KEY POINTS:
Cricket waved its declaration of peace from the comfort of armchairs yesterday, just in time for the hostilities to resume without a full-scale war breaking out.
With the bad taste out of the mouth perhaps, we will be reintroduced to the jaw-dropping exploits of the greatest team in
international sport when the mighty Australians set about mauling India with the aim of creating a world record 17 successive victories.
If you noted the reactionary polls and read the words of one columnist in particular out of Australia, you might have believed that these outstanding modern gladiators were so reviled in their own country that upon reaching this summit in cricket history, they would be promptly marched to the bottom of the hill and put in stocks.
It seemed their captain Ricky Ponting, a batsman compared by his predecessor Steve Waugh to Don Bradman a few hundred runs ago, would be lucky to escape with rotten eggs on the face.
The numbers suggested that even those cheering Australian supporters in the stadiums attacked their heroes the moment they got in range of the most savage of modern weapons, the internet polling yes/no button.
There is a science to proper polling and none of it sneaks past this firewall. Black and white questions, yes/no responses, dangerously random samples, all in the heat of the moment.
The real test of this extraordinary flow of sentiment against the Australian leader would have been to ask the question a day before the appearance of self-naturalised Australian Peter Roebuck's column calling for Ponting to be sacked as captain.
Sack Punter? "What the hell are they on about?" might have been the response. Yet a day later, most of Australia, we were told, would have happily marched upon Ponting's home demanding he fall on a sword that is producing test returns at nearly 60 runs a pop.
A well-aimed column, a flash poll, a few well-edited words from luminaries, and, hey presto, revolution. Among those apparently deploring Ponting was the sailing maestro John Bertrand and yet I heard Bertrand interviewed on radio and his manner was more reasoned than the written quotes suggested.
For a channel of media onslaught to turn on a player who has achieved so much for his country was beyond belief, and for great segments of public opinion to apparently follow suit is just as amazing.
The ridiculous part was that Australia were portrayed as the only transgressor, where as other countries - including India - are hardly angels.
Roebuck has since said that his aim was to shake the tree, produce changes in behaviour, but to demand a sacking is a serious step.
All of us in this business deliberately overstep the mark at times to make a point, but you only call for a head if you are prepared to hold out the plate for more than a day or two.
Australia should be, and no doubt is, prouder of its team than some of the words and numbers have suggested. They were cajoled so amazingly by a media firestorm that politicians and their advisers will have taken note for election tactics.
It is harder to judge cricketers than many other sportsmen in these sorts of things, because cricket tries its hardest to place itself above normal sporting behaviour, even though it often acts below it.
It was claimed in recent days that Waugh had been the inventor of cricket sledging but knew how to keep a lid on it.
In fact, we know that the Australians of the 1970s turned the heat on our very own Glenn Maitland Turner. I asked Turner about this once when writing a story on bouncers, and he replied only that his ancestry was questioned and he did not cower. Maybe it was suggested that he was a descendant of monkeys or was a bastard, but he did not elaborate.
What we will probably find out from Perth is that Australia doesn't need a bark to deliver the bite.
For the great Indian opener Sunil Gavaskar to suggest that the Australians have deliberately tried to have Ponting's nemesis Harbhajan Singh cut out of the series is laughable. Others may run from the Australian onslaughts, but men like Ponting have not made their names by ducking the battle.
It is claimed that Australia this week agreed to temper its tough approach, and that India have agreed not to "abuse" their power within cricket. We shall see.
Australia should carry on their merry and winning way in Perth, even though they might field a new opening partnership. They have raised so many standards in cricket, not the least its entertainment value, while keeping test cricket to the fore, a relief to traditionalists. Their deeds should be celebrated.
Opponents need to challenge them. Not only have Australia notched 16 test victories in a row, but they are unbeaten in 29 matches, and have hardly even been threatened over the last three World Cups.
An absolutely fascinating clash is in store at Perth, one that has got the juices flowing in anticipation, but India won't halt Australia's magical run although scoring machines Sachin Tendulkar and Rahul Dravid, who should be rescued from his opening mission, could make a mockery of this claim.
As for lessons learnt, it remains to be seen whether resentment floods back under pressure; whether peace in our time falls to pieces.
It is also hard to imagine that India will suddenly curb its growing power and influence because of this outbreak of pragmatic goodwill.
For now though, cricket feels as if it has rediscovered enough sanity to enjoy a blistering battle in west Australia.
