"The 2005 loss was more the result of an inspired England team raising its game to knock off the heavyweight champ of its era"

By Jon Pierik

Australia’s inglorious Ashes meltdown will force a major rethink at the selection table and has called into question  Ricky Ponting’s legacy as captain.

The 2-1 defeat means Ponting will retire, perhaps as early as next year, without victory as skipper in England and India – clearly Australia’s biggest series in the modern game.

He was captain by name on the breakthrough Indian tour of 2004, but it was Adam Gilchrist who led the side to victory in the opening three Tests as Ponting was sidelined with a broken thumb. When he did return for the final Test, Australia lost.

Ponting was in charge during the surreal 2005 Ashes series when Andrew Flintoff’s heroics and Glenn McGrath’s sprained ankle an hour before the Edgbaston clash was due to begin conspired to torpedo  Australia’s reign.

And last year the Australians lacked enough grunt in India to knock over an ageing line-up ready for the picking.

Indeed, as great as he has been as a batsman, Ponting must deal with the fact he is one of only two Australian captains – joining Billy Murdoch more than 100 years ago – to lose the Ashes twice in England.

Regardless of what he says publicy, this will haunt him and add to a belief in some quarters that he is not a natural leader as much as he is a natural batting talent.

The 2005 loss was more the result of an inspired England team raising its game to knock off the heavyweight champ of its era. That wasn’t the case this time. This was a battle of two fairly ordinary, even flaky, teams who were capable of crumbling in the blink of an eye.

England did in the opening session at Headingley, Australia did in the second session on day two at The Oval.  The tourists couldn’t have picked a worse time to do so for cricket’s famous little urn was firmly on the line.

For that, there should be casualties.

There are three players firmly in the spotlight: Mike Hussey, Stuart Clark and Brett Lee. Hussey is already 34, Clark is 34 in September and Lee is 31 in November.

Age, nor form, is on their side as Australia’s priority must now be to rebuild for the home Ashes battle of 2011-12.

Hussey had to score more runs than any other Australian to finally break into the team in 2005, but he has clearly lost his way. Ponting and the selectors had backed him to “come good”, but he has now endured his fourth straight miserable series.

Three times in this Ashes battle he shouldered arms and was bowled – a sign of a man who has lost his way. Ok he scored a good 121 on the final day but by then the series was lost and he had been dropped, twice.

Hussey, understandably, wants to play on for as long as he can after breaking into the Australian team at such a late age. Four years may not seem that long, but it has been more than enough time for Mr Cricket to make his mark.

That Lee was not recalled for the pivotal final Test, despite finally being fit, indicated Australia had finally lost all faith in its former spearhead.

Australia was prepared to roll the dice on a 50 per cent fit Glenn McGrath four years ago in Manchester. Not so this time with Lee, even though he supposedly was "the man".

As is the case with Clark, it's time to groom for future battles, particularly as the opportunity to do that presents itself with Test strugglers West Indies and Pakistan visiting Australian shores this summer.   

But it’s not just the playing personnel who should be critiqued.  Australia’s national selectors have precided over some bewildering selections in the past 18 months.

Two on this latest tour stand out – the axing of Phil Hughes after just two Tests, and the glaring omission of Nathan Hauritz at The Oval on a pitch that was clearly going to take spin.

That the part-time spinner Marcus North was the leading wicket-taker in England’s second innings highlights what a folly it was to overlook Hauritz who may be a modest tradesman but had shown earlier in the series he was capable of unsettling a fragile England batting order.

The Hughes' decision could be debated either way -  go crazy on Twitter if you like - because replacement Shane Watson showed he does have a future as an opener.  But at least Hughes , unlike Lee, Clark and Hussey, has a future.

So do swing-king Ben Hilfenhaus and allrounder Marcus North. Few would have expected they would have made such a major contribution in this series.

Repercussions of losing cricket’s most famous series are always great. In 2005, Jason Gillespie, Simon Katich and Michael Kasprowicz were three high-profile casualties.

Expect similar recriminations this time.