Is this Australian cricket side too old?

Australia must be careful not to become blinkered in their pursuit of the Test No. 1 ranking. Generational change is imminent and, if delayed too long, could see the side fall in a hole.

Chris Rogers, Shane Watson, Brad Haddin and Ryan Harris are at the end of their careers.

Australia soon will have to make decisions on their futures or risk having to rush new players into the side in the lead-up to the next Ashes.

At the end of this South African series, the Australian selectors will need to closely consider the positions of Rogers and Watson, in particular.

The side only has eight Tests between the end of this series and the next English summer to settle upon the line-up which will attempt to retain the Ashes.

Australia will have two options.

They can either back in their veterans to perform at a high level for the next 18 months, through to the end of the Ashes in England.

Or, if they are not convinced all of those older players can keep their standards that long or maintain their health, they must make tough calls.

What Australia cannot afford is for two or more of those veterans to lose their edge, get injured or retire in the run to the Ashes.

That would leave the team scrambling for replacements too close to the tour of England, which will decide not only whether Australia hold onto the Urn but also whether they can genuinely challenge South Africa for the No. 1 ranking.

Even if Australia vanquish South Africa 3-0 in this current series it will vault them only into second position on the ICC rankings with 117 points, behind the Proteas (124 points).

Regardless of Australia’s astounding form resurgence, it is going to be a massive task to dethrone the South Africans over the next 18 months.

In that period the Proteas have a remarkably soft run, playing just seven Tests against Zimbabwe (away), Bangladesh (away) and the West Indies (at home).

Even considering the weakened state of the South African side following the departure of Jacques Kallis, it seems quite possible that, barring weather-forced draws, they will win all of those matches.

Over the same period, Australia will play 13 Tests against Pakistan (away), India (home), West Indies (away) and England (away).

That is a far most demanding string of matches.

In light of that, it seems unlikely the No. 1 ranking will be regained with this ageing group of Australian cricketers.

Rogers and Watson are clearly the two older players under most pressure to retain their positions.

The left-handed opener will turn 38 during the next Ashes, while the injury-ravaged all-rounder will be 34 years old.

The query about Rogers’ is an obvious one: when will his reflexes desert him?

For many batsmen, even those with far more distinguished careers than him, that occurs as early as 33 or 34 years old.

Typically, only those blessed with exorbitant levels of natural talent can play Test cricket to a reasonable standard at Rogers’ current age.

In fact, even the greatest batsmen of the modern era – Sachin Tendulkar, Ricky Ponting, Rahul Dravid, Brian Lara and Jacques Kallis – were struggling to have a consistent impact on Tests at Rogers’ vintage.

All of those players possessed gifts with the blade which far outstripped those boasted by the Victorian, who instead has made the most of his comparatively limited ability through robust focus and determination.

Rogers is currently an integral member of the side, having scored more runs than any Australian batsman over the recent 10 Ashes Tests.

His circumspect batsmanship also provides a crucial counterpoint to the cavalier approach of his opening partner David Warner.

But, if he continues to labour against South Africa over the following two Tests, should the selectors end his career?

Australia’s next series will be on expected dustbowls in the UAE against a Pakistani side with comfortably the world’s best spinner in Saeed Ajmal.

If Rogers was clueless against Graeme Swann on dry decks in England, how will he cope against the bewildering variety of Ajmal on surfaces certain to be tailored to maximise his impact?

Should he be offered the opportunity to prove he has developed his capacity to tame spin or should the selectors make a harsh call and put in place a new opener?

If they decide to dump Rogers I would not replace him with Watson.

Australia’s biggest concern is its propensity for top order collapses.

Partnering the skittish Warner with the all-or-nothing Watson would probably worsen this problem.

If time is called on Rogers’ career he should be replaced with a young opener.

Given Phil Hughes’ play against Test spin has made Rogers look like Brian Lara by comparison, the obvious options would be one of Jordan Silk or Joe Burns.

The second half of this summer’s Shield campaign will give us an indication of whether either player is ready for such a challenge.

Meanwhile, Watson’s fate looks set to be decided by the state of his body as opposed to an age-induced dwindling of form.

The burly all-rounder will soon be 33.

How realistic is it to expect a player whose body has proven horribly frail for more than a decade to fulfill the dual responsibilities of batting at first drop and being a fifth bowler?

If he breaks down in the run to the Ashes, or during the series itself, it would leave Australia in the horrendous position of trying to identify a new number three at short notice.

The selectors clearly believe they require an all-rounder in the side to try to alleviate some of the burden placed on its veteran pace attack.

But Alex Doolan’s accomplished debut at first drop may have given them pause for thought.

As will have the blossoming of Nathan Lyon into an assured tweaker capable of delivering long, searching spells while the quicks rotate from the other end.

The selectors could soon be asking themselves whether the team needs an all-rounder any more, and an injury-prone one at that.

In any case, they cannot afford to let the side coast along until the next Ashes if there are changes which need to be made.

Australia has made a habit of bungling generational change.

That needs to be broken.