisions going our way this time, and heaven forbid, we win a toss, and things will change really quickly - but panic stations like dropping Hughes for Watson is just throwing all the cards in the air and hoping they land somewhere good - a gamble of the highest proportions.

And what if it doesn't work? What then? Back to Hughes for the fourth Test? Crazy?

At least Phil won't need to wait too long, Watson, with the work load of opening the batting and bowling his 15 overs a day (that's the limit for him isn't it?) will surely break down again and force us to toss all the cards back up in the air for the next match.