Cricketing conundrums #1

Finally, I like reading Cricinfo articles again. I feel I can open the 'Sports' section in every Indian newspaper without trepidation! Life is beautiful.. when India does well at cricket. :O)
However, one minor bone I have to pick with the Supersub rule (though it has worked wonders for India recently) is that of substituting a batsman. According to the rule, a bowler can be 'supersubbed' after bowling, say, 4 overs and the Supersub will be allowed to bowl the remaining quota of that 'subbed' bowler's overs (6 in this case).
But can a batsman, whilst in the middle of his innings, be 'supersubbed', thus leaving the 'Supersub' to play out the remainder of the 'subbed' batsman's innings?

This, being far from a cricketing or logical fallacy, I assume arises from the imbalance in the fact, that a batsman could bat for as long as he wants (upto the 50 overs per side limit) but the bowler regardless only gets 10 overs. Maybe, the sport of cricket is indeed tilted towards the bat beating the ball!

P.S: http://aus.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/2005-06/SL_IN_IND/SCORECARDS/SL_BOM-PRES-XI_22OCT2005.html