The opponents, after all, were the weakened West Indies, without some of their best players, a shaky Pakistan, always prone to choking in Australia, and New Zealand, who have looked less and less like a Test side as the past decade had worn on.
Not to say that any of them are pushovers, but that they were hardly the sternest test around. And the results against the strongest of those sides, Pakistan, have of course recently been called into question.
Before that the Aussies somehow contrived an Ashes loss to an England team who rarely played great cricket, and had no real standout contributors. If 2005 had been the ringing clash of titans, 2009 was the sigh of a deflating beach ball. Saying you were bowled out by Stuart Broad is like saying you were savagely beaten with a feather duster.
Then there was a drawn Test series to a Pakistan team that was apparently doing its best to lose matches, followed by a loss to England in the one-dayers, and now the 1-0 scoreline as it stands in India.
The Aussie team is on the ropes, and the Brits are full of vim and vinegar.
The Aussie nemesis Broad, the fluffy menace, is gangling in from the horizon. This looks the most likely team to lose a home Ashes series since…well, since last time we lost one.
We’ve all heard the talk about how when a bunch of greats retire, it will take time for the next generation to fill their shoes. We’ve heard about them being a young developing team. Well, they’ve had several years to develop, and look weaker now than they did when the big guns first fell silent.
Given the crucial factor was allegedly the end of the Warne-McGrath era, the young Aussie bowling attack actually looks in good shape. Mitchell Johnson’s terrific bursts outweigh his terrible ones, though his temperament remains suspect.
Hilfenhaus is coming along in leaps and bounds, and Siddle, Bollinger, Harris, McKay, Pattinson, George and Starc round out an impressive-looking back-up squad.
It’s the batting that’s the worry, where young and raw is far less the issue than old and creaky.
Shane Watson and Michael Clarke are the youngest, at 29. Then there’s Marcus North at 31, with Ponting, Hussey and Katich all clocking 35.
Age itself is irrelevant, of course. India’s big three are all 37 years old. Tendulkar just won the Cricketer of the Year award, and Laxman has pulled off more fourth-innings chases in the past two months than most cricketers will in their careers. Dravid has shown few signs of slowing either. All are prodigious talents who love their game. A number is just a number.
But whether age is a factor or not, the Aussies are struggling.
Batting collapses have been a feature of the last couple of years, something that rarely happened in the previous era. With the amount of experience the current line-up has, there’s no excuse. And while it’s admirable to give players time to rediscover their touch, a team simply can’t carry that many batsmen at once.
In recent seasons, only Watson has batted like a member of a champion team. Katich has been consistent over several seasons, despite a technique that rarely looks convincing – a tendency to panic in the 90s isn’t the worst problem a batsman can have. Phillip Hughes started out batting like a champ, but was prematurely dropped.
But from there down the order, it’s a big fat serve of not much. Ponting’s star is fading: perhaps the great batsman can have a late Tendulkar revival, but if he wasn’t captain then surely his spot would be under pressure by now.
Clarke has freed himself of off-field modelling distractions, but rarely looks like a man who’s enjoying his cricket. He pokes and prods as though he can’t quite remember where he is, and his youthful confidence has retreated so far within him that it’s about to come out the other side. His lethargic performance at the World Twenty20 indicated someone immune to help or criticism.
Hussey is one of my favourite-ever players, but his Test form is among the patchiest. Even if his career-saving century in Sydney wasn’t the result of match-fixing, I can’t figure out how a bloke who was dropped three times in ten overs can be credited with playing a great innings (let alone win a Man of the Match award).
Regardless of good one-day form, Hussey now looks so nervous that he seems to freeze up every time he comes out to bat wearing Aussie whites. Someone give the man half a Valium and a gin and tonic next time he pads up, and he might just get his mojo back.
Then there’s the mystery to rival the Riddle of the Sphinx: just how the hell Marcus North keeps getting picked.
Until today, North’s four centuries in 30 innings seemed a decent rate, but three of them came in his first 10. And even then he was a feast or famine batsman: five of his other first ten innings were scores of 12 or less.
Still, his average to that point was an impressive 56.55. In the 20 innings since, it more than halved to 25.36. And a whopping 12 of those innings netted 10 runs or less. His century today, shaky start and all, is actually the worst thing that could have happened, as it will keep him in the side for another few games.
While he might enjoy the odd day out, his penchant for single-figure scores will make him the weak link for the Ashes and keep better candidates out. And the way North has been batting of late, recalling Glenn McGrath to number six would add a bit of steel to the middle order.
Then there’s the batting insurance policy at No. 7. Brad Haddin is a fantastic keeper – one need only think back to his catch off Salman Butt in Sydney. But his batting has been a constant disappointment, with an abject refusal to consider the context of the match. ‘Play your natural game’ is the mantra of the day, but it’s hard to play like Adam Gilchrist if you’re less than half as talented.
Of course Tim Paine has the gloves in India, but all indications are that Haddin will recover from injury and be picked for the Ashes. Perhaps we can pay someone to crash a banana truck in front of his house.
And lastly there’s poor old Nathan Hauritz. He cops a lot of flak, and he’s a tough competitor who does the best with his limited resources. But that limitation is hurting his team.
Struggling in India is no cause for indictment – plenty of spinners in different leagues to him have done the same. But twice now, in Cardiff and then Mohali, Hauritz has had the task of bowling out the last couple of tail-enders on crumbling fifth-day pitches, the role for which a spinner is in the team. Twice now he has failed to do so, and twice it has cost Australia the series. The English batsmen will look forward to a six-ball holiday every time he comes on to bowl.
What happens in the current Test isn’t really relevant. A series in India is hardly a good indicator of form or talent; it’s a cricketing otherworld where the strangest things happen. A world where Shane Warne couldn’t buy a wicket while Michael Clarke ripped the heart out of a side with 6 for 9.
But whatever happens, this is a team at its lowest ebb for many a long year.
And whatever happens, the English team will soon begin its trip to Australia, filled with more confidence than any time in living memory.
abby
Guest
The thing that really pisses me off about this article is the picture of Shane Watson. He is one of the only saving graces in our side at the moment.
Hansie
Guest
I think we should move on from blaming Billy Bowden for the first test loss. India got more raw decisions in that test than Australia. For example, Ishant Sharma was given out lbw in the 2nd innings when he plainly wasn't out, so India should have won by two wickets.
Lolly
Guest
Geoff, I think the Warriors should take a punt on Mitchell Marsh and bring him up the order. They collapse as often or more often than the Aussies so he's coming in under pressure most of the time at 6. He's still young and needs to show some real accumulation in the Shield this year. I can 't see him being considered for a couple of years at least. His brother was similarly lauded when he first came in to first class cricket and he proved very inconsistent for years.
mattamkII
Guest
Faie to say they are at their least popular in decades too.... Ponting and Co. have made me lose any level of excitment.
Bayman
Guest
Greg, I'd be amazed if Johnson was still playing Test cricket for Australia in five years. If he's still there in two years he'll have achieved something wonderful. He is what they call, "A luxury!"
Bayman
Guest
Geoff, You forget that in 2001 Ponting was about 26/27 and in his prime having been in the Test lineup for about five years or so. He always had class written all over him and his failure in 2001 was a shock of huge proportions. Forget about maturing afterwards. I agree with you that it's not all doom and gloom based on the India result, especially if you take the view, as I do, that the current team is not that good. Therefore, India, as the current no.1 are not travelling as well as they might be. The difference is that they are picking young guys to come in when necessary. We still think 10 years of Shield cricket is a pre-req for Test selection unless your name is Bradman. Clarke is the last relatively young batsman chosen by Australia for any length of time. Hughes was dropped at the first opportunity, more's the pity.
Bayman
Guest
From memory guys it was David Gower and John Morris who took the joy flight. It did not go down well with the skipper or team management. Perhaps it had something to do with the fact that both players birthday is April 1st.
Geoff Lemon
Expert
He's got potential, and he's played a couple of good one-day knocks, but he's only played seven first-class games and averages under 20. As much as we want to see bold action, surely he needs more matches first. Or at least a trial in limited-overs cricket. Even there, he's only played a handful of state games.
Geoff Lemon
Expert
Well, you can win without taking 20 if you lull the opposition into a declaration... but yes, I take your point. Thing is, we have a good group of fairly fresh young pace bowlers who look like they'll do the job for Australia, once they get enough matches into them. Johnson probably needs to go back to the Shield and to ODIs for a while, get his rhythm and his hunger back. But Siddle will be a fine bowler once he gets back to form post-injury, and Hilfenhaus has proved dangerous in Australia. There are a lot of young prospects, and the future looks optimistic. The lack of a spinner is a problem. But the batting order is a problem too, and there's nothing wrong with looking at ways to improve it.
Geoff Lemon
Expert
Yes, much as Swann gives me the shits, he'll probably be the one to do the damage. Hussey in particular can be shaky against good spin (though he took Ajmal apart in the Twenty20). And Haddin's pet shot is the tame chip to mid-on.
Geoff Lemon
Expert
Yes, we would be having this discussion, because everything I wrote was based on pre-India observations. These problems have been endemic for a long time now. North himself admitted after the match that the century followed by five failures has been the pattern for his whole career. That's a liability to any team he's in. Smith is a genuine batsman, more so than a bowler: he's already scored four tons and three fifties in first-class cricket. He certainly couldn't do worse than North has done. You may be right about Hussey and harsh calls, he deserves a few more matches. But North and Clarke should make way now: the latter could be back after freshening up, the former's time should be done.
Geoff Lemon
Expert
Will, if the process has many years ahead, why are we picking four top-six batsmen who won't be playing for more than a couple more seasons? This will only create more problems when they leave, and suddenly a whole new side has to be thrown in at once. Yes, we're in a rebuilding phase. But rebuilding has to start with players who will be there for the future. The likes of Khawaja and Ferguson have a decade or more in them if they're picked now. Let's get on with it.
Geoff Lemon
Expert
Chaos, it's not doom and gloom based on the India result. Actually I was saying the opposite - that I wouldn't turf a player based on a bad performance in India. India is where promising young cricketers go to be destroyed. Ponting made 17 runs in five innings in 2001, and even when he notched his high score of 11, he was dropped twice on nought. That doesn't make him a bad batsman though, and he went on to mature and dominate for many seasons. I'm talking about weaknesses that were evident and changes that needed to be made even before the India series, which has only confirmed them. North might make a hundred every six innings, but he scores nothing in between. That's a liability. Someone who scores a solid 40 every dig is worth much more. We need batsmen with confidence and momentum - Khawaja and Klinger spring to mind.
tommy_doleman
Roar Pro
Geoff, what does Mitch Marsh have to do to get a game? Surely he's the sort of bloke the Aussies should be turning to!
Joe Barrett
Guest
Why is it our focus is not on taking 20 wickets. No team in history has ever won a test match without taking 20 wickets. All the great teams in History had great attacks. Why we get so focused on the batting I for one cant believe. Have a look at the dominant Australian team when Mcgrath and Warne were out of the team for the summer against India at home . We drew the series . I wish people would begin to realise that a bowler with an average of under 25 is so much more valuable than a batsmen with an average over 45.To win test cricket you need to take 20 wickets . Full Stop.Look at the Windies in the 80s if they got dismissed for a low score they had the belief they could get the opposition out even cheaper. You would be amazed how much more confidence this gives your batsmen. Look at our batsmens over inflated averages during domination.
jay p
Guest
at the end of the day we need 20 wickets and close 500 runs first innings to win tests. at present who can you see in the side doing this? it requires 1 batsmen scorring big hundreds and another getting a small one. replacing north with smith wont fix it but maybe north with hughs or Khawaja might. i think watson still isnt Australias ideal opener and should go down to 6. if haurritz cant spin a ball or keep it tight put smith in and bowl him and kat more. then we just have to pound into ponting to set off side attacking feilds. (i dont mind ponting dropping down the order either). but really australia need some one who will look like averaging high 40s not just handy players down the order.
Lolly
Guest
One simple rule could be followed even though we all know that there will be no changes in spite of losing three tests in a row. Bring a right-hander into the middle order. Swann is going to eat Huss and North alive and probably raw. Work out which ever rightie plays spin well and get them in. But it won't happen. The idea of Huss, North, Haddin (recklessness personified, regardless of being a right-hander) then Johnson, leftie in love with ducks, lining up like little lambs is at least worth a giggle.
Anthony
Guest
If the Billy had rightly given Ojha out lbw in the first test would we be having this discussion? Or hailing our test team as firmly back on track? I definitely agree changes must be made, but to say that Smith for North is a no brainer is ridiculous. Smith will be a fine player, but not at 6, imagine him coming in in the same situation as North in the first dig.. 6 is for batsmen only, you can't cut corners and hope all will turn out fine, esp in test cricket. Recent double ton maker Usman is our next best talent, and maybe Clarke is in need of a wake call, so straight swap them. Also, Hussey has been fired two tests in a row, just when he may have been finding touch... -- Comment left via The Roar's iPhone app. Download The Roar's iPhone App in the App Store here.
Harry
Guest
Oh look people, Clarke, North and Hussey all fail again in the 2nd dig leaving poor old Ricky to take the fight to the Indians after the openers made a decent enough start. One of today's 3 failures - Hussey would be my pick - should go before Brisbane for whoever is the most inform shield batsmen, otherwise we will have this mid-order brittleness throughout the Ashes. That was a very unconvincing 20 from Hussey.
jameswm
Guest
To Chaos - Khawaja has just passed 200 against SA And yes Greg - Stephen O'Keefe is an interesting one. Left arm offie, after about 10 1st class games averages over 50 with the bat and under 30 with the ball. Not a bad start to his career. As for what my namesake said - not many batsmen coming through? You only need 2 or 3, and there are a lot more than that. As for the rebuilding/stability argument - yes the Ponting's mates thing is a big issue. It might be stating the bleeding obvious, but you can't drop Kat, Punter, Huss and North in one go. You have to replace them one by one. And you don't simply pick the replacement in the best form at the time - you pick one who has class, not form, and who you think is a long-term prospect. Guys like Ferguson, Khawaja and Smith all have shown they have class, and appear long-term prospects. I have been hugely impressed with Ferguson's ODI batting - he often comes in at a difficult time, and makes batting and scoring runs look easy. Mind you, the way MClarke scratches round in one-dayers, anyone could make batting look easy after that. Mitch Johnson is someone you have to persevere with. Smith gives you flexibility - will he be a number 6 batsman and 5th bowling option (or even 6th with Watto), or will he be a no.7/8 picked more for his bowling? Frankly he could go either way, so to speak. Hilfy is here to stay too, and he's only 27. We've got 5 good years left. Tim Paine I have no problem with, and in fact I'd probably leave him there for the Ashes. So most of the parts are in place. We need another quick, and we have Bolly, Siddle, George, Copeland and others coming through. Bolly and Sids will do for now while the others sort themselves out, and get blooded in ODIs. We need a no.1 spinner, whether this is Smith, O'Keefe, or someone else. This is what I see our team looking like in 1-2 years' time Watson Katich (yes, still there, and captain ideally) Khawaja Clarke Ponting/Ferguson Smith Paine O'Keefe Johnson Hilfy one other quick - Siddle, George, Hazlewood, Copeland etc. 4 quicks, 2 spinners + Clarke/Kat, and very good batting to 8. A well-rounded team.