Maybe it's time we did that most English of things...

For all the talk of redemption before this Ashes series had begun, there is little to show for it after two exciting tests. Michael Clarke would certainly seemed to have redeemed himself from some of the demons from his disastorous 2005 series. Much the same could be said about Simon Katich, although the jury may still be out on that one.

But the most important case of redemption is the one that remains unfulfilled. Ricky Ponting has again been caught against the searing light of public examination and accountability that captain's seem to come under the most at Ashes time.

First, take a quick look at Andrew Strauss. His captaincy has almost been one of absence at worst and lassiez faire at best, yet he has largely escaped the wrath of the public and media because 1) this is his first Ashes series in charge, 2) he is on home turf and gets the rub of the green, 3) his team so far has exceeded expectations, and 4) his opposite number has so much expectation on his shoulders.

Ricky Ponting's Ashes tour has perhaps only proved to us something we already suspected. That is, Punter is a good captain only so long as it means leading with the bat.

While his batting prowess remains exceptional and unquestioned, his inabliity to choose the correct bowler cost us the first test. In the second test, he again pursued Mitchell Johnson as the strike bowler when it was apparent the Queenslander was in a bad way mentally. Punter also dropped catches, missed run outs, and some of his field choices were reactionary and defensive. In neither test have we bowled England out twice.

However, against this damning backdrop, a friend reminded me the other day of some caveats in the 'new' Ricky Ponting era. Firstly, for the last 15 years, we have been spoilt by the riches of Warne and McGrath. I can't think of bowlers who were almost able to get wickets at will like those two, bar perhaps Curtley Ambrose. Secondly, Brad Haddin is not Adam Gilchrist. His batting and glovework are both sub-Gilly. Lastly, many players in the team are still learning their craft at the test level, let alone cementing their spot in the side. Phil Hughes, Nathan Hauritz, Marcus North, Ben Hilfenhaus and Peter Siddle are all still relative newcomers to top flight cricket.

Having said that, there remains some inexcusable actions and choices from this tour so far. Obviously, not winning either coin toss and sucumming in the first test are the biggest and most damaging mistakes, but some selection choices are questionable. Not including Jason Krejza in this side was a mistake. Hauritz is a door-knob turner that doesn't do enough with flight or drift to make him a threat to anyone with concentration. Not taking a versatile backup batsman was a mistake. Brad Hodge or David Hussey could be brought in for the out-of-form and out-of-luck Michael Hussey. Not realising Johnson needed some rest and time in the nets was a mistake. Stuart Clark should have bowled in the 2nd test in place of Johnson.

Look, there are some positives to take from the first two tests. Peter Siddle has proven to be a handful and bowls like the workhorse that he is. His role cannot be understated and historically has proven to be something that Australia needs to be it's most successful. Michael Kasprowicz and Andy Bichel both bowled without complaint for long stretches to give the powerhouses of McGrath and Jason Gillespie a rest and support. Siddle also has a bit of mongrel in him and isn't afraid of asking the question of the batsmen, physically and verbally.

Hilfenhaus is the next surprise to have come from the series so far, and he will probably take 200+ test wickets for Australia, but you would love to see a bit more anger from him directed at the batsman.

Also, Michael Clarke has proven he will be Australia's next test captain, and with good merit. Poise under pressure at the crease, in the field or in front of the camera cannot be easily taught, and Clarke has found gracefulness laced with assertiveness in all situations.

Maybe it's time we did that most English of things and have a new Captain in the side while the former captain is still playing. Punter would have pressure taken off him and could focus on what he does best - batting and fielding. Clarke could command some new enthusiasm from his players and prove once and for all that the Australian side is actually new and his. With a truly new side and new captain, the talk of redemption from 2005 would become empty and meaningless. New battle lines could be drawn.