In the Sydney Pardon Press Box at The Oval today, they are showing the Channel Five highlights package with, for some reason, the colour turned down. As a result Ricky Ponting is being interviewed in black and white, his faded baggy green a ghostly baggy grey; with the gasometer in the background, you half expect Len Hutton to be up next. It’s somehow congruent with the feel of this match so far – a polite, middle-aged audience watching some polite, middle-aged cricket.

There are, however, already shades of 1953, when Australia went into the Test without a slow bowler, relying on Bill Johnston’s left-arm variations, and England chose two, local boys Jim Laker and Tony Lock. When chunks flew from the pitch’s crust during Alec Bedser’s first over, Lindsay Hassett walked up the pitch to confide to his partner Arthur Morris. ‘I can see who this pitch has been prepared for,’ he griped. But by then it was too late. Without a specialist spinner, Australia were unable to retard England’s fourth-innings chase, and England won their first Ashes series in 20 years.

Which is not to say that I forsee a repeat of these events, although the parallels are instructive, and complaints about the pitch, such as those of my esteemed colleague Scyld Berry in today’s Daily Telegraph, are misplaced. Both teams have stared long and hard at this surface. It was open to both to choose an XI to suit the conditions; Ricky Ponting could very easily have won the toss and batted, in which case I fancy Australia would have batted far better than England. Scyld seems to allege some sort of deliberate malpractice: ‘It is an abuse of the spirit of the game to tailor a pitch quite so blatantly.’ But had the pitch been prepared according to some secret administrative fiat, one would have expected Panesar’s inclusion alongside Swann. Scyld’s theory depends, then, on believing that ECB are capable of cocking up even a conspiracy.

Hmmm, on the other hand…..