Where does this rank among Australia’s greatest Test wins of the past 20 years? Did England’s three debutants give any reason for hope?
These were two of the questions spawned as Australia completed a 5-0 series victory by demolishing England for 166 to record a thumping 281-run win at the SCG.
Where does this rank among Australia’s greatest Test wins of the past 20 years?
Dethroning the West Indies in the Caribbean in 1995.
Vanquishing the India hoodoo on the subcontinent in 2004.
Executing ruthless revenge against England in 2006-07.
Smashing the Windies 5-0 in 2000-01.
And now… pummelling England 5-0 just months after losing 0-3.
Where would you place this summer’s incredible whitewash among Australia’s greatest Test series wins of the past two decades?
There is one thing which is certain – this scoreline was more unexpected than any of those aforementioned Aussie triumphs.
England entered this series as warm favourites. The only predictions of 5-0 were in their favour.
Somewhere in the world right now, a mug punter is sporting a monstrous grin as he clutches a betting ticket which says, ‘Australia 5-0’.
Even they probably did not expect such a scoreline but rather couldn’t resist the juicy odds which were about 70-1 prior to the start of the series.
This Ashes has spawned many enthralling Australian storylines.
The rebirth of Brad Haddin and Mitchell Johnson.
The emergence of Nathan Lyon, David Warner and Steve Smith as future stars.
The late blooming of dual-centurion Chris Rogers.
The awe-inspiring potency and consistency of the Australian attack.
But is this victory on the same level as those I listed above?
To my mind it does not have the same significance as either the 1995 or 2004 wins.
The unseating of the West Indies as Test cricket’s superpower serves as the marking post for Australia’s golden era, which continued for another 13 years.
The triumph in India was the so-called ‘final frontier’ for Australia during that phenomenal era of success. It was their crowning achievement.
This summer’s 5-0 result does, however, compare favourably with the 2006-07 whitewash.
That series will always hold greater sentimentality since it marked the retirements of four extraordinary Australian Test players in Shane Warne, Glenn McGrath, Justin Langer and Damien Martyn.
But Australia had a far better team than England so the lopsided result was not particularly shocking.
For that reason, this cleansweep deserves to be rated as the greater achievement.
It might not be the Windies in 1995 or India in 2004, but it is not far behind.
Did England’s three debutants give them any reason for hope?
No. No they did not.
While England will have been buoyed by Ben Stokes’ combative efforts with blade and ball this series, the three players blooded at Sydney offered zero encouragement.
In one way Boyd Rankin, Gary Ballance and Scott Borthwick were on a hiding to nothing given they were joining a shellshocked side being toyed with by a rampant Aussie outfit.
On the other hand that situation meant they were not burdened by high expectations.
It is difficult to say which player had the worst debut.
Towering quick Rankin was always likely to struggle for rhythm given he had not bowled in a match for more than five weeks.
Even that outing in Alice Springs offered him limited preparation as it was restricted to two days and he only completed 14.5 overs.
In this Test, Rankin laboured in every possible way.
He scattered deliveries all over the pitch, never managing to build anything close to pressure on the Aussie batsman.
His poor preparation no doubt contributed to the fact he twice had to leave the field mid-over because of cramps.
Unfortunately, he may never get the opportunity to improve on this forgetful introduction to Test cricket.
Rankin turns 30 this year and was picked in this series seemingly on a hunch, considering his form in county cricket had not merited his inclusion.
England stocked up on beanpole pacemen this summer in an ill-advised strategy which has backfired.
Gary Ballance, meanwhile, is almost certain to earn greater patience from the English selectors.
With England having lost or dropped three members of their top seven this summer, and uncertainty surrounding the future of veteran Kevin Pietersen, they desperately need to unearth new batting talent.
Ballance looked all at sea against Nathan Lyon in both innings.
Playing tentatively from the crease, he was a wicket waiting to happen against the accurate Aussie tweaker.
England’s next two series are against the spin-heavy attacks of Sri Lanka and India. Ballance has plenty of work to do on his play against the slow bowlers if he is to survive those series.
Borthwick has no such concerns. He is unlikely to retain his place in the line-up.
Drafted into the England side as a frontline spin replacement for veteran Monty Panesar, Borthwick looked a long way short of Test standard with the ball.
He served up a buffet of long hops and full tosses in the first innings, probably hampered by nerves.
His figures of 1-49 from seven overs were scarcely better than Simon Kerrigan’s much more maligned debut in the final Test of the previous Ashes.
Borthwick was slightly improved in the second innings, but his figures of 3-33 were very misleading.
His dismissal of Brad Haddin was from a full toss, Chris Rogers handed him a return catch with an awful stroke to an unthreatening length ball and Ryan Harris gifted him his third wicket with a wild tailender’s heave.
In between these breakthroughs he continued to send down a generous helping of dross.
His bowling looked marginally better than that of Aussie part time leggie Steve Smith.
As Borthwick was being hit to all parts of the ground we were reminded repeatedly he bats at first drop for his county side Durham.
It mattered little as he made five runs across his two digs.
Stokes is undoubtedly a future star.
But on this limited evidence, Rankin and Borthwick in particular are well shy of being Test-standard bowlers.
perthie
Guest
Hello everyone. Its good to see civilised conversation! Most forums have degraded to insults about living in the opposing country or attacks on perceived character flaws by now. I can't wait till the S.A. series. Although our batting has many cracks at the moment I think we do tend to perform a little better when the balls coming on a bit more. We seem to struggle (not so much this series) against the Anderson style's. I'm interested to hear everyone's opinion on selection for S.A.? I'd like to see Hugh's have another chance as recent form locally has been very good. I think maybe rogers and Hugh's could work well together with warner down to 3. Coming in at 1st drop he could switch on and be quite devastated after the shines come off the ball a bit. I would put Clarke at 4, smith, Watson, then Hidden. I think that could potentially give us some depth. Watto has to be a 6. His days up the top are over. Just my opinion.
JohnB
Guest
95 Windies tour has a lot going for as the best in the period - away from Australia, against a still strong opponent (albeit in its last days as such), and a clear passing of the baton beginning a golden era. And that Australian side, particularly its bowling, wasn't that highly rated at the time - especially after losing McDermott before the tests started. I'm less sure about India 2004 - all very well to call it a "final frontier" but winning then didn't put that frontier behind them or lead to any leap in performance going forward marking it as a changing of the guard or beginning of a new era (as 2005 and 1989 did, and hopefully 2013/4 will). It also has to be said that 2004 was a bit of a funny old series in itself - Australia won 2-1 with one drawn, India winning the final game on a diabolical dustbowl that even they may have been embarassed about after having already lost the series. A series with a game like that in it has to lose marks in any "great series" discussion, but at least it was a dead rubber. Australia had won the opening game in a fine performance (Michael Clarke's debut match) - as good a test as they've played in India in 40 years, let alone 20. It's forgotten however that Aust were on their way to losing the second test had not the final day been washed out. It's also not much mentioned any more that the series winning 3rd test win owed a lot to one of those strange bits of internal politics that India seems to manage to produce - the Nagpur curator apparently got the hump with being told to produce a turner to favour Kumble and Harbhajan and instead came up with something nearer a greentop which India could not remotely cope with against McGrath, Gillespie and Kasprowicz (with Warne also chipping in). Australia were a very fine team, they won the series and may still have done so anyway if normal Indian pitches had been rolled out for the 3rd and 4th games (and rain not intervened in the 2nd) - but all those things did happen and that devalues that series in my view.
Ronan O'Connell
Expert
Haha I did at least say I thought MJ would play well at the WACA so I was only 80% wrong!
Ronan O'Connell
Expert
Yep the bowlers get an A+ mark from me for this series. It's the top order that has a bit of work to do to build partnerships more consistently.
Ronan O'Connell
Expert
Cheers Nudge, you clearly have a huge passion for cricket too which is great to see. I have a great feeling about the South African series...I think it going to be a corker!
Prosenjit majumdar
Guest
I still remember that ronan article with the predictive title 'smith to shine,johnson to struggle'. atleast he did get half of that half-right ;-)
Prosenjit majumdar
Guest
Actually they were burned out by playing too much of mitch johnson's fireballs.the hot sun hasn't helped either.
Nudge
Guest
Ronan you've done an awesome job with these wrap ups from the 10 ashes tests, and also all the other articles you've done in between. You obviously have a great cricket brain but your passion for test and australian cricket really stands out. And you never rule the Aussies out which I love. Can't wait for the South African series, I think if we can win 2 of the tosses and the luck falls our way we can win 2-1.
soapit
Guest
sounds like a real challenger. were wales rated highly in the early 90's? a loss by that margin wouldnt be as much of a surprise in the period after professionalism where the nh took time to adapt.
Tony Loedi
Roar Guru
Yeah I agree I was happy to see the sideways movement, but unhappy at how most of our batsman played it
The Bush
Roar Guru
Ronan, I don't buy into the exhaustion thing. The Australian Cricket Team plays more cricket than any other team and I can't remember the last time we used that excuse. To be frank, and I am happy to be seen as one-eyed here, I believe that a lot of Cricket teams around the world, except Australia, a frequently mentally fragile. True Australia lost 4 zip to India, but did anyone really think this mob was going to do okay there? Comparing our strength to England's in Australia, we showed far more fight.
Beauty of a geek brains of a bimbo(atgm)
Guest
Why only lyon mate?i believe everybody needs to improve their respective games.The batsmen should be practicing for 8 hours/day or another 47 allout cud be on the cards.
Ronan O'Connell
Expert
There's been lot of excuses coming from the British press about why this England side was so uncompetitive. The main one they have latched on to is that the players were burned out and had been playing too much. Anderson was exhausted by the time this series started apparently, according to several English pundits. Yet in the 13 weeks between the last Test in England and the first Test in Brisbane he bowled a total of 30 overs in competition. That was a huge period of recuperation. How much longer could he possibly need?
Ronan O'Connell
Expert
It was a nice warmup for the tour of SA. This SCG deck was similar to the type of conditions we'll see at Newlands.
Ronan O'Connell
Expert
Well that really is damning. England have no other options then really an are stuck with Captain Clueless.
The Bush
Roar Guru
This series does not rank along with the '95 or '04 wins (or even the '05 Ashes as a spectacle), but you're not really comparing Apples with Apples. Whilst Australia had already secured the series in '04 prior to the last game, at least India showed some fight, whilst the Windies tour will be, for my generation, the defining Cricket series ever I believe. This display has been phenomenal and surpasses the '06-7 series due to the lack of talent in this team, but as a contest it was seriously lacking and that lack of contest means that years from now, we probably won't speak of it in the same breadth as tours like the ones you have mentioned (or the '05 Ashes).
The Bush
Roar Guru
Mits, It's hard to compare where this series ranks compared to '95 and '04 as this win is very, very different. The '95 and '04 series, like the Ashes in '05, where tightly contested affairs between teams at the top of their game. The excitement and suspense of those older series was certainly not replicated here - whilst a huge amount of satisfaction has been taken from this, as a spectacle it doesn't rank anywhere near those other series. But when you consider the underdog status of this team going into the series, to demolish English like this is truly a remarkable feat.
Tony Loedi
Roar Guru
I disagree guys, I loved the fact that there was plenty of grass as I like to see the ball do a bit but the wicket had uneven bounce from the first session, apparently there were cracks underneath the grass which shouldn't happen on the first day
Tony Loedi
Roar Guru
From the sound of it the English players don't rate his leadership abilities. I heard Michael Vaughan saying Bell wasn't captain material - And thats from a former teammate. Unfortunately there are no other options
Ronan O'Connell
Expert
Yeah nothing wrong with that pitch at all. England were just pathetic with the blade.