This Australian side isn't quite as good as the one they had a few years ago under Steve Waugh but as Tim says they have a certain hunger, intensity and determination about them. Hopefully now that England have lost the Ashes having held them for only 14 months there will be no more looking back to the 2005 Ashes and they will chart a path forward under a new captain, new coach with a new direction and philosophy. The wicketkeeping position must come under review and they must back young players and groom either Alastair Cook or Kevin Pietersen for the captaincy in 2 years time. I don't think they should revert to Vaughan as captain as I don't think he's fit enough nor good enough as a batsman any more. Give the captaincy back to Strauss. Pick your best side first then the captain!
There are certain players who should never play for England again such as Giles (thoughts with him and his wife of course) and GJones (is he Fletcher's secret love child?). If the selectors don't want Read as keeper they should look at alternatives such as Prior, Foster or Davies.
I would also question Steve Harmison's international future unless he puts in a match-winning display for the final 2 Tests. I know he bowled much better in Perth but his bowling has been in decline for the last 2 years now, he is inconsistent and struggles to bowl well on good batting surfaces. He will never be a world-class fast bowler with that bowling action. He also gives the impression that he'd rather be somewhere else than on the cricket field.
I'd stick with Mahmood and Anderson as they're both still young and there must be no more doubts about Panesar's place in the side. He needs to bowl lots of overs and have the full support of the selectors, captain and coach. He's England's best spinner since Underwood and needs to be treated as such.
Most important thing is to sack Fletcher as coach. England can't evolve and go forward as long as he's in charge. He's too stubborn and pig-headed and his treatment of Chris Read and Monty Panesar on this tour leaves much to be desired. It was pleasing to hear David Collier of the ECB say that his position would come into review and that each coach may have a shelf-life.
England have regressed since the Ashes due to laziness and complacency, the Aussies have regrouped and gone forward. England don't lack talent and ability but they need to change their mind-set and mentality, toughen up and wisen up.

I really do think it is time for all serious cricket lovers to ask for Fletchers removal. WE need a more pragmatic coach. Fletchers thinking has now become blinkered, his self belief misplaced. We the cricket loving public ensured that monty could no longer be ignored and we the cricket loving public will ensure that fletcher does not remain.

It was always going to be this way. In 2005 everything went right for England and they won by the bearest of margins. This time around the luck was shared between the two teams (Andrew Strauss aside) and they are on their way to a 5-0 drubbing.

On the bright side with Australia's aging team 2009 should be another cracker of a series.

Tim, do us a favour and write something new. You are like a broken record .... "Aussies are too old". It obviously doesn't matter how old they are does it, they still keep winning. And yes we all know they are closer to the end than the beginning. You keep repeating it like a mantra to protect England from humiliation. How many more posts are you going to trot out this same message dressed up in different words on different days.

And stop criticising KP, without him England would have arrest warrants waiting at Heathrow with an escort to the Tower to be stripped of their M's and OBEs before being given the chop.

The Tour from Hell continues...

Hang on a second.
As an Australian I wasn't allowed to get away with blaming our loss in 2005 on poor umpiring (Martyn), retaining out of form players (Gillespie) and form slumps (Hayden/Gilchrist/Clarke). Hey, I couldn’t even get away with blaming it on McGrath’s injury.
All my English mates kept telling me the English team won because they played better cricket.
This time around it should be no different.
No English supporters/columnists can blame this one on poor umpiring (Strauss), dodgy selection (Giles/Anderson) or form slumps (Flintoff/Jones).
The Australian's played better cricket and that's why they won.
If you find consolation in constantly reminding us how old the team and patronising Warne and McGrath then go for it.
See you with our new talent in 2009.

The biggest reaon for the England's loss was the selection of captaincy. Last time it was Michael Vaughan who was calm and composed and he had a glamour boy as well as passionate player in Flintoff. Everytime England needed a magic to turn things around Vaughan looked at Flintoff and boy didn't he respond. Three jobs for a single person is asking for too much and rightly he didn't click in any. The selectors should have gone for Andrew Strauss who isn't a crowd puller and he could have utilised Flintoff's resources quite well.
All n all with so much of hype surronding this series it was disappointing that the series is done within three tests.

I really do think that KP is selfish. A good player, yes, but selfish. It was obvious that he was playing for his average today and didn't want to have a crack at the Australian bowlers for fear of getting out.

With that sort of mentality from England's best player, they were doomed from the start.

Congratulations to Australia. England have been soundly beaten and no amount of excuses will chnage that. England simply did not play well enough for an entire test match to even come close to threatening the hosts. Yes we had some periods during which we looked like a reasonably good side but there was a singular lack of sustained consistency to warrant a draw - let alone a win. Only KP showed the necessary consistency but he cannot do it himself. Personally I look forward to 2008 - who knows what that will bring.

It pays to read things before commenting on them, which is advice I can only assume David and Jordan have yet to accept. Perhaps I am unfair and all that is required is an irony transplant. I think the point Tim makes here (if he will allow me to put words in his mouth) is exactly that it does not matter at all if Australia is aging as they are still such high class performers.

'And stop criticising KP...' surely recent good performances from somebody I grudgingly admit is a class player are not absolute protection from respectful criticism.

The smile on my face when Giles and Jones were selected in Brisbane that became Chesire Cat-like in Adelaide is testament to the fact that, and read this bit closely, the management of the team has contributed to the bad cricket that England has played in patches. Additionally, Michael Vaughn's injury troubles have cost England their best batsman and their only one proven in Australia. Do I think Australia would have beaten a Vaughn-led team containg Read and Panesar, of course, but you lose the right to participate in reasoned argument if you are unwilling to admit that their inclusions would not have changed the tests significantly, potentially in England's favour.

Tim, reread your comments, and start posting some positives about this legendary Australian team, who have done so much to take cricket to another level regardless of age. This age issue is borrrrrring, and dismisses and disrespects Australia's achievements over the years including this current series.

Pretty accurate stuff from Jordan.

To criticise the best bowler the world has ever seen by comparing him to one with a quite imposing record (though always remaining 2nd best) is quite ridiculous! I wonder if SMcG would have ever got a game for England?

I suspect the end of this tour will tell us that Flintoff really has some remaining issues with his ankle.

I have no doubt that G. Jones should have played his last test. Never, ever, seized the moment in the field - and Australia gave him more than a few chances.

By the way - the aim is to win. I think the result sits at 3-0.

dont give me this "ausies are too old" bullshit tim. australia wouldve won this series without gili ( haden as replacement), without mcgrath ( clark) and without warne...ok maybe not without him! but Warne is a different story! we won this without any excuses and as much as i love Australia i doo feel for FLINTOFF and only him, he bowled his heart out, and he probably cannot handle being a captain, but he does deserve my respect. All he needed was backup in the first 2 tests and England couldve won 1 of the first 2. I think in the third test he just gave up.

Cant wait till 2009, we will be younger, but stronger.

Go the Ausies!!!

Spot on Jordan. In 2005 Australia took the loss in their stride and learned from it, rather than making excuses. Time will tell whether England are capable of the same.

David and Jordan make good points Tim.

In 2005 it was all about the whole English unit working as one. They were the way forward Fleet St said. Support staff out of the ying yang, subbing players left and right - you know the young side that needed a break, Prat with the runout (who was that Aussie guy in Brisbane that took the catch on the boundary hahahah Duncan), immaculate preparation in focusing on WINNING the 20/20 and one dayers pre the Tests.

In 2006 it was a case of Arrogance gone wrong. Not injuries, not performance but arrogance. Pick Giles who has never troubled Australia and leaving out "the best finger spinner in the world" (as he well might be on his performance here). Pick Jones who would have to be the greatest front runner in world cricket - as long as there is no pressure he plays an OK 2nd grade game. Leave Pieterson at 5. Pick 5 bowlers and load up the all rounder with everything - does Freddie also get the bags? And when you have five bowlers make sure you only give the third seamer 16 overs or so in the game. Whenever things are tight and discipline is called for make sure you give KP license to ping away at the stumps and concede overthrows when the batsmen are already safely home...should I go on?

Totally inept performance BUT this side has real talent which is shame as it can not let it loose shackled by poor management thinking about the next book deal - "How I kept the Ashes in Oz" is know entitled "How to stuff it up and blame everyone else" by D Fletcher and co.

And Tim what is all this about Warne and McGrath not going well? The pitches have been roads as the scores by the Aussie's show. We posted massive scores in Brisbane, chased 550 in Adelaide and got 170 in a one day chase on the fifth day, faced a lively one in Perth first up - got rolled - rolled you guys for less. In the second dig Gilly tonks a lazy 100 off 50 balls, 2 other guys get tons and there is a 92 and 75 as well. No wonder Warne can't get much in the first innings and McGrath has not filled his boots. Just remember we are still waiting for the Poms to bowl us out twice - you know the young team of the future!!! But I suppose you need something to take your mind off the woeful ineptitude of the English unit as a whole in this series, so blast away at the old guys, why not.

Keep pointing out the Aussies perceived short comings - I will look at the scoreboard that says three nil.

We will soon see how hungry each side is in the next two dead rubbers. I know who my money is on

I don't think it is fair to heap all the blame on Duncan Fletcher. Monty Panesar should certainly have played from the opening test and possibly Chris Read although I am not a great fan of his. However England need to develop more strength in depth. We don't have the test quality bowlers to step in when 2 or 3 of our bowlers lose form or are injured.

Unbiased View - I am from Pakistan living in New York, and have been sleeping 3 hours or less each night (and showing up at work), draining endless pots of coffee every day, and going insane trying to explain how cricket is the real sport and not baseball.....After establishing my absolute love for the game and not being English or Austrailian, I hereby ask for Cricinfo management, to declare Cricinfo not an international cricket site, but a severly biased English opinion, whining, complaining, always seeing the wrong witht the Aussies website.......

Tim journalism is about opinions, not bias, and all of us specially you should be able to give credit where crdeit is due, rahter than pointing out how out of date and old the Aussies are.....well maybe they are like you said, but what does it say for the rest of the cricket teams.

Well done punter and his men

A certain Mr.Geoffrey Boycott had asked for Fletcher's removal sometime back and was ridiculed from all quarters. Guess who's laughing now!

Good on you Jordan, couldn't have said it better myself! Oh, except for possibly one thing. Despite how well England played in 2005 the reality is that it was a couple of overs/runs from Australia winning 2:1 or at worst drawing 2:2 (and keeping the Ashes). It has not even been that close this time around. And I agree with you about 2009 - Hussey, Clarke, Ponting, Lee and Clark will still be going strong with players like Jaques, Tait and Watson (and don't forget 13th man Voges) coming through to carry things on. And if Richard Hadlee can bowl at nearly 40 why can't Warney!

Yes, Tim, a good coach can have a bad series. But good coaches are never blatantly biased in their team choices. Australia have played well, better than England, and it itself there is no shame in that. But it is the plethora of other reasons that stick in the throat - insufficient warm-up games, Fletcher's totally unreasonable and biased selections amid a squad bereft of down-under experience, the wrong captain (remember Botham?) and a whole lot less hunger. If England had got all that right it might have been a different story, and we would not be left fuming at the incompetency of it all. Don't expect anything out of the World Cup (as if anyone does). Fletcher has done well in the past, but his shelf life is now up - he has got into the same boat as Erikkson and Robinson ... oh, and McClaren too.

Pietersen's batting with the tail was disgraceful. I can't decide whether it was that he had either couldn't care less about battling it out for his country no matter what the odds (i.e. pea-heart syndrome), OR figured the test match was over and he was protecting his average making sure he knotched up another not out against his name.

Either way it seems to sum up a player who has already released an Biography after a grand total of 21 tests and just over 100 first class matches. No question he is a great talent and can be exciting to watch even as an opposition supporter but he already seems to think of himself as above the game. Left a bad taste in my mouth watching the end of the Perth Test, especially with Monty still out there giving it his all.

I agree with Jordan. Whenever England lose, the team itself, the English press, and the supporters blame it on some very lame extraneous factors. And it does not really matter where they lose - be it in England, in Australia, or in the Subcontinent. They simply refuse to admit that they are not just a good enough side, no matter who plays. In fact, it's a good thing that the Ashes order has been restored. The Australians play their cricket with a flair, even when they lose. England won in 2005 because they were more effective, not because they played glorious cricket.

Jordan - whilst there may be a fair bit of ranting at the bizarre selection policies on this tour, I'm not sure many (rational) fans are actually saying that the Australians haven't played by far the better cricket. For me, the biggest difference between this series and last was the intensity of the teams - last summer, England won the important sessions, this time around the Australians have done so, and emphatically too, driven on by all of the events in 2005. It's just annoying (as an Englishman) that we didn't send out our best available XI to compete.

Of course, I think things would have been closer this time around had Vaughan, Simon Jones and Tresco all been available, but they weren't and damn, does 3-0 hurt. We just need to make sure that this series drives us on to better things in the same way it's done for the Australians.

can hardly be denied (as warne himself says) that some of them are closer to the end to the beginning, it's patently obvious. but when their age is wheeled out as a cheap shot in the face of a drubbing, it's a line that is a little old and wrinkly itself (perhaps not so obviously bitter in this article, but it's everywhere else). old? yeah, they are. nor are they are very good team, from what a lot of blog pundits are saying. and they still won. says a lot for their opponents.
the team is not infallible, nor getting any younger. but they've even surprised me how well they've played this time around. as an australian i eagerly await some of the new faces, glimpses of which will be in the one day series (if not the dead rubbers).
cheers

Like most of you I've been quietly following both Tim and Gideon's blogs throughout this series and have commented previously. I have noticed people talking about the aging Australians, it's a true statement too. However lets hypothetically look forward to 2009 and lets say all the current over 35's retire in what has been the long feared (by Australians) and long awaited (by their opposition) mass exidus. Australia's line up could possibly look something like this.

Rogers
Jaques
Ponting
Hussey
Clarke
Watson
Haddin/Ronchi/Hartley/Paine/Crosthwaite (Any other promising young keeper, which seems to be ample currently)
Clark/Lee/Tait/Johnson/McDonald/Dorey
Cullen/Heal

Whilst some of these names are far from household names, there's still a few seasons of these kids being "belted" by Dads Army back in domestic cricket to fine tune their games. Through the grounding these kids are getting in domestic cricket here, they'll be prepared for Test Cricket, sure we may not have as spectacular team as we do now but it'll still be a very good side.

PS My most sincere appologies to names I may have left off that list as I know there are plenty :)

For all the crap you write, I will not honour you with a decent comment! Let me assure you that each of Dad's Army is fitter than your juvenile Poms. There is only ONE reason england won the Ashes last time - LUCK. This time they deserve the 5-0 they are going to receive!

crappy pomies

Jordan is right, the aussies were better, england made mistakes but the aussies were the better side and it pains me say it. I wouldn't say England were a terrible side and i think are a good test side, but australia have proved they are the world's best at test cricket.

At this point of proceedings, we usually see wild headlines declaring England to be a shambles, rubbish, lacking pride and passion etc etc. England are still the second best test team in the world...it's just the Aussies are miles in front of everyone else.

At this point of proceedings, we usually see wild headlines declaring England to be a shambles, rubbish, lacking pride and passion etc etc. England are still the second best test team in the world...it's just the Aussies are miles in front of everyone else.

I think to be honest that England fans have felt for many years that taking out McGrath and Warne would leave merely a good Australian side - very good batsmen, though no better than say the Indian batsmen of 5 years ago, and average bowling. Hence it's incredibly frustrating when Austalians bang on about 'the team' every two seconds, how England have been beaten by a 'great team'. Take out McGrath and Warne and many of those victories would have been draws and defeats.

That's the root of English focus on the growing age of the Australian side I feel - a mixture of frustration, and yearning for a time when two once in a lifetime cricketers are gone.

Thus forgive me asking Jordan - what talent? Dan Cullen is going to frighten anybody - if Australia unearth any decent spinner for 20 years after Warne, it'll go against all evidence from history.

z41n:
> We the cricket loving public ensured that monty
> could no longer be ignored and we the cricket
> loving public will ensure that fletcher does not
> remain.

Breathtaking arrogance!

Aside from that, a very good article from Tim. I see no attempt to blame umpiring or other external factors, and think the quality of Australia has been fully acknowledged. They won through playing as a *team*, just as England did in 2005. I do agree with Jordan, though, when he says "no English supporters can blame this one on... dodgy selection" (Giles/Anderson/Jones). Those are knee-jerk arguments, that bear little analysis and less respect. Panesar *may* have helped salvage a draw at Adelaide, but that's all. We'd still be waving goodbye to the Ashes, if not this Test then at the next.

The lame and selfish display by Kevin Pieterson once again summed up England's hopes to retain the Ashes. Like the first innings, he again took singles of the first ball to expose the tail to a rejuvenated Warne. It just looked like KP was trying to stay unbeaten and inflate his average, caring little for the result. Sangakarra's batting in the recent test against New Zealand shows exactly how an established and well settled batsman is supposed to protect the tail and keep the score board ticking. I agree KP is a very good player but he lost respect in the eyes of millions of fans by his selfishness.

Spot on Jordan. Apparently Australia had to believe that England won the last series solely on talent, when it was quite obvious the gremlins were also actively amidst the Aussie team (i.e. form, selection and that errant cricket ball ankle injury).

Yet, "beaten by the better side" (despite our disbelief) was the mantra we were forced to accept.

Well, now Tim, in your ever-bullish manner repeat after me: "England was beaten by the better team."

That's all you need to say, Tim. Stop whining about unpiring decisions, form and selection and face the fact that your boys were just smashed by the number one. Full stop.

And stop your bloody whinging...

The Blog which you have written is very good. I was able to understand each and every verse in the Blog. Please do write this kind of Blogs in near time in future.

simply said, the australians were always a better team. 2005 may be now counted as a slight dip in their high rising winning graph across the years, and this can be argued by simply looking at the margin of defeat in 2005 and now. It was 2-1 that england won it by last year. Three matches in this time around they are languishing 3-0 at the hands of pretty much the same team core.

Well thank god for that! England weren't bad, just Australia were awesome. I actually can't wait for 2009 as i think it will be a much better contest. England were green this series and didn't help themselves wirth selection; but i dont feel it can be stressed how well Australia played, true champions that they are. In reply to don's comment fom earlier here are my 2009 lineups

Cook Rogers
Strauss Jaques
Bell Ponting
Pietersen Hussey
Shah Voges/Cosgrove/Clarke
Bopara Watson
Flintoff Hartley/Paine
Prior Lee
Broad Warne (Cullen)
Tremlett Hilfenhaus
Panesar Tait

It's funny how some commentators confuse *reasons* with *excuses*. I think most England fans will be aware of some of the _reasons_ why the England team have been beaten so easily and quickly this time.

On the one hand, Australia have been able to select their strongest team (yet again).

On the other hand, England have not been able to select their strongest team; with the genius-captaincy of Vaughan and the very good bowling of Simon Jones being particularly missed. This is a very significant reason since these two players feature as perhaps first and second in the explanations for how England won the Ashes in 2005. If Australia lost their first and second most important players to injury (say, Ponting and Warne) this would be regarded as a significant *reason* for their impaired performance, not an 'excuse'.

But, on top of this, England had further reason for playing below par in that their selection from among the available players was demonstrably sub-optimal.

A third reason for England's poorer-than-hoped for perfomance is that Strauss would have been a better captain than Flintoff, as everybody knows in their hearts (even Flintoff's supporters as Captain never stop mentioning his *load* - but Flintoff asked for, was offered and accepted this load, so we should not sympathize with him when he has kept a better captain out of the job).

So there are three *reasons* why England have played sub-optimally. Australia have no such reasons for sub-optimal perfomance: all their key players are fit and available, they have picked the best players from this pool, and they have their best captain (probably - I'm not so sure about this last one).

If England had not suffered this triple disadvantage of injury/ selection/ captaincy, I think they could likely have drawn the series; if they had suffered only two, I think the series would still be alive, although Australia would probably have won in the last Test.

i'm from the west indies (Guyana) and just for the records, the aussies are my favourite team.... the aussies are just the best no matter what...they keep producing young stars all the time ( clark, hussey, tait, clarke, haddin) etc... do you think its gonna matter in 2009.. i think its gonna be the same drama all over again England vs The best in the world.. Aus

I was watching the post mortem of Englands defeat on sky sports this morning. David Graveney the chairman of selectors was in the studio to answer his questions. Bob willis and the presenter asked him some good questions that were on the minds of every english cricket fan and raised some good points. Graveneys answers were simply pathetic. What a joke. He went red dn't stop looking down at the ground because of shame and looked under great stress as he forcefully tried to defend himself and Fletcher. Charles Colville said that Fletcher was sticking 2 fingers up at Graveney by selecting his own team as soon as he landed in Australia. Graveney responded by saying he supported Fletcher so Charles asked "but does Fletcher respect you?" Graveney paused for a moment and said "I think so" I felt sorry for the man, it was a pathetic performance, I don't know if he is forced to spew all this fake rubbish or he wants to, but it cannot be a healthy way of iving. Well done to Aussies, England got what they deserved. Sad day for cricket, not jut english cricket, if England regained the ashes, it would have been a great thing for cricket. What is even sadder is that England didn't fail through lack of ability. It was a result of poor management. Something that is now expected from the WICB, PCB and BCCI but you would thought the ECB would be more professional.

After the disappointment, it's not time to despair. Cook, Bell, Collingwood, Pietersen, Flintoff, Hoggard and Panesar all did as well (or almost as well) as could have been hoped for in the tough circumstances. Strauss was often unlucky and Harmison was obviously mishandled and was improving all the time. Only Anderson, Giles and Jones were clear minuses (as was Mahmood). The Australians had no injuries; we had crippling ones. Yes, there were mistakes but the prospects for the next series must be good with a group of young players, including Broad, finding their feet. It's just a huge disappointment England couldn't have made it last more than three games.

I totally agree with Bruce. If the aussies had the long term injurys that plague England they wouldn't be the world champs that they are. Missing our top players over the past year(s) and still winning most of Tests shows a great team. England will become the new Australia when the old farts die of old age or retire( whatever comes first). Also 2005 was a great series. England should have one 4-1 except for the rain and we didn't need to win the fifth test. Our team has great youngsters in Cook, Bell and Monty and can match up against any in the world. England will be the team of the decade 2010-2020.

The better team won. That's it. The only Pom that could walk into the aussie team is the Ego. He is world class but the rest...blah. They believed in their own hype and pride comes before a fall.
I am enjoying the mauling very much thank you. Now boofhead Botham can eat his words and Duncan Fletcher can get off our island - loser.

just as an aside re kevin petersen
although i instinctively don't like arrogant people, a lot of great people of any pursuit (sport, business, politics etc) come across as arrogant as they need great self belief to get to the top, and haven't been properly brought up to disguise that

re his batting with the tail - steve waugh used to do the same thing, and was often praised for showing faith in his batting partners, thereby building their self belief and improving their batting, except when they failed, then he copped the selfish tag, although i can't think of a less selfish cricketer
so perhaps KP is trying the same thing, after all hitting the ball to a space where you can get a single and not running is tantamount to saying to the other batsman that they are so bad, they really shouldn't have bothered padding up, and after all even mcgrath has a test 50 (and dizzy a 200)

ps - if you're good enough you're old enough
should read - if you're good enough, you're young enough - mcgrath - more wickets than any of the english bowlers, at a respectable 25 average

With the exception of the relatively untried Watson, Australia fielded the team they wanted. Watson's ommision left the way open for Clarke, a piece of serendipity from the cricketing gods.

Had Englad had trescothick, Vaughan and SIMON Jones (the one worth his place) and picked Panesar, well, Australia would probably still have won BUT...
If Australia had to be without Ponting and Warne in this series - they would have lost all three tests, regardless of who England put out.

Since the first innings Mcgrath has got out tired century makers and tail enders, Brett Lee has been the fodder he usually is against England.

Without Ponting and Warne Australia will lose - what's telling here is that a year ago I'd have added McGrath to that list, but on the performances so far - he lives on in name alone.

Lets have Broad and Vaughan in for the next test for Mahmood and Harmison.

and go home 3-2 down. (and for flips sake get Troy Cooley back asap = what the hell is the matter with Englands management ?)

Clarker

Thanks for a great column Tim, I've quite enjoyed it and it gives us Aussies a bit of a different view, but I think you need to stop with the old jibes - it doesn't matter any more. It doesn't matter that McGrath and Warne aren't (statistically) as good as Clark, it doesn't matter that Ponting, Hussey and Clarke have scored a lot of runs, it doesn't even really matter that Warne has been over bowled - but it may come Sydney - what matters is that England regroup quickly and well, because with all those statistics, you've been beaten by the core of the 2009 Ashes campaign, and I would think that would be quite scary - McGrath, Langer and probably Warne will not be there, but Clark and Jaques will be, and you should thank your lucky stars you didn't have to face Tait - I don't think it's going to get much better than this, so Englang must get hungrier.

This isnt the death of English cricket, Australia havnt lost a series here for well over a decade....We have had the greatest bowing combination that have ever played the game in Warne and Mcgrath...But tim is right, these guy's are on the wrong side of 30 for cricketers..They are still the greatest but their time is limited now. One can put money that alot of them wont be around next time around, It will be the end of an era and Australian cricket wont be as potent without the Warne Mcgrath combination..I hear talk of warne playing till he's 40+ Yes that's a real possibility but we will have to wait and see, his paunch is getting bigger by the week, and to last five days in a modern test match you have to be super fit and still have the willingness to bowl alot of overs..England have had alot of problems, selection, injury, yada yada yada...The thing is Australia is the new India (even the pitches are even going that way).A bloody hard place to win a test match. This isnt a sad day for cricket, its a lesson, if you want to come here and challenge you have to be absolutly ontop of your game, that includes the coach and the selection panel...No excuses for England they came here unprepared for the rigours of an Australian summer and have so far been outdone, however one gets the feeling that this young team has a very bright future with the likes of Panesar, Bell and Cook, these guys really look the goods........

WHAT IS SO GOOD IS THAT THEY DID NOT REPEAT THEIR MISTAKES OF 2005. THEY NEVER ALLOWED FREE SCORING, THEY DID NOT DROP CRUCIAL CATCHES, AND POOR SELCTION POLICIES AND INJURY LIST OF ENGLAND MADE IT LOT EASIER FOR THEM. BUT THEY ARE NO WHERE NEAR AS GOOD AS THEY WERE UNDER STEVE WAUGH. THEY ARE TOO OLD TO HANDLE FULL STRENGTH ENGLISH SIDE, BUT WHAT IS DONE IS DONE.

This is self-evidently the last hoorah of a great Australian side. Since being beaten by a superior side in 2005, they have been unrelenting, winning 11 and drawing one of 12 intervening Tests. Here, England have had many hours where they've been in (relative) control, but, after messing around for the last 15 months, they've been unable to sustain the necessary intensity of performance. The three second innings performances are instructive ... England has lost 30 for 849 in 295 overs. Australia has lost 10 for 897 in 190 overs. Always wise to remember the old Martina Navratilova line : It's not how good I am when I'm at my best that matters, it's how good I am when things aren't going for me... And even wiser for England to gift Warnie 14 wickets in the next two Tests so he doesn't have the temptation to return to nab his 200th English victim in 2009.

It is an ideal time for Aussies to blood their young colts and giving some rest to some(many???) of the older guys.

England has always been a "sissy" touring team, complaining about all and sundry things, half a dozen guys getting injured,giving lame excuses for failure, some guys chickening out with mysterious illnesses and reasons.

England can play their best cricket if and only if it is Apr-July of any calendar year, when they are at home.

It is high time they came roaring back even it is a dead rubber.

I think those of my fellow Aussies who depict a perpetual hold on the Ashes are under 30. Their recall of pre-1989 Ashes cricket is sketchy at best and they don't understand the cyclical nature of cricket dominance.

The English set-up is the best they've had, probably ever but certainly in the modern era.

They have fifteen test-quality players and better depth than they've had for a long time. In Pietersen they have a potential superstar (he'll be better if he realises writing an autobiography after 15 tests is a little premature), in Panesar a talisman.

Australians of some vintage know the gift they've had since the Warne/McGrath era began. Soon after they began bowling together we knocked off the Windies to be proclaimed the world's best team.

When they're gone, I think we'll lose that mantle. Bowlers of that ilk, in partnership, are at best a once in a generation combination.

Australia won't slide far, though - we still have comfortably the world's best batting side. And have had for fifteen years (the Indians post-Gavaskar never had openers of the Australians' quality). And the young bowlers coming through will prove themselves test-quality once given a chance. But I don't see a Warne or McGrath amongst them, so we may have to settle for simply being "one of the best" teams instead of the indisputable position we've held for ten years now.

The continual focus by the english on the age of the Australian team is becoming tiresome, especially now, given the current results of the series. I'd rather have a winning team that some people (with a certain agenda and bias) want to write off as being too old, than have a group of young losers. Surely the idea is to pick your best team (fletcher is still coming to grips with this concept), so if your best player is 22 or 38, what difference does it make? The 22 year old obviously has more time left in the game than the 38 year old, but I fail to see what relevance that has to current performances.

And Bruce G Charlton, keep clutching at straws.
'Australia have been able to select their strongest team (yet again)'
Well, I think Shane Watson was to be picked in our strongest team but was unavailable due to injury.
It may also surprise Mr Charlton to learn that Glen McGrath did not play in the two tests Australia lost in 2005. This was not accepted as a *reason*, let alone an excuse, by the english media and fans, for Australia's loss, so don't expect anyone to be sympathetic towards england now. Take the loss like a man and stop your bleating.

My 2009 line-ups would have to be:
England
1. Strauss
2. Cook
3. Bell
4.Pietersen
5.Collingwood
6.Flintoff
7. Hopefully we get another Alec Stewart, if not though Read
8.Monty
9.Hoggard
10.S.Jones
11.Harmison

The aussies will be a bit weaker then they are now. They'll look something like this

1.Jaques
2.Rogers
3.Ponting
4.Hussey
5.Clarke
6.Watson
7.Haddin
8.Warne (i think he will still be there) If not Cullen
9.Lee
10.Clark
11.????

For 11 the choices would be : Hilfenhaus, Johnson, Tait, Gillespie (he took 10 for south aus the other day)and Dorey

This ashes England played good cricket at times. In the end 1 hour at Adelaide killed us. Giles dropping Ponting was probably the defining moment, if that had been taken Australia surely would'nt have won. Australia played brilliantly. They played so well. Full credit to them. England would have beaten alot of sides with the cricket they played. Now for 2009, and look out Aussies.

oh forgot to mention that without pietersen England would have lost 100x more convincingly. I would get off his back cause he tried as hard as anyone.

Australia would have won the Ashes in England had there not been the cricket ball incident in game 2. What England showed in the last series was that it's going to be tougher to beat them at home than usual, but what this series has shown is that England still have no idea on how to win in Australia. I just find it hard to believe that everyone was saying that they were focussed on winning the Ashes, hence their shocking one-day form. And now England have made dumb decisions and have dropped players who were in form and then bringing them back and not performing as well. With the Ashes gone, I think they should experiment with the team a bit more and see what they can come up with. Strauss(c), Cook, Joyce, Pieterson, Bell, Flintoff, Dalrymple, Read, Panesar, Broad, Hoggard. They can't go any worse then what they have done. Oh, and give Flintoff the role of coach too just so he's doing three things at once still.

Dan - you're a tool if you think Pietersen's book is ridiculous after 21 tests. George Headley played 21 tests and will go down forever as "Black Bradman" so the number is irrelevant. Secondly, Symonds has played 11, done absolutely nothing, and has a book. Factor in that of all players in the last 15 years to face Australia in 5 or more tests, he has one of the best records of the lot. Oh, and if he stayed in South Africa, he'd probably have 60 tests under his belt, but he has a conscience and made a gutsy decision to leave based on his beliefs. So bag him all you want - the bottom line is he has become one of a handful of players that genuinely has it over Australia, and at his current rate could well finish with 10,000 test runs. Can't see Symonds achieving that. Oh, and on top of all that, how the hell can you bag a guy for not wanting to get out? If nothing else, he can walk away from the three tests so far and say that the Aussie bowlers have only cracked him three times. He has it all over them.

Bruce G Charlton, get a grip mate! They are excuses - otherwise you are saying that England merely turned up to make numbers. If the 'reasons' for the loss were so obvious in Vaughn and Jones (whose swing would have been far less effective Down Under), are the touring party here for a holiday?

The only person who can feel hard done by in the England camp is Andrew Strauss. Not only should he have been captain (face it guys, Freddy is never going to be a thinking captain) but he has been on the end of some appalling decisions.

Cook is one for the future, and the century at the WACA helped atone for the earlier failures. Bell has also matured in this series.

KP - you expect a South African to give his all for England? I don't care what anyone says, his move to Old Blighty was based solely on his ego needing to be recognised. He is a fantastic talent and whilst I'm sure SA miss him, he did you no favours on the 5th day in Perth. Collingwood has also been a fighter, but let the team down in Adelaide with a selfish performance also.

Read has to keep - end of story. Geraint Jones is an average keeper, and unless you have the batting ability of a Dhoni/Gilchrist, go with the better gloveman every time.

Stating that Australia would be nothing without Warne and McGrath is a cop-out - and allows the Aussies to say that they would have won the 2005 Ashes with McGrath. For a brief run-down of the England attack;

Monty - hero for the future. I was ashamed to see that he had been racially abused in a tour match and I hope the same hasn't happened in Perth. I think he is great for the game and a real character - kind of like Phil Tufnell but minus the idiot whinger factor. Hoggard and Flintoff have tried hard but the penetration has not been there. Anderson and Mahmood have been ineffective but they are bowlers for the future. Giles, catch the next plane home with Jones and Fletcher - your inclusion smacks of the 'old boys club' and is insulting to everyone. Did they consider that his bowling average against Australia of over 50 would negate any runs he might get?

Why the rant? You've let me down England! What could have been an excellent series has petered out into an Aussie rampage.

It's a tremendous relief to have the Ashes back. First time Ricky has smiled in 15 months!
I don't think England have to make too many changes - they are a good side, just a little fine tuning, but they should sort out the captaincy issue quickly.
Thank goodness for Ashes rivalry! This is one of, if not the, longest running international sporting competitions. Despite the EU, globalisation, Fletcher or any other evil you'd like to name, isn't it marvellous that we can celebrate Test Cricket so passionately in 2006?
I still think there should be 3 Tasmanians in the team to retain the Urn in 2009.

As an Aussie through and through, I am disappointed in a way that the series is over so early. Like myself most Aussies love a good stoush right through to the end.

However, I can't fathom some of the English supporters comments/excuses for the early result... Saying Australia is an ageing side really does make your team look even worse! Blaming the coach (although probably justified to some extent) and selectors doesn't really cut it either. The responsibility lies wholely and squarely with the players at the end of the day. Their inability to perform at their best (and lets get one thing straight - they have some fantastic talent) can only be the fault OF the players!

And talking about how well we would do without McGrath, has everyone forgotten about the Champions Trophy - a certain Mitchell Johnson stood tall there while McGrath found his feet again. And without Warne? McGill sits in the wings as always and there is plenty of young talent emerging in our domestic scene - lets not also forget M. Clarke's 6 for on the subcontinent a little while back or how far Symonds turned the ball at the WACA! Not fulltime spinners I know, but handy nontheless.

Hopefully the Englishmen will find their feet for the remainder of the series, and be able to show their supporters and the Australian public just how good they can be and not through in the towel and come up with more excuses.

England's Ashes summary so far:

Outplayed - Outsmarted - Outclassed.

No excuses.

It's a tremendous relief to have the Ashes back. First time Ricky has smiled in 15 months!
I don't think England have to make too many changes - they are a good side, just a little fine tuning, but they should sort out the captaincy issue quickly.
Thank goodness for Ashes rivalry! This is one of, if not the, longest running international sporting competitions. Despite the EU, globalisation, Fletcher or any other evil you'd like to name, isn't it marvellous that we can celebrate Test Cricket so passionately in 2006?
I still think there should be 3 Tasmanians in the team to retain the Urn in 2009.

Ralph, You show your ignorance. To say that Australia is nothing without Warne and McGrath is just wrong. Which team holds the record for test wins on the trot? Australia. During the "streak", were both Warne and McGrath in the team? Answer - No! Warne suspended and McGrath injured. Simple fact.... Any of the Australian Shield teams would give the current English side a hiding to nothing. England won the ashes by the barest of margins and have lost them emphatically. Australia will never again suffer with the simultaneous retirement of senior players the way they did when Greg Chappell, Rod Marsh and Dennis Lillee retired in the early 80's.

Santa must be an Aussie.

I'm going to have a Verry Merry Christmas!

Any gamne of cricket features 11 players against 11 opponents. Age has nothing to do with events that have occurred in this series. Was Warnie any less determined, focussed and excitable that Monty Panesar- hardly! It is a good example where statistics- ages, averages, etc- tell a small part of the tale. Warne's bowling has consistently threatened or pressured the English batsment by drying up runs. McGrath 6/50 in the first test and wickets in almost every innings.

Enough of the whingeing about injuries, too! If McGrath wasn't injured on the morning of a test, Australia would never have lost the Ashes in the first place.

The simple facts are that Australia has played superior cricket- batted far better than England, bowled consistently better, fielded brilliantly (just ask G Jones) and produced the moments of intangible greatness that turn a series or a test.

Are England any good as a TEAM? Not really. A few very talented individuals with a large number of journeymen cricketers. Monty Panesar is a good prospect, but hardly the third best spinner in the world- maybe one day...

I dare the England management to make a few changes to test their other squad members. Mind you, Mahmood would have really appreciated the long spells and opportunity to work himself into the Test match. Perhaps he was picked for his batting.......

What it comes down to is this - if you put 10 randomly picked Aussies and 10 randomly picked Pommies in a ring and said, fight for your lives until 10 men are left standing - 8 of the 10 left will be Aussies.

Another difference is in the heart - when a Pommy cricketer is good, the Australian public will take their hats off and show them nothing but respect - but look at for instance what Tim de Lisle writes - it's ungracious, mean spirited and begrudging. Class will always come through and in truth it doesn't matter if you lose on the park, what matters is if you're a loser in life.'

Your assessment of Pietersen, another fighting, respect earning half-century, typifies just how skewed your view is.

Tim R: typifies the English response to a resounding defeat....by talking it up!! It seems to be all the English are really good at. Talking a great game.

Simply put, England did not have what it took to beat Australia at home....even without the injuries he was bleating on about. Who cares (other than an Englishperson) about Andrew Strauss' bad luck?! I bet those same people didn't moan about poor old Damien Martyn's continual bad (Steve Bucknor) luck last year. That's sport...you get bad luck & injuries (remember G. McGrath before the 2nd test last year...very pivotal moment in the series).

England must start their rebuilding all over again. England have a very divided team regardless of how it is being downplayed by the ECB. There are major senior player divisions within that team (think previous vice captain & previous captain)....all will be revealed I'm sure by Fleet St. in time. Coupled with major long-term injuries to significant players. It is very unlikely they will ever have the same impact again. Also, Flintoff is still visibly limping in the field, i.e. how much extended aggravation can his ankle take in the name of pride? Then you have the iron hand of Fletcher to contend with. English cricket has no transparency in its selection processes whatsoever. England, you will continue to struggle to compete with Australia for a good while yet. In the modern age of cricket how can a team hope to be a dominant force, yet completely forgo one form of the game? Australia's one day tactics came to the fore in Adelaide, while England could not cope or compete.

To all those English pre-Ashes talkers of a renaissance in English cricket & fighting the Aussies with fire & youth, your humble pie is baked & ready to serve. Enjoy a double helping.

Well done Punter & the boys. Congratulations Marto on a fantastic career.

Tim when the majority of the bloggers find more reason and sense in a roughly two-paragraph post from a guy named Jordan than you, you know your journalistic abilities are on the decline.

Over and over you’ve been accused of bias and where there’s smoke there is fire. Unless everyone who reads your blogs are actually wrong and you’re right. How many times have you had to defend yourself so far? Come out of the closet mate. The Barmy Army guys on Ashes Banter have a more impartial view than you.

Enjoy the humble pie tim! And god, i hope in 2009 a YOUNG australian team demolish England in exactly the same fashion they have here so you will quit trodding out the 'too old' line.

First and foremost congratulations must go to Australia for a ruthless performance. However, it cannot be overlooked that England have not been at full strength and impeded, admittedly by their own management, by poor selection. During the Ashes series of 2005 Vaughan as captain was one of the most influential players along with Simon Jones and Marcus Trescothick, other absentees from this present tour. Therefore, the current results do not reflect what the 2005 Ashes did where, for the majority of tests, England and Australia were at full strength. If we were to take an opener (e.g. Langer), the captain (Ponting) and first change bowler (Clark) from Australia, as has been the case for England, results may have been somewhat different. Then take into account that England have deprived themselves of their best spinner for the first two tests and things look decidedly different. I am in no way suggesting that Australia do not deserve their victory as they can only beat the team put out by their opponents but I am just suggesting things may have been different and that what should have been a tight contest between two closely matched sides has now turned into a drubbing. England and Australia at full strength are two evenly matched sides (Warne apart) it's just a shame that what should have been a great series has turned into a damp squib.

Anyone looking forward to a clean sweep ? As far as I know its only been done twice before. I hope the Aussies dont take their foot off England's throat and play with the same intensity in the last two !

Very good point about Pietersen's batting. I'm a big fan of his batting but he needs to do some work between his ears. He doesn't seem to have a clue when it comes to batting with the tail. Either that or he was simply being selfish and playing for a not-out to increase his personal average. I was definitely seeing shades of Jacques Kallis in his batting on Monday.

For a man who claims to prefer the No.5 spot, he takes a lot of singles off the first ball of an over, exposing the lesser batsmen to the next 5 balls. Harmison and Panesar both perished in this fashion in the second innings, and I have vague recollections of Pietersen being equally irresponsible in the first as well.

If you compare the way Hussey and Pietersen manage their respective tail orders, the difference is very clear.

I agree with Hasan that the 2005 series was a dip in the graph of this Australian side that has been so strong for so long. But this was caused by a side that was on the rise at the time, had nothing to lose and backed themselves all the way. Perhaps after that they had reached their pinnacle, and as such they're performances have not amtched that of 2005.

This result is great for the Australian captain. It is unfortunante that Pontings great time as captain has so far been overshadowed by the fact he was the captain that lost the Ashes. With the exception of Ashes 05 and the Final Frontier win in India 04, Punter has swept every series, with the draw in Perth last year his only other blot. I have no doubt that Australia can win 5-0, and I hope they do to let Punter get the recognition he deserves as skipper.

Poor planning and man management has played a big part in Englands poor performance. I agree that it would not have changed the result, but may have made them more competitive. We have already spoken about selection issues such as Jones/Read and Giles/Panesar. Just quickly - I hope the Queen of Spain (Mrs Giles for those not in the know) gets well soon. I think the use of Mahmood in this match did nothing for his confidence apart from destroy it. When your team bowls so many overs and you hardly get a bowl, all you can think is that they must have no confidence in you being able to do the job.

Australia have thumbed their noses at all their critics at the start of the series. It doesnt matter how old you are, all that matters is how good you are, and so far Australia have shown they are heads and shoulders above.

As for a hypothetical 2009 team, here we go:

Cosgrove
Jaques
Ponting
M.Hussey
Clark
Watson
Haddin
White(provided Warney has retired!)
Lee
Clark
Bracken

Other members of the touring squad will be: Tait, Johnston, Voges, Ronchi, D.Hussey, Cullen.

Sorry to whack in two posts one after the other - just wanted to say something else. Somebody posted earlier about Flintoff (I think) bowling his heart out when it was too late. I think that's half the problem with the English team - showing grit when their backs are against the wall and the odds are overwhelming. Kinda like that guy in the poem holding the bridge on his own (you Brits know who I mean - it's one of your poems!). England on occasion duing this series were magnificent - Hoggard all series, Cook on Day 4 Test 3, Collingwood in Adelaide, Bell, Panesar (when DF finbally gave him a go) and especially Pieterson (although I tend to agree with some posts about the way he batted with the tail yesterday). But why, oh why is it when all seems lost? The English need to put it out there when there is something to lose - be brave - not tragically heroic. I think Trevor Bailey for England had quite a reputation for that sort of thing in the 1950s. You guys have GOT talent - for cricket's sake, take a risk and stick your neck out - you might be surprised just how good you are. Don't get me wrong - I'm delighted with the result of this series as a proud Aussie - mainly because of the graciouslessness (was that a word?) of the English press in victory, but the bottom line is that I am a cricket lover and I want to see Ashes cricket at its best - kinda like 2005.

England were beaten by the better team. Period.

Of England’s specialist bowlers (Giles inclusive, 'bowlers' is being stretched a little here), the lowest economy rate was 3.18, the highest peaking at 5.11. Australia’s bowlers had only one bowler with an economy higher than 3 (Brett Lee 3.62, expectedly)

Of England’s Batsman, 3 centuries, 8 half Cs, versus Australia’s 7 and 10. Interestingly, both teams faced roughly the same amount of overs( Aus 588, England 581). Simply put, Australia’s batting were superior, applying themselves and scoring more runs, at a faster rate. England's bowlers could not stem the run flow, and they're bowlers never looked like getting 20 wickets. Hoggard and Panesar aside, Englands bowlers are not pulling their weight. Harmison is a liability, low on confidence, and his commitment is questionable at times. And Sajid who?

Anyway, my 2 cents. I’m predicting 4-1, England certainly have showed in their Perth 2nd innings they can apply themselves.

For England to win everything had to go right and it hasn't.England don't have the depth and many of their best players are either injured or have been. Most of the Australian team hadn't played for 6 months. Six months of training and planning revenge, with the whole nation baying for blood. England are a good team, while Australia are a great team.

right now, im feeling like suing the ECB, but anyway i have learnt a valuable lesson POMS won't get any better; all that expectations and all that whatever that was has now died with this series. 5-0 it is no about ....and well i guess its our destiny (cricketing) to get hammered by the aussies (here i being an indian talking for all the mortals of cricketing world, aussies excluded deservedly so ).

Well, i must say im a little dissapointed. For all the talk, for all the promise we have being left with a shambolic display by England. I'm not sure if its fair to say this, but englands pursuit of Test Glory and failures at one day cricket are really starting to take its toll. Attitudes from the ICC Trophy have carried on it seems. There has being no intensity in their cricket. KP and Hoggard have played hard and well. Flintoff prooved that giving your allrounder all the jobs doesnt quite pay off, no matter how inspirational he is. England have paid for neglecting one half of the cricket road show. Australia, like they have since the start of the Super Series against the world 11, showed the strengh, and believe that a team needs to succeed. Having great players goes along way to help a team towards victory, however the team is greater. The past 15months have shown that the Aussies got the slap they needed, and responded. It also showed that Englands best cricket was before 2005, and it needs to be remembered why they won 6 test series in a row.

As for 2009. As much as i love the aussie team right now, father time will start knocking on the door, even if he hasnt yet. The greatest duty that many of these great players can perform is to retire some time before the end of the 07/08 season. Hayden, Langer, Mcgrath, Gilchrist, Warne. All truely great players who deserve to leave the international side of the sport while they are still on top. Jaques, Rogers, Cosgrove, Birt, Haddin, Paine, White, Cullen, Bailey, Tait, McDonald, Braken, Henriques, the list goes on. These guys will be playing in ODI and Test in the near future, and many of them are ready. With Ponting, Clarke, Hussey, Clark, Lee, and im guessing watson waiting for new breed to join them, im excited for the future of aussie cricket. As should we all. 2009 will be a cracker, 2 young teams going at it. Exciting Stuff. Oh and Tim, stop being soo negative and biased, its soo terribly english of you to do so.

I must say I find it completely inexplicable that Geraint Jones is one of a "senior players' group" that is consulted regarding team selections. The guy - even if you think he should be in the team - is clearly there by his fingernails, and as such it is difficult to see how you can invite his input ... Still, it's difficult to tell internal dynamics from the outside.

Regardless, I have been very annoyed, from the outset, that England have had Vaughan and Jones out injured. Precisely because it now provides the opportunity for a whole raft of "if only"s. Well, how's this? "If only Vaughan and Jones had been around to experience the 5-0 drubbing about to be handed out to the current England squad."

Make no mistake, if all of England's unavailables had been in the series from the first Test, they'd still have gone down 5-0. Ponting is a man possessed.

I'm keenly looking forward to the English post-mortem at the end of the series. If all 'what ifs' are still being trotted out when the scoreline is 5-0, as I suspect they will be, old Queenie should be lining up to give you all MDE's (Most Delusional Englishmen). Seriously, when Chelsea whoop Sheffield United 5-0, do the SU fans all go about saying, 'Ooh, we picked the wrong team, and gosh, weren't we unlucky with injuries,' or do they just tend to accept that they were beaten by a team with more talent in its collective little toenail than their own mob put together? We all admire the way the Barmy Army support their team when they're out on the pitch, but to be taken seriously in post-match analysis you need to demonstrate at least a passing interest in realism.

People like Ralph can't have their cake and eat it too.

OK - lets take Flintoff & Jones out of the 2005 England team. How many tests would YOU have won?

You might want to believe that Australia can't possibly find a quality spinner for 20 years after Warne, because that's the way you want the world to work. Unfortunately for you it doesn't work like that. Australia may or may not fins another top quality spinner - we will just have to wait and see. However, I do remember thinking 'we just have to get past Marshall & Garner & then we will beat the Windies'. Well, guess what - along came Ambrose & Walsh!

It is 2.5 years until the next Ashes. If we go back 2.5 years from the Ball of the Century in mid-1993, we arrive at 1990-91. Any promising leggies on the scene in Australia? NO!. Go forward 12 months to 1991-92. Some fat kid makes his test debut and gets smashed all over the place by Ravi Shastri. Anyone afraid of this kid? NO! Go forward another 12 months to 1992-93. Slimmer kid with unimpressive trst record gets a run against the West Indies. Are they afraid of him? NO! Richie Richardson goes so far as to suggest that he is one dimensional aand poses no threat...

Funny some of the abuse Tim has copped from angry Aussies on this one - I had to re-read his article to see what set them off.Still none the wiser. I didn't see any disrespect for the Aussies at all, rather the reverse.
Yes he mentions the age thing - kind of hard to ignore as it is a fact!But goes on to emphasise "still much too good". I think that is called telling it like it is.

By the way I congratulate Australia and do not want to make excuses - after all injuries etc are part of the game. But perhaps some of the more rabid Pommy bashers might care to contemplate how this series would have gone if Vaughan Jones and Trescothick had all turned up fit and ready to play, while Australia had had to replace say Ponting Warne and Langer before the first match......

I hope both teams have all their best players on deck for 2009 and look forward to watching it.Whoever wins.

i suppose as Poms we're all trying to figure out where it all went wrong, not just whingeing!
The fact of the matter is we were completely outplayed by a far superior team. we have been bemoaning the loss of a couple of players, and bad selection policy, which hasn't helped, but surely this shows a basic lack of bowling talent on the english county circuit? Harmison, Mahmood and Anderson can bowl quickly, and on a good day, with helpful conditions they can be intimidating and get wickets, but where are our bowlers who can put the ball on the spot (or "in the channel")95% of the time?
Hugo says: Of England’s specialist bowlers (Giles inclusive, 'bowlers' is being stretched a little here), the lowest economy rate was 3.18, the highest peaking at 5.11. Australia’s bowlers had only one bowler with an economy higher than 3 (Brett Lee 3.62, expectedly)
This is where England must focus their attention:
only Warne can convince himself that he can take a wicket with every ball he bowls (and deservedly so)otherwise as medium/fast bowlers a lot of the time you have to wait for batsmen to get themselves out by bowling a tight line and length.
The rest of the team are fantastic and i think they will be hard to beat in the future, especially with 2 or 3 quality seamers alongside Flintoff.
I'm not going to get into the 'old' debate,and what ifs, because as yet there is no real proof - we've just been whipped... well played the Aussies!
I just hope we whip yours in the next 2 tests...

The australians were very hurt when they lost the ashes.England had to be with their full side playing at the top of their game to have any chance of retaining the ashes.It did not happen.key players missing & captain missing.still England are a very good test team.ex-players criticizing the defeat,unfounded & uncalled for.o.k.i give them that monty should haver played.get off duncan fletchers back.He has got England where they are now.to be 2nd to the aussies is no mean feat.They are the best & like i said before you need to be at the top of your game to beat them.

Uncle Fester, I was very careful not to say that Australia were 'nothing' without McGrath and Warne. I said that Australia would merely have been a good team without them over the last 10 years, with very good batsmen but average bowling.

I don't see how that can be disputed - think back to 1997 Ashes, England 1-0 up and having thrashed Australia in the one-day series. Who turns the tide at Lord's: McGrath with a 8-for. The only time Australia have been challenged at home in recent years: against India when McGrath and Warne were injured. Think of the third seamers Australia used on a regular basis: Reiffel, Kasprowicz, Bichel. None of those players are matchwinners. People like Colin Miller got picked.

Finally, I don't know why you said that neither McGrath nor Warne had a part in the 18 consecutive wins, or whatever it was - a random check reveals that in the series against the West Indies in 2001-02, which I'm pretty sure was part of that trot, McGrath took a 10-for in the first game!

Tim de Lisle obviously fails to understand that the Australian cricket team walk this earth as gods, that Warne, McGrath et al are immortals who will NEVER retire, that whereas England’s 2005 Ashes victory resulted from Australia’s injuries, poor form, bad luck and poor selections the current series represents the unfolding of a divine plan which is utterly beyond reproach. Mr de Lisle's comments like ‘Australia have won the Ashes at speed, in style and quite deservedly’ or ‘They have played much the better cricket’ now stand exposed on this message-board for their pathetic anti-Aussie bias. I have seen with my own eyes the great Shane Warne turning water in Fosters, and I think there’s every chance of Australia winning this series 8-0 or maybe even 9-0.

Not only have the Aussies won the ashes, Aussie journalists seem to be thrashing the English at cricket writing as well.
To see this , you just have to compare the quality of Gideon Haigh with the blatantly anglocentric prose of Tim De Lisle and aimless meanderings of the increasingly trivial Andrew Miller who seems to be writing a travel journal rather than a cricket column ( and not a very good one at that). Memo to Miller - There are plenty of writers who have cornered that niche mate !
And Tim, write about something new and interesting. This 'aussies are too old' angle has been done to death. Yes they may be but it has been said about 3000 times before so please find something new to foam about - things are more interesting that way.

The team average stats tell the story really. Englands batters have done as well as last time, on the one hand against a better attack (ie with S Clark and McGrath), on the other on flatter tracks. So no real change in quality overall, which makes sense when you look at individuals (Bell is better than last time, as is Collingwood; Flintoff and Jones are out of form; we've lost Vaughan and Tresco; and the tail's v.long without S Jones).

Our bowlers have failed, which again makes sense (Harmison out of form, Flintoff not fully fit, and not on fire like '05, no S Jones, the new seamers are not Test class yet, and Panesar wasn't used enough).

It's no good blaming Fletcher for all the "selection" issues (after all, no-one was claiming GJ was more likely to fail with the bat than Read before the series, and didn't the rumours suggest DF wanted Panesar in for Adelaide?), and the scheduling is definitely not his fault. Getting rid of him would really be cutting off our nose to spite our face. The lesson learned is to maybe have some more sense around who gets involved with selection on tour (remember Fletcher is first and foremost a coach, not a selector/manager).

The positives for England's future, and our prospects of thrashing WI and India in the Summer, are massive:

1. Hopefully Simon Jones will recover fully to fill the gap at no.8 / 3rd seamer. We’ve really missed him.
2. With Vaughan back, and the rise of Bell, Cook and Collie, our depth of Test-class batting will be much better than in '05
3. Monty
4. A fitter Flintoff
5. Broad, Tremlett, Mahmood, Dalrymple all showing big potential
6. The 19-year old wicketkeeper-batsman at the Academy who bats at 4, hits boundaries for fun and stands up to Broad, Tremlett and Mahmood (OK I made that up)

These are all signs that, overall, we should be a better side in 07 than we were in 05, let alone 06. That's good, right?

It’s a shame to hear so many whining/outraged/reactionary/football-fan style comments at the moment. The fact is we've been comprehensively beaten (but not humiliated) with a young, slightly understrength side against a fantastic side containing 4 or 5 all-time greats. Not the end of the world, and lets not insult the other quality Test sides out there who would love our (deserved) 2nd spot in the rankings.

Australia are still the top boys by far, and may be for a year or so longer. It's an honour to be 2nd best to them for now, and when the big 3 hang up their boots, we’ll see what happens.

This is about my sixth or seventh post & I know I won't get posted again, but it's like I said at the beginning:
The English team are not as good as they are made out to be.

As an Aussie, I didn't mind losing the Ashes in England. You played well & beat us. Well done, good on you, at last it's interesting & some fantastic sport played.

Th question is - what did both teams learn from the experience?

You just witnessed it!!!
Paul

Interesting to note in the 2005 series, Australia just lost and had similar problems to what England have experienced in this series. The only difference is that in this series, England have been slaughtered. That sort of indicates that given the best players to pick from, and no poor umpiring decisions, Australia would win in a canter. Australia has been spoiled with McGrath and Warne, but next time around in 2009, they'll just have to play a full 5 days to win instead of the 4 they usually take to beat England.

This is completely unrelated, but I was wondering if anyone else noticed how bad the light was when Cook was out to McGrath on Sunday night? Apparently Ponting had just taken off Lee from the other end for that reason. I think Cookie was desperately unlucky there. Looks like if there had been more overs remaining in the day he would probably have been offered the light.

The Australian dominance of world cricket will not last peter, and my other fellow Aussies that think it will just a matter of us having to turn up to win...
I remember the Windies when the young Lara made his 270 odd in Australia on debut. I thought that the talent of the Windies would never run out, and they would be ontop for ever...We all know what happend when two of their great bowlers retired in Walsh and Ambrose...Warne and Mcgrath are so good at effecting preasure on a batting team that one simply cant maintain any form against them...All the talk of the aeging Aussies is simply a matter of recognising that an era is coming to an end....

Tony: Vaughan, Jones & Trescothick are very very unlikely to ever feature on the same scorecard again. Get used to it!! You got beaten comprehensively. Cop it. Don't make the excuses you said you weren't. Imagine "IF" last year Glenn McGrath never stood on that ball. End of!!!

Furthermore Tony, you obviously haven't read a lot of Tim de Lisle's pieces this summer. Do you think perhaps Aussie fans may actually be gving him a bit of a rollicking for his previous 'journalistic licence'? FYI Tony: Mr. de Lisle has given this Aussie squad a good bashing himself this summer, hence the return he is getting in this blog. Do some more back re-reading Tony to see where the venom is coming from.

On the subject of Pietersen's pathetic batting on Monday, just look back at that surreal innings played by Nathan Astle in a similar situation for the Kiwis in 2004. I have no doubt that Pietersen is a better batsman than Astle, and he could have at least TRIED to pull of something outrageous like that. But no... He gave up overnight and from that point on all he cared about was his average. DM is right about the similarities to a Jacques Kallis innings. Not impressed!

The thing that gets me is that people assume that once our champions retire that there is no able bodied replacements waiting in the wings. The perfect example of this is one M.Hussey. If it wasnt Gilchrist it would have been Hadden, If not Mcgrath, Clark would assume his role and England would have been introduced to the raw pace, swing and energy of Mitchell Johnson. Spinning options we have Cullen and another legspinner by the name of Doran who has been turning a few heads in QLD.

On the batting front we also have Phil Jacques who is banging so hard on the door that it is almost completely destroyed, There is also Brad Hodge who's double hundred against South Africa last year seems a distant memory. One gets the feeling that Hodge is in the same vein as Hussey who, once given a solid chance, will take international bowling attacks to the cleaners.

One deffinately to watch out for is a very young allrounder by the name of Moises Henriques who is currently playing for NSW, he was the Australian U/19 captain, Opening the bowling and then batting at number 3.

I'll give you the hot tip for 2009 - Aus 3 - 0 up after three tests.

The thing that gets me is that people assume that once our champions retire that there is no able bodied replacements waiting in the wings. The perfect example of this is one M.Hussey. If it wasnt Gilchrist it would have been Hadden, If not Mcgrath, Clark would assume his role and England would have been introduced to the raw pace, swing and energy of Mitchell Johnson. Spinning options we have Cullen and another legspinner by the name of Doran who has been turning a few heads in QLD.

On the batting front we also have Phil Jacques who is banging so hard on the door that it is almost completely destroyed, There is also Brad Hodge who's double hundred against South Africa last year seems a distant memory. One gets the feeling that Hodge is in the same vein as Hussey who, once given a solid chance, will take international bowling attacks to the cleaners.

One deffinately to watch out for is a very young allrounder by the name of Moises Henriques who is currently playing for NSW, he was the Australian U/19 captain, Opening the bowling and then batting at number 3.

I'll give you the hot tip for 2009 - Aus 3 - 0 up after three tests.

Aussie Patriot that was absolute gold! cracked me up although you should know that Warnie turns water into vb nobody drinks fosters not in aus anyway

England well-beaten and deservedly so. Time for the 5-nil and to "scar" the new generation.

A few random points picked up from other posts:
Trescothick - hardly an excuse/reason. The guy has never scored 100 against Australia, Alastair Cook (one for the future) did it in 3. England would have lost by a larger margin with lead-feet-Marcus

Adelaide test - I'm sick of hearing the line "we lost it in one bad hour". As poor as an excuse as that is, considering you need to be switched on for every minute of a Test, England lost that game by how they played it all through. Their embarassing scoring rate in the first innings which stopped Flintoff beinf able to decalre at 650 or more, Giles' drop of Ponting, Jones (every time he went near the ball, this guy wouldn't make a grade team in Sydney), and of course woeful batting on the fourth day (for four hours, not one)

Reality check

Tim i am still waiting for the day when you bring yourself to give this Australian team the credit it deserves. Your posts always start out with a token gesture of praise then finish with a fully fledged sledging.
I was lucky enough to be at the Perth test and what i saw was a the best sporting team in the world doing what they do best, WINNING.
Make no bones about it the Australian cricket team is the best sporting team in the world. Better than the Bulls in the 90's, Better than Liverpool, better than Man united. They go about there business in a professional and clinical fashion and will continue to do so for a long while yet.
I dare you to write a piece that gives this team the respect it deserves.

Whilst trying to ignore the constant dribble about ages, injuries and selection issues, there is no way on God's earth that England would have even come close to winning this series even with their best XI at the peak of their powers. Determination is a massive factor in a contest like this... Australia have it and England just simply don't. To watch Kevin Pieterson not only show disrespect to his tail order by throwing the bat as soon as No. 8 arrived, he then happily took singles from the first ball of an over to fully expose them to world class bowlers and keep himself a nice little 'not out' and preserve his average so on paper at the end of the day he's looking pretty good. Great talent but no team man. I'm sure the Ashes meant very little to him for most of his life.
Andrew Flintoff would be the only English player to get a start in the current Australian team. Full credit to him for his efforts, opening the bowling and expected to get runs at No. 6 is a huge ask of anyone and it's no wonder that the captaincy role has suffered.
England need to go away and have a good hard look at their domestic competition in order to toughen up their test ranks. Australian domestic cricket is played as tough as most teams play Test matches, no easy runs or wickets, and is a fantastic breeding ground for a great Test side.
Let's see 5-0.

Well i agree with some of the guys saying without Mcgrath and Warne, Australia would be no better than any other teams. These 2 guys with Gilchrist have taken Aus. cricket 1 step above the rest. As an aussie fan, I keep on praying Australian cricket would not get the same fate as of Carribbean, see where they are now after having a couple of golden decades.

and well for english fans, just wait what 2009 brings. obviously these 3 legends wont be there and u may have the deal on equal terms, i hope. and what the fuss about S.Jones, he is an ordinary bowler not a matchwinner. even if was in the current english team, it would hav taken australian fault to retain them the ashes, as in 2005. they didn't play any good cricket then, aussies palyed it bad. i can bet with anyone he wont be able to get reverse swing anymore, just look at Flintoff.

I definitely agree with Dan and DM, I think Pietersen is a potentially great batsman. However he needs to understand that cricket requires a certain amount of grey matter. The way he played and his preferance for batting at number 5 show me that he is in the game for personal glory not for the team. The second innings in Perth, he batted like a specator where he would just stand and watch the tail being rolled over by Warne. If he is as good as he thinks he is, he should have made sure he faced as many balls as possible. Instead he was glad to get to the non strikers end at the earliest opportunity. Maybe watching Hussey in that test against SA would be of help.

As a Pom living in Perth and lining up as a WACA member (I've never seen a queue so long) to get into day one, it was tremendous to see such interest in a Test match (record crowds), great to witness the too-and-fro on day one first hand, but a sense of forboding was always there no matter how cheaply Aussies were dismissed last Thursday. England needed 400 to even stay in touch.

The cricket system here is so different (clubs play amazingly competitive cricket from aged 5 upwards) and this filters through everything from then on. I've coached cricket in England and here, and it is chalk and cheese. PLus, the Aussie team were always going to hit England hard - real HARD. Mistakes, injuries, selections, nerve ... all important, did not go right for England. This was an Aussie team bent on revenge. The stars were aligned for England last year - it was not to be in 2006. Most English fans here were cowering well before Harmison's first delivery in Brisbane, cringing at what was about to unfold. And so it did ... England will be better if they learn, tougher for the experience, and still #2 ranked side in the world. But let's not resign ourselves to 5-0 ... the games have been competitive (sometimes for session after session) but 'competing' is a pretty low bar don't you think? Lets see the (right) team stand up and be counted - 90000+ on day one at the G. It's a once in a lifetime opportunity. Go the Poms. Warnie - 700, you are a superstar; you'll not be forgotten, even if you do retire (as the rumours suggest on the nightly news tonight) tomorrow.

I'm a proud Pom and actually bloody angry with our team. The Aussies that arrived in England in 2005 were arrogant and complacent - they even lost an ODI to Bangladesh. The shock of Ashes defeat made them hard and hungry - they've lost nothing since.

England swanned off to Pakistan after the Ashes and straightaway lost a very winnable Test. They carried on losing ODIs and a fair few Tests, and still thought they could take on mighty Australia. They praised Monty's work ethic, but it never occurred to them that they should do the same.

The Aussies deserved to lose in 2005, but England's defeat now is even more richly deserved. I'm just ashamed that all those tickets bought by Australians and Englishmen for Melbourne and Sydney will give them the chance to see cricketers playing a dead rubber.

Davo - glad you liked my post, but dammit you’ve blown my cover as a Pom who knows nothing about Aussie beer. Despite the pain of losing the Ashes I’ve at least had a good laugh reading some of the claptrap spouted on this blog by the more over-enthusiastic Aussie supporters – I haven’t seen so much rubbish since, oh, the third innings at Adelaide. Long may it continue – if the Aussie team gets anywhere near as arrogant and complacent as some of these fans, then I reckon we might well do to you in 2009 what we did in 2005.

Poor old Tim didn’t half cop it for suggesting some of the Aussies were a teeny-tiny bit old, and then – lo and behold – it looks as if Warne and McGrath are about to announce their retirements. Tim de Lisle for an MBE, the man’s a true prophet!

What great players, though – it’s been a pleasure to watch them bowl over the years, even through gritted teeth. I shall seek out a tankard of vb and toast their health…

Dear Vishnu
As I said I have no wish to play the "if" game , and I wholeheartedly congratulate Australia on their achievement. My point was that some of you are going rather over the top in your bragging and sneering ,and perhaps a little more balance might be appropriate.

By the way I have read a lot of Tim's articles , and I fear that if you seriously term them "Aussie bashing" then you must be an extremely thin skinned individual.
Enjoy your current position of undisputed number one team. Like all things mortal, it will one day pass.

No wonder the English lost the Ashes. Their bowlers are outmoded - they're old hat!

I have just read a massive call, 'England will be the new Australia of the decade 2010-2020'. I am unsure if this comment should be dignified. England with taking Australia out of the equation have put together a formittable outfit (at last after many years in the very average wilderness!).
Comparing them to the team that really has dominated internationally since the resurgance around the Allan Border retirement, carried on by a brilliant captain Mark Taylor to the near invincible unit of Steve Waugh's to the current Ricky Ponting side at this stage is ridiculous!

I have just read compare taking Simon Jones out is the equivalent of Australia losing Shane Warne (can these comments be serious??). Michael Vaughan to Ricky Ponting, who after 100 + test matches has pretty well layed claim & taken the mantle of second greatest batsmen ever to Bradman (his stats show this).
England press & supporters alike have some class & admit you've just witnessed why the Australian cricket team are & have been probably the best cricket team in history.
To my mind England 2005 performed as well as this current side & players ever can. Australia did not & seems this was the loss Australia needed to have. If I was an Australian selector the only English players I'd want to have had in my side possibly would be Kevin Pieterson, Andrew Flintoff & from what I have heard maybe Panesar.
It is pretty tiring to see first hand the whinging reputation English alike have about selections, availability of injured players, umpiring decisions etc etc & that things would have been otherwise. Reality check they wouldn't have & this current English teams players available & not will not be as good as the Australian team has been for the last decade & more.
But take heart if Australia doesn't replace adequately the retiremnts of Shane Warne, Glen McGrath, Damien Martyn, Adam Gilchrist, Matthew Hayden & Justin Langer England may just perform & compete & look better than what they are & how we'll hear about it. But I doubt it.