It's about bloody time Shane Watson cracked a ton. Not a swashbuckling 60, a slashing 70 or a nervous 90; a patient, mature ton.

Watson is Australia's best cricketer. He has won consecutive Allan Border Medals (whatever this counts for) and it has now been nine years since he first toured South Africa in 2002 under Steve Waugh.

His technique has improved markedly since his inaugural tour. His driving through the covers can be a beauty to behold. The positioning of his right knee on the turf is reminiscent of Pat Cash's picturesque backhand stance when he won Wimbledon in 1987.

Watson's output as a batsman on Australia's recent tour of Sri Lanka was poor. In five innings, he scored 87 runs and failed to pass 50.

In the first innings of the final Test he was dismissed by debutant Shaminda Eranga with his first ball in Test cricket.

He played a loose, flailing shot outside off stump which belied the age-old philosophy of ‘having a look' at a new bowler.

Such misdirected intimidation tactics have been all too prevalent in Watson's Test career. It is one of the reasons why he has failed to endear himself to Australia's sporting public.

Watson's bowling in Sri Lanka was quite effective. His three middle order wickets in Galle (all LBWs) played a large part in Australia's overall series victory.

Watson's tour of Sri Lanka is indicative of his output as a Test cricketer to date. In 30 Tests, he has scored 2,040 runs at a decent average of 39.43. He has also taken 50 wickets at a return of 29.90; a better average than Brett Lee.

Watson has taken five wickets in an innings as many times (twice) as he has scored a century.

His conversion rate (15 fifties and two centuries) is truly deplorable.

He is a ferocious scorer when the field is up early in an innings. Yet once the field retreats, and boundaries are harder to come by, he often struggles to acclimatise to the different tempo required of him. Mike Hussey, on the other hand, thrives on this tempo.

Watson's opening partnership with Phil Hughes has gotten off to a shaky beginning. The pair was involved in two run-outs in three matches during last summer's disastrous Ashes campaign.

They failed to set the world on fire in Sri Lanka, combining for a total of 150 runs over five innings at an average of 30 runs for the first wicket; hardly Greenidge and Haynes numbers.

Hughes and Watson seem unsure as to who ought to assume the mantle of the aggressor.

Early in his Test career, Phil Hughes was happy to reduce his partner, Simon Katich, to second fiddle, trusting his natural flair to prevail over South Africa's more fancied pace attack.

Since his return to the team Hughes has attempted to tighten his defensive technique, allowing Watson the scope to attack. Yet it hasn't worked. Both players appear to lack the capacity to rotate the strike on a regular basis.

As opposed to Hayden and Langer, they don't appear to nurture each other through the inevitable troughs that come with opening the innings. Perhaps this is because they are both so intently focussed on their own output?

Time is running out for Hughes and Watson as a combination.

If Hughes succumbs to the imminent onslaught from Steyn and Morkel, then he might be honing his game at Shield level for years to come.

If Watson fails, he will probably be demoted in the batting order. Such talk has been around ever since he took Hughes' spot at the Rose Bowl in 2009. The only way to silence it is for him to convert.

In the hours leading up to the Cape Town Test, it might be worth Shane Watson watching footage of Brian Lara's unbeaten quadruple century against England in Antigua. Maybe then he might understand the true meaning of intimidation on a cricket field.