The first Test has been and gone. It was a slaughter. Looking around the world, you can say that in duplicate. Australia slaughtered Sri Lanka by (less than half) an innings and South Africa slaughtered New Zealand by more runs than I could count. In fact, South Africa’s second innings (which was only three wickets down) easily accounted for both of the Kiwi’s paltry efforts.

I hardly watched a ball of the Test between Australia and Sri Lanka but I did listen to a great deal on the radio. As you all would know, I’m not into giving free advertising to commercial concerns. But ABC Radio and Grandstand doesn’t fall into the commercial category. Listening to ABC cricket is magnificent. If you can watch TV with the volume muted and listen to the ABC, all the better, but the radio coverage in itself is wonderful. The ABC commentary team may not have a panel that have all captained Australia, or even necessarily played first class cricket – something that would preclude them from commentating on certain commercial concerns – but they all love cricket, they all know their stuff and with the right mix of characters, they contrive to deliver enlightening and enjoyable comment.

Of course, there is Skull (Kerry O’Keefe). He was a Test cricketer. Peter Roebuck was a first class cricketer. But it is some of the others that I find intriguing. Jim Maxwell, Drew Morphett and Glenn Mitchell are “cricket nobodies”, in playing terms. Yet, they are paid to watch, and waffle about cricket for long periods of time. And what a good job they do. How I admire them for getting into such an enviable position. They just love the game (and all sport) and I’m sure they’ve worked hard. Jim Maxwell is a cricket journalism icon. I recall several sub-continental tours where you got the impression that Jim was actually paying his own way. I remember one famous occasion in India where Jim was under the desk fixing the wiring – during the call. And he’s been doing it for a long time. For some reason, “Massie’s match” was being discussed during the course of the last match. Jim casually remarked “I was there”. He was pickling his liver in the Members’, when Massie took 16 at Lords. Just for the love of it.

It is on the ABC that you will hear The Bowlologist. I didn’t forget him. Last, but not least, is Damien Fleming. The Victorian and Australia swing bowler. He is a real character and knows his cricket. He loves his stats and can trot them out with the best. Among other things, Fleming is a bowling consultant these days (which former Australian Test bowler isn’t?). Flem thought he needed a better term for his professional services and invented the term “bowlology”. Soon you will be able to get a degree in Bowlology at the Bowlers University. (http://bowlersuniversity.com).

It makes one think about how far science and analysis will go in sport. Kerry O’Keefe comment that Dennis Lillee was the best analyst of batsmen he ever saw. He explained that he didn’t mean that Lillee spent hours watching video footage. Quite the opposite. Lillee had that innate ability to watch a batsman for a few balls and spot the weaknesses in technique. It’s a skill, an instinct really, that sets the greats apart. Warne, McGrath, Hadlee, Imran, Akram, Marshall, Miller, O’Reilly, Barnes, Spofforth, Jo Angel – they all had it.

Are bowlers better today because of all the help they get? Do all the technology, cricket academies and bowling coaches make a difference? I’m not talking about the greats but the next level down, right through to state level? The answer is I don’t know. Probably – or a whole lot of money is being wasted. The technology is at the very least interesting. Those tools that you see on the local television carrier are quite amazing. That one that plots were the ball is pitched and where it passes the batsman are fantastic. You can have it done for an entire over. Or you can see one bowler to all batsman, or one bowler to left and right-handers, colour code of course. Or one bowler to all batsman, coloured codes for dot balls, wickets, and how many runs. Last summer we saw Cook’s “out balls” for the entire series and they conclusively showed that he was susceptible to a certain type of delivery. It’s incredible. Add to that super slow motion replays from 1001 angles, analysis of seam position, seam movement during delivery, monitoring of pace in the air and off the pitch, trajectory analysis and how many revolutions per second a spin bowler can get from a ball, and you get an idea of what can be learned at the Bowlers University.

I’m sure it’s interesting but give me Thommo any day. The Thommo degree in bowling was far easier to teach and even better to watch. “I just shuffle up and go “whang”.” I’m happy for Flemmo to be the Dean at the Bowlers University as long as Thommo is on the lecturing staff.