What about the kids, Steve? They deserve Test results

Fourth Test a much better finish than the third test.

A bit close to the bone Scott. I was a Vietnam conscript and I have a nephew in the SAS (an only child to his parents,who never know when he is on assignment) who has done stints in both Iraq and Afhganistan (twice) so I can't and will not answer that Scott (although my nephew may be tempted) ,nor I suspect,can you. I mention Rorke's Drift because it was a real draw if you read the history carefully,with analogies that could be extrapolated to cricket without too much of a stretch;the same could not be said for the Boer war.

I've no problems with the 'slow' batting and 'late' declaration on day 5. It just seemed that Smith was sending he message that he is looking at the big picture. Accepting the possibility of a series-winning-draw in order to ensure there was no possibility of a loss. What I cannot accept/understand is not bowling the last four overs. Settling for a draw when (no-risk) win was still possible. Dhoni salvaged a draw from a possible loss. Smith accepted a draw from a possible win. The only answer I can fathom is that Smith knew of Dhoni's planned retirement...

Old Pete is correct. A draw is a result. It's in the game's laws. It's better than a loss, not always as good as a win, although I'm sure the Indians would be happy to have avoided the loss ; and ties are pretty rare. The kids can revel in the fact that they follow a game that can have 4 results -- not even counting "match abandoned" -- I certainly did as a child. Perhaps the last few overs lacked a certain zing, but any fan of any sport has watched boring patches, unless they just watch the highlights.

Happy NY Scott. But still WOW. I can't see how a kid isn't going to watch the Sydney test because of what happened on the 5th day. So the other tests mean zilch? Adelaide didn't exist? I know they have short attention spans but they have good memories. It also seems this article is here to have a crack at Marsh. He did what he had to so we weren't in a position to let India back in the series. Smith could have declared earlier if he wanted to. There were rain delays and there was sloppy fielding that cost us a chance to have a safer go at India. We've had amazing series so far, if the kids lose interest because one day out of 14/15 played didn't get up to fever pitch then we're doomed anyway. They won't be able to hold down a 'boring' job to pay their taxes and help pay for our pensions!! The kids I was with found it pretty exciting with Marsh trying to get a hundred and then especially with the start of the Indian 2nd innings and the other wicket bundles near the end. I guess kids, like adults have different ways of enjoying things and what floats their boat. Kids follow their heroes too so they're more likely to see past results and look forward to their favourite player doing well. The marketing is good these days, there are three excellent formats and fans have greater access to players which will keep Tests strong. I wouldn't of stuck with cricket through the 80's if I was worried about draws or getting flogged, it was watching my favourite players. Then as you get older and understand the game more there are a whole lot of other aspects of the game that become apparent. If they are hooked with T20 that has all the fanfare they will appreciate the other forms as they get older. Just like ODI got a lot kids interested in Tests back in the day. "Americans visiting for our New Year’s Eve celebrations cannot comprehend how we can play a game for five days and not get a result" - I would have thought that was taking into consideration what Americans think of our game, can't see how I invented copy out of that. Hope you and little Johnny can cattle prod each other during the final test in case there are two maiden overs bowled in a row ;)

I was just about to post something about the pitch, then I read this. There you have it, as Mc Grath said, the pitch was a road! Not a fan of these drop in flavourless pitches.

I'm unfortunately with you Steve. I put my point of view across in an obscure and possibly wrong way way too. ( and I was quickly banished to the stocks for it) But personal abuse is the price paid for an opinion. I had no issue with Marsh going for his hundred but to do it with purpose. I always want players to get their milestones. Warnie was very keen on Australia having 90 overs at the Indians chasing 330-350 and thus having the last 10 overs with a new ball. 330 has never been achieved on the last day of any test in history to win a match. India's tale has collapsed in every innings this series. The Fairfax commentary team told of a similar situation when India was in England earlier in 2014. I watched the the last day with four other guys and like you and me and they are idiots.

We should just defer the captaincy to the producer of channel 9's cricket coverage.

Steve Smith ensured we won the series and therefore it was the correct decision. When the game is a draw there is still a result - a draw. Scott there are 4 results possible in cricket and a draw is as valid a result as the other 3. Why do you care what an American tourist thinks?

Australia were never really in a position to force the issue in their second inning. India had every chance to bowl them out and chase a small total. And it's not as simple as saying India were six down so ten, twenty or however many more overs would have lead to an Australian win. India were 3-10 in those exact circumstances. At another time they may have ended up 0-100 and chased anything as they showed was possible in Adelaide. And anyway the match was on the line up to and including the time of the bizarre premature ending. Another great day of Test cricket. As for the Big Bash they're may have been a couple of exciting finishes but the standard of batting has mostly been atrocious even by T20 standards.