Has the empire crumbled?

Plenty of debate on Australia's fortunes following the 2-0 loss against India in India. Plenty of people saying that it is too early to write off the Australians, that India is the toughest place in the cricketing world to tour and that, but for foibles by the selectors and a couple of ill advised captaincy calls, it would have been a whole different story.

All of those arguments hold merit. And while I may not necessarily further the debate, here are my two cents.

The current Australian team ( to India) reads

Ricky Ponting - 33 years
Doug Bollinger - 27 years
Stuart Clark - 33 years
Michael Clarke - 27 years
Brad Haddin - 30 years
Matthew Hayden - 37 years
Michael Hussey - 33 years
Phil Jacques - 29 years
Mitchell Johnson - 27 years
Simon Katich - 33 years
Jason Krejza - 25 years
Brett Lee - 32 years
Shaun Marsh - 25 years
Peter Siddle - 23 years
Shane Watson - 27 years
Cameron White - 25 years
Bryce McGain - 36 years

Adding Shaun Tait, Andrew Symonds, Beau Casson and Ashley Noffke to the mix, we have
Shaun Tait - 25 years
Andrew Symonds - 33 years
Beau Casson - 25 years
Ashley Noffke - 31 years

8 of the 21 players listed above are 32 or older. 7 of the 8 players above the age of 32 are automatic picks for the Test team.

And what this points to is that within the next 3 years, there is going to be another churn in the Australian ranks with player retirements.

Australia are already struggling with life after McGrath, Gilchrist and Warne. And no suitable replacements have been found for Martyn,Langer or Gillespie either.

Nor have the replacements been given a long enough rope to hang themselves ( Beau Casson is a case in point).

And there is really no thought given ( in all the discussions on Australia's supremacy) on the replacements for people like Ponting, Lee, Symonds and Hayden. Nor is there any discussion on what type of cricket the Australains should play in this new environment.

The one characteristic of all the transitions from Border all the way through to Ponting was that the core remained stable - people tapped as replacements for the tried and tested senior pros were playing long enough alongside them to imbibe the team ethic and team philosophy and the team ethos.. And this ensured a seamless handover when the old pros retired

The situation now is different. There is no replacement identified for Ponting. Watson may replace Symonds, but as long as Symonds plays, it will be difficult to justify two all rounders ( unless Australia want to do away with the specialist spinner).

Jacques for Hayden, Rogers for Katich?

Tait for Clark but that means there is really no one to exert control at the other end. And if Symonds and Watson play, there is really no spinner to perform that role. ( which also means that Australia will continue to grapple with over rates, but thats a whole different discussion).

And who comes in for Lee?

Hussey Sr may be replaced by Hussey Jr, but Hussey Jr is not exactly a spring chicken himself.

So, if the 32+ guys get replaced with 30 year olds, we are talking of another churn after another 2-3 years..

And what this means is that the team ethic developed and nurtured by the various teams from Allan Border down to Steve Waugh will be lost..

And that being the case, we are talking of another reconstitution of the team from ground up, with its own ethos.

It is nobody's argument that there is no talent in the Australian domestic scene. The question is, do the selectors have a vision on how they want to bring together this talent?

And does the Australian think tank have clarity in how they want to mould this talent together and how they want to approach their cricket?

Australia is not that far ahead from the rest of the pack now. And the pack is closing in.. And with the next wave of retirements, they may be with the rest of the pack or may fall behind too..

The million dollar question is, will they fall behind the rest of the pack? And if so, by how much?