Mark Nicholas, the face of Channel Nine's cricket coverage, spoke candidly to BackPageLead this week, supporting the calls for changes to the current Australian line-up.

Nicholas advocates the most radical surgery to the bowling attack, with Pat Cummins predicted to debut in Thursday's second Test against South Africa.

"I'd like to see some of the young bowlers chosen," he said. "I'm not convinced that sticking with Mitchell Johnson and Peter Siddle is necessarily the way to go right now. It may be that they come back into the fold as they begin to incorporate a new sense of the attack but I think these younger guys have got to be seen."

The respected commentator also critiqued Australia's batting, particularly the form of Phil Hughes.

"There's a problem with Phil Hughes," Nicholas said. "Does it concern me? Yes. I covered the last tour of South Africa and saw how well he could play and I'd also seen an innings he'd played for NSW on a poor pitch when he got 90-odd out of not many and I thought ‘they've got to get this guy in.' But, it's the boring old cliché; the next level up investigates you further. So, I am concerned about him, and I'm really concerned because I think he's absolutely what you want in the Australian team. I think he's got everything you want except the technique to cope."

"There are big issues over Ricky, as with Simon Katich," Nicholas added. "You have to be bold as a selector. You don't want three guys over 35 in your top-five, so there's been a need for a bit of planning there. I think Inverarity will make sense of all of that in a way that will give the players more clarity."

One batsman whose form is not of immediate concern is Michael Clarke, but Australia's sporting public has yet to rally behind the Sydneysider as captain. Nicholas, a long-time captain of Hampshire in the English County Championship, believes Clarke will prove his doubters wrong, especially once Tim Nielsen is replaced as coach.

"I think Michael Clarke is the right man for the job. There's an enthusiasm, energy, and a sense of adventure about him. He has that bit of comic-strip hero about him and I think that's a really good thing for Australian cricket right now," he said.

"Clearly, the support structure around him at the moment is confused. There isn't really a coach, and in the modern era coaches have played such a big part. It is interesting to see how big the impact of coaches and support staff has become."

In the period since Nicholas was last on Australian screens, Cricket Australia has been fed the recommendations of a series of reviews into its performance, the consequences of which Nicholas believes will be of great benefit.

"I think there's been a bit of confusion over the last couple of years and what a review brings into focus is the opportunity for change," he said.

"I think that John Inverarity is the best possible choice as Chairman of Selectors. He's an intellectual man in a practical fashion and I think that his reach, his own insight into people and the calmness of his thinking will bring a sort of common sense.

"He's got a couple of interesting choices alongside him. Rod Marsh has pedigree in all aspects of dealing with young cricketers and Andy Bichel comes straight out of the game so understands the modern cricketer, so I the balance is extremely good and I think that was needed."

The second and final Test of Australia's tour of South Africa begins on Thursday and the tourists will be hoping to rebound from their humiliating first Test collapse. Despite such a dramatic failure in Cape Town, Nicholas was taken aback by how unexpected many commentators found the event, especially considering the increasing volume of shorter-format cricket and the influence this is having on batting techniques.

"I was surprised at the amount of surprise," Nicholas said. "The collapse happened because of a couple of good balls and a couple of bad shots."

"They're playing a good South African side and they had one of those meltdown moments. The way the modern guys play, technically, and the way they think, mentally, does leave them exposed to dramatic collapses. Especially because of the advent of T20 cricket and the different ways of approaching the game."

The dismissal of Brad Haddin in Australia's second-innings raised the most ire in newspaper columns and did not escape Nicholas's scrutiny.

"There are lots of ways you can deal with being in the middle of a collapse, and one is to counter-attack. But counter-attacking to that level of rashness shows, I would say, irresponsibility to your position and to what you've achieved in the past.

"You are accountable when you're picked to play for your country. I think it's right that he looks to play his shots, but running down the pitch and backing away to leg and just mowing it - it wasn't great, was it?"

Nicholas also believes the collapse was exacerbated by the use of DRS.

"On balance, I would say that the DRS, on pitches that are doing enough to encourage the bowler, goes in favour of the bowler. I think there are more decisions that in the old days batsmen would have got the benefit of the doubt," Nicholas said.

"Ricky's was a good example. I know a lot of umpires who make an assumption about that type of ball on that type of line, and they're generally right. The fact that it proved to be clipping the top of leg stump was why in the old days, before DRS, it would have been given not out. Nowadays, quite rightly, the ball can be shown to be hitting the stumps, which is out."

As the anchor of Channel Nine's cricket commentary team Nicholas has got to know Shane Warne and is unsurprised by his colleague's decision to come out of retirement for this summer's Big Bash League.

"The idea of a comeback has been mooted by Warnie off and on for a while now. He misses that life and he's still got something to give young cricketers. He's an amazing mentor and teacher of the game and I think it's a brilliant decision by the team and by him," Nicholas said.

"Is it a marketing exercise? Yes, because he's unlikely to turn matches off his own arm now but I think it's a great thing for the competition."

Before leaving, I asked Nicholas how he would remember Peter Roebuck, a man he had known both as a rival and colleague.

"I knew him really well," he said. "I played against him in county second-XI cricket. First in 1978 and we had many battles over the years, and many rows over the years."

"He was difficult, unusual, contrary and within him was some genius. He had an extraordinary mind and he could read you like no-one else. He knew things about you that you weren't sure you knew yourself and he brought that to his work, which made him such a special writer and broadcaster.

"The dark side, the tortured side, was always there. Even if he was walking on his own along the beach at Bondi you sensed you were watching a man never really at peace with himself. He was a show-off in lots of ways; either in the eccentricities of his behaviour or clothing or simply in the extremities of his journalism. He certainly wanted to be liked, and I think in that dreadful moment he will have realised that there would be questions asked abut him forever more that made him feel his position was untenable.

"I don't think that's right, but I think in the welling up of that moment he would have only seen that dark tunnel; he wouldn't have seen any light at the end of it."