On this tour, India are bringing Virat Kohli, R. Ashwin, Ravindra Jadeja and Rohit Sharma, players deep into their thirties, past their best, recently thrashed by New Zealand at home and, in the case of Ashwin and Jadeja, with no record of achievement on Australian soil. But, like Warner, they are brand names with outsized social media presences who hold great appeal for both casual and brand-driven audiences. Cricket is a business, and it needs recognisable faces to put in its advertising.

It also measures its health by social media engagement. Kohli and Warner are one-man social media industries. When it comes to social media engagement, Warner is good for cricket like Nick Kyrgios is good for tennis. (Someone ought to ask him who built the pyramids and whether the Earth is flat. Watch those socials take off.) India, at least, are trying to manage a transition, with half their team in their twenties, some returning after winning the last two Border-Gavaskar series here.

When the teams take the field in Perth on November 22, half of the Indian players will be younger than the baby of the Australian team, the 30-year-old Marnus Labuschagne, unless Nathan McSweeney can break in (McSweeney would be a natural replacement for Steve Smith at number four, but Smith has already selected himself). No Test cricket team has ever been without a single player in their twenties. For an Australian under 30, we’ve finally found one thing that’s harder than buying a house.

McDonald is popular with the senior players, who have formed a perfect protective circle by encouraging his reappointment. Why wouldn’t they? His man-management mantra is about standing aside and letting grown men be themselves and make their own decisions. If they want to keep playing for Australia, then that’s their choice. Selectors count themselves privileged to get a free tracksuit and a seat in the changing room. Their mission is to box-tick the best team “this week”, which carries an explicit bias toward past performances. If that was the priority in 1999, Ian Healy would never have been dropped and Adam Gilchrist would never have had a Test career.

Loading

The present panic attack over the opening batting position is an early tremor. Eventually, Usman Khawaja will realise that he is 37 and has a life to live (the emergence of Khawaja as a late-in-life opener, suddenly the foundation stone of Australia’s order, shows how one player can cover up for years of negligence from the selectors). Smith will run out of positions in the batting order in which to slot himself. Mitch Marsh will eventually stop defying gravity. Then there are the aches and pains for Mitchell Starc (34), Josh Hazlewood (33), Patrick Cummins (31) and Scott Boland (35). There’s a cliff coming, and it’s not Cliff Young.

If things get wobbly against India, we’ll see how “incredibly important” all of that “future-proofing” has been. To make a comparison, we are coming out of the football season in which professional teams have their rosters planned three, four and five years in advance. Cricket? Roster management? Succession planning? Future proofing? Yeah, nah. Just ask the boys when they want to retire, cross your fingers, and if things get desperate, phone Davey.

Sports news, results and expert commentary. Sign up for our Sport newsletter.