5th Test - Sydney: Australia marks out of 10

 

If any more proof was needed, the defeat in Sydney showed that this is the worst Australian side since the dark days of the mid-1980's. Impotent with the ball and, in most cases, clueless with the bat, Australia were beaten by an innings again - the first time ever they have had three such defeats in one series.

A massive rebuilding programme awaits, but how did the well-beaten XI rate here (see England marks out of 10 here): 

Shane Watson - 5: Two more starts and two more failures to go on call into question again the long-term viability of Watson opening. His shout of "oh no" when he was dismissed in the first innings summed things up perfectly - what he said about being run out in the second is probably unprintable. We're looking forward to the "Shane Watson's Comedy Moments" DVD - crazy run-outs, serial failures to reach three figures and plenty of sulking and preening.

Phil Hughes - 4: Actually resembled a reasonable test match opener in the first innings before ruining all his hard work by having an injudicious swish outside off-stump with lunch just three balls away. Gave Watson an eye for an eye for Melbourne by running him out in the second innings. The less said about his antics when claiming a catch off Cook on 99 the better.  

Usman Khawaja - 6: A composed debut with the dismissive pull to the boundary off only his second ball in test cricket being positively Goweresque. Not the finished article yet, but likely to emerge as a vital cog in a rebuilt Australian side.

Michael Clarke - 3: Not a great first match as Australia's 43rd Test captain with two more careless dismissals and his side conceding more runs in an innings to England down under than any previous Australian side in history - and Pup thought that Lara Bingle was hard to manage. At least showed he was prepared to be bold by opting to bat under grey skies and in handing the new ball to Johnson, but as job interviews go this wasn't a compelling performance from Pup to get the job as top dog on a permanent basis.

Michael Hussey - 4: To say that Mr Cricket will have been disappointed to get out to Collingwood to the delivery before the new ball was taken is a massive understatement. Made a late bid to be classified as an all-rounder by rolling his arm over, but the kryptonite he took before the Brisbane Test has well and truly worn off now.

Brad Haddin - 4: Moved up to six and immediately got out chasing a wide one in the 1st innings before Tremlett got him with a brute of a delivery in the second. A very good batsman, but with Australia rebuilding, how long will it be before Tim Paine comes in?

Steve Smith - 5: Plucky 50 in the second innings doesn't hide the fact that Smith is not yet ready for Test cricket. Not good enough to play as a specialist batsman or bowler and not good enough either yet as an all-rounder. Clarke would seem to agree too given that he didn't hand him the ball until the England innings was over 100 overs old.

Mitchell Johnson - 4: A typical hit and miss performance from Johnson. His 1st innings 50 kept Australia in the game, but he was then wayward with the new ball and despite taking four wickets went at nearly five runs an over. His downhill performance continued with a first-ball duck in the second innings. Makes Steve Harmison look accurate and consistent.

Peter Siddle - 4: After his strong performance at the MCG, Siddle had to be content with just the solitary wicket of nightwatchman Anderson here. Further demonstrated his promise with the bat with a fighting career best 43 on the final day. A man that Australia can rebuild a team around.

Ben Hilfenhaus - 4: Rode his luck with the bat in the partnership with Johnson that gave Australia a foothold in the game. Poor with the new ball, he at least managed to pick up three wickets - his best return of the series, but he could do worse than sitting down to watch a DVD of Anderson to see how a swing bowler can be effective - and more importantly less predictable - on Australian wickets.

Michael Beer - 3: Bowled tidily enough but will rue for the rest of his days the no-ball that let Cook off the hook when he had made only 46. Looked a better bet than Doherty, but how Nathan Hauritz didn't play even one Test in this series is a mystery.

Where next?

1st Test: England marks out of 10, Australia marks out of 10

2nd Test: England marks out of 10, Australia marks out of 10

3rd Test: England marks out of 10, Australia marks out of 10

4th Test: England marks out of 10, Australia marks out of 10

Check out all our Reverse Sweep heroes and zeroes

Read KP's Ashes Diary exclusively at the Reverse Sweep

Read all the latest from our Ashes 2010/11 coverage

If you like this, follow us on Twitter @thereversesweep

Comments

[Rohan]

Bit harsh on Siddle I think. He's probably the only Aussie to emerge with any credit whatsoever - a hat-trick, better batting average than both Punter and Pup, etc. To give him the same as Hughes and less than Watson seems a bit much, no?

[Rohan]

Apologies, having raced into a comment about Siddle, I now appreciate these ratings are for Sydney and not for the whole series. *facepalm*

[Eddy Jenner]

Nice blog. Agree with every word. Didn't think I would ever say this but- well done England.

[Eddy Jenner]

Actually allow me to expand. Having agreed with comments about the players, I think the biggest answer to the question 'what next' is that major management changes are needed. Hilditch, Sutherland and Nielsen are swanning around with idiot grins droning 'I didn't do it', they all need to be lined up against a wall and, er, be given their marching orders. Competent management isn't the only key to a good cricket team like England's but it obviously helps. We have many former great players with good cricket minds in Australia working in the media, surely some can be brought back onto the scene, along with some overseas talent as well.

[Howe Zat]

I would worry about your first "experimental" usage into illicit blog commenting, Eddy.

You post one brief comment and then you feel the need to expand on it, and then before you know it you're compelled to start ranting your heart out to someone you've never met and not even sure if they agree with you or not.

Gateway drug, my friend.

[The Reverse Sweep]

That's ok Rohan. As you say Siddle deserves a better mark than 4 for the series and doubtless that will be the case when I get around to doing my series marks out of 10 later!

[The Reverse Sweep]

Eddy you are right on Hilditch especially. As an Englishman, I may wish him to continue in his role, but surely someone like Steve Waugh should be brought in. With the current dearth of quality players on Oz, they need to find cricketers with a bit of the animal about them - like Siddle and Haddin for instance - and build from there.

[Eddy Jenner]

Howe Zat, I know what I'm doing and I can stop any time I like, ok? So I like a bit of a blog from time to time, it's perfectly natural, I just like making comments and getting comments and....come to me comments........sweet sweet comments..........*BINGE BINGE BINGE BINGE BINGE*

[Bexley]

A bit harsh on Clarke. I thought he showed application in his second innings and was dismissed after some virtuoso swing bowling from Anderson rather than carelessness.

I can't see Haddin being ditched for Paine unless others start performing. On current form he would make the Aussie side purely as a batsmen. If they try to rebuild they can afford to keep the bits that are working (like Haddin) since there are so few right now!

"...but surely someone like Steve Waugh should be brought in."

Maybe. It could work but bringing in a successful former captain is no guarantee of success as England discovered with Ray Illingworth and Peter May.

[simon]

"I can't see Haddin being ditched for Paine unless others start performing. On current form he would make the Aussie side purely as a batsman."

Actually, that's what I'd do. Push him up the order, make him captain with Tim Paine as VC, and see how you go from there.

As for Hussey, "the kryptonite he took before the Brisbane Test has well and truly worn off now"... Hmm, dangerous words with the ODI series still to come... :)

[The Reverse Sweep]

You may be right on Hussey Simon, although the comment wasnt meant as a derogatory one - he was sensational for the first three Tests and there was no way he could be expected to keep bailing out the Aussies. The Haddin-Paine battle to a tricky one. As you say, Haddin is a fine batsman - but he is 30 and Paine is 22 and a far better keeper. I think you may have cottoned to the best solution of playing Haddin as a specialist batsman. Interesting times for Australia. 

[The Reverse Sweep]

True, bringing in a former great doesnt always help, but surely the beleagured Hilditch has to go. I think Haddin is a fine batsman and maybe that is the way to go with him in the side as a batsman and Paine taking the gloves. Paine looks a better keeper in any case, and at least it would enable Australia to get one of its better young players into the XI. Others like Khawaja, Mitchell Marsh and pattinson look promising, so I dont think the future is the doom and gloom picture that some of the Aussie press are painting now. But as a long-suffering Englishman, it is all rather enjoyable!

[Bexley]

"But as a long-suffering Englishman, it is all rather enjoyable!"

Part of what I'm really enjoying is the silly suggestions in the press. I read them suggesting ideas that didn't work for England in the '90s and I hope they're adopted by the hapless Hilditch.

I'm also hoping that Australia's search for the new Shane Warne continues to follow in the footsteps of our search for the new Botham.

[The Reverse Sweep]

Theyre already making a start on finding wholly unsuitable candidates for the new Warne  - hence the premature inclusion of Smith in the side and the bizarre selections of Doherty and Beer. Hauritz may not be a great spinner, but he is the best that Oz have and therefore should have been included in the Test side. England still would have won the Ashes, but it would have been a bit closer.