The capitulation of Australia to South Africa at Hobart and at Perth has been extraordinary. This is, after all, a South African team that was convincingly beaten at home by a mediocre England team less than a year ago.
But what have we actually just witnessed? And should Pakistan be counting their chickens?
The Aussie bowling is okay. Not great, but okay
The Aussie bowlers, shorn of their two fastest bowlers in Cummins and Pattinson, have actually done fine. They have restricted South Africa to scores of:
242
540-8d
326
Starc and Hazlewood have been excellent, but the third seamer is a weak link and Nathan Lyon is a deeply mediocre off-spinner who can't bat.
Half the batting is just fine
The problem, of course, is the batting. But even there, Dave Warner, Steve Smith and Usman Khawaja have been fine, while Shaun Marsh was good too until he broke a finger.
So the malaise seems to be traceable back to three positions: Numbers 5, 6 and 7.
Adam Voges was never good enough to get into the Test team even in his twenties, and it is illuminating that over the last decade the selectors only came to him after trying out Andrew Symonds (who was never really a Test batsman), Rob Quiney and Alex Doolan.
Voges was called up in the hope that he could emulate Mike Hussey and Chris Rogers as mature veterans to stabilise the team. And at his age he's great on flat tracks. But his failure on livelier pitches not only means the end for him, but raises huge questions against Misbah-ul-Haq and Younis Khan Down Under.
The number 6 position is a worry too. I still think it was an error to throw Mitch Marsh overboard, because [MENTION=132373]Convict[/MENTION] has warned us for years that Callum Ferguson is a mediocre batsman, and the balance that Marsh gives is sorely missed.
As for Peter Nevill, he was brilliantly compared by [MENTION=136729]Suleiman[/MENTION] to Adnan Akmal. I hadn't thought of it, but it's a perfect comparison: two tidy keepers whose batting is the poor end of mediocre.
The historical context
I have seen teams in this situation before. And I don't mean the mid-1980's Australia: they were different because ATG's had just retired (Lillee, Marsh, Chappell), terrific new players were emerging (the Waughs, Dean Jones, Mark Taylor, Craig McDermott, David Boon) and the disappearance of mediocre older players to Rebel tours of Apartheid-era South Africa meant that the youngsters got a long run in the team, even though they lost for a couple of years.
In 1992-93 Australia was two runs away from defeating the West Indies at Adelaide to topple them as world champions, but lost by 1 run. They then fell apart at Perth and were beaten in the final Test within 7 sessions - just like today.
The selectors kept their nerve, and the team moved on to an away Ashes series which was won by Shane Warne's "Ball of the Century" to Mike Gatting, which cracked English morale and led to a 4-1 victory.
Contrast that with England in the 1980's. They won the Ashes Down Under in 1986-87 and then pushed the world's second best (or possibly joint best) team, the Pakistanis, close in home and away series in 1987.
But the following summer they were demolished by a moderate West Indies team in large part because the selectors lost their minds and created the "Summer of Four Captains", and the team fell apart with the turmoil.
The following summer England expected to retain The Ashes, but a very ordinary Aussie bowling attack achieved a 4-0 victory in England because of the same never-ending selectorial Merry-Go-Round.
Where to now for Australia?
The team is at a crossroads.
Four players are secure: Warner, Smith, Starc and Hazlewood. Not just secure, but potential matchwinners.
Two more players - Lyon and Khawaja - have arguably done enough to stay in the team.
I'd rather see Glenn Maxwell than Nathan Lyon in the team - what's the point of a spinner who can't bat, but also can't bowl in Asia? But that's not going to happen.
So the first question is whether the selectors replace 5 players now (second opener, Voges at Number 5, Number 6, third seamer, wicketkeeper) or whether they toss aside Nathan Lyon too.
And the second question is whether they pursue their insane attachment to veteran debutants - now including Callum Ferguson - instead of youngsters. Do they really think they can clone Mike Hussey?
It's pretty clear now that Matthew Wade will replace Peter Nevill as wicketkeeper. But nobody else really screams out for selection. The cupboard is bare.
What are Pakistan's prospects?
I think that Pakistan will be in trouble if Australia keep their nerve and produce greentops for the back-to-back Day/Night Tests v South Africa and Pakistan.
Australia would negate their weakness - low scores - and have Pink Ball specialists like the huge left-armer Jason Behrendorff who could hurt the opposition under lights.
A grassless future of high-scoring draws?
I think that Cricket Australia's hierarchy is too damaged to take the risk of losing the toss on greentops in the Day/Night Tests. I think we will see grassless tracks which turn the pink ball into a rag and see huge scores amassed. That will damage the attendances and future of Pink Ball cricket, but James Sutherland and Pat Howard and even Darren Lehmann have careers and large salaries to protect.
The irony, of course, is that grassless pitches give Misbah, Younis and even Hafeez a chance to survive and score runs.
Is something else going on?
The 1989 England team fell apart in the Ashes while secret negotiations for a Rebel Tour of South Africa were going on.
The Aussie team half a decade earlier was doing the same things.
I don't want to be moderated, but the 1992-1999 Pakistanis underperformed at times when some of the team were suspected of fixing.
I don't see how a team with a good top order linked to a dodgy lower-middle order can keep collapsing like this.
It's only 11 days ago that Australia was 158-0 in reply to South Africa's 242 all out in the First Test.......only to collapse to 244 all out.
And now, in the last four days they have produced an 85 all out which is MUCH worse than it looks - remember that Smith scored 48 not out, the rest made 36-9 - followed by losing 8 wickets for 40 runs today.
Obviously morale is bad. Self-confidence is bad. Belief is absent.
On the first evening of the match Darren Lehmann hinted that the players felt that Mitch Marsh had been lied to by the selectors about being given two Tests before he would be dropped.
And today, after the match, Steve Smith made clear that this is not the team selection that he wanted.
This capitulation is not just about 5 mediocre players in a team with 4 Test superstars.
Something is rotten at the heart of this team. And it will be interesting to watch this unfold.
Watch out Pakistan!
But Pakistan should be careful. Whichever Aussies take the field against them will be used to the conditions, and will have a lot to prove.
And Australia will still have 4 absolute Test match-winners in the team in the shape of Starc, Hazlewood, Smith and Warner.
But what have we actually just witnessed? And should Pakistan be counting their chickens?
The Aussie bowling is okay. Not great, but okay
The Aussie bowlers, shorn of their two fastest bowlers in Cummins and Pattinson, have actually done fine. They have restricted South Africa to scores of:
242
540-8d
326
Starc and Hazlewood have been excellent, but the third seamer is a weak link and Nathan Lyon is a deeply mediocre off-spinner who can't bat.
Half the batting is just fine
The problem, of course, is the batting. But even there, Dave Warner, Steve Smith and Usman Khawaja have been fine, while Shaun Marsh was good too until he broke a finger.
So the malaise seems to be traceable back to three positions: Numbers 5, 6 and 7.
Adam Voges was never good enough to get into the Test team even in his twenties, and it is illuminating that over the last decade the selectors only came to him after trying out Andrew Symonds (who was never really a Test batsman), Rob Quiney and Alex Doolan.
Voges was called up in the hope that he could emulate Mike Hussey and Chris Rogers as mature veterans to stabilise the team. And at his age he's great on flat tracks. But his failure on livelier pitches not only means the end for him, but raises huge questions against Misbah-ul-Haq and Younis Khan Down Under.
The number 6 position is a worry too. I still think it was an error to throw Mitch Marsh overboard, because [MENTION=132373]Convict[/MENTION] has warned us for years that Callum Ferguson is a mediocre batsman, and the balance that Marsh gives is sorely missed.
As for Peter Nevill, he was brilliantly compared by [MENTION=136729]Suleiman[/MENTION] to Adnan Akmal. I hadn't thought of it, but it's a perfect comparison: two tidy keepers whose batting is the poor end of mediocre.
The historical context
I have seen teams in this situation before. And I don't mean the mid-1980's Australia: they were different because ATG's had just retired (Lillee, Marsh, Chappell), terrific new players were emerging (the Waughs, Dean Jones, Mark Taylor, Craig McDermott, David Boon) and the disappearance of mediocre older players to Rebel tours of Apartheid-era South Africa meant that the youngsters got a long run in the team, even though they lost for a couple of years.
In 1992-93 Australia was two runs away from defeating the West Indies at Adelaide to topple them as world champions, but lost by 1 run. They then fell apart at Perth and were beaten in the final Test within 7 sessions - just like today.
The selectors kept their nerve, and the team moved on to an away Ashes series which was won by Shane Warne's "Ball of the Century" to Mike Gatting, which cracked English morale and led to a 4-1 victory.
Contrast that with England in the 1980's. They won the Ashes Down Under in 1986-87 and then pushed the world's second best (or possibly joint best) team, the Pakistanis, close in home and away series in 1987.
But the following summer they were demolished by a moderate West Indies team in large part because the selectors lost their minds and created the "Summer of Four Captains", and the team fell apart with the turmoil.
The following summer England expected to retain The Ashes, but a very ordinary Aussie bowling attack achieved a 4-0 victory in England because of the same never-ending selectorial Merry-Go-Round.
Where to now for Australia?
The team is at a crossroads.
Four players are secure: Warner, Smith, Starc and Hazlewood. Not just secure, but potential matchwinners.
Two more players - Lyon and Khawaja - have arguably done enough to stay in the team.
I'd rather see Glenn Maxwell than Nathan Lyon in the team - what's the point of a spinner who can't bat, but also can't bowl in Asia? But that's not going to happen.
So the first question is whether the selectors replace 5 players now (second opener, Voges at Number 5, Number 6, third seamer, wicketkeeper) or whether they toss aside Nathan Lyon too.
And the second question is whether they pursue their insane attachment to veteran debutants - now including Callum Ferguson - instead of youngsters. Do they really think they can clone Mike Hussey?
It's pretty clear now that Matthew Wade will replace Peter Nevill as wicketkeeper. But nobody else really screams out for selection. The cupboard is bare.
What are Pakistan's prospects?
I think that Pakistan will be in trouble if Australia keep their nerve and produce greentops for the back-to-back Day/Night Tests v South Africa and Pakistan.
Australia would negate their weakness - low scores - and have Pink Ball specialists like the huge left-armer Jason Behrendorff who could hurt the opposition under lights.
A grassless future of high-scoring draws?
I think that Cricket Australia's hierarchy is too damaged to take the risk of losing the toss on greentops in the Day/Night Tests. I think we will see grassless tracks which turn the pink ball into a rag and see huge scores amassed. That will damage the attendances and future of Pink Ball cricket, but James Sutherland and Pat Howard and even Darren Lehmann have careers and large salaries to protect.
The irony, of course, is that grassless pitches give Misbah, Younis and even Hafeez a chance to survive and score runs.
Is something else going on?
The 1989 England team fell apart in the Ashes while secret negotiations for a Rebel Tour of South Africa were going on.
The Aussie team half a decade earlier was doing the same things.
I don't want to be moderated, but the 1992-1999 Pakistanis underperformed at times when some of the team were suspected of fixing.
I don't see how a team with a good top order linked to a dodgy lower-middle order can keep collapsing like this.
It's only 11 days ago that Australia was 158-0 in reply to South Africa's 242 all out in the First Test.......only to collapse to 244 all out.
And now, in the last four days they have produced an 85 all out which is MUCH worse than it looks - remember that Smith scored 48 not out, the rest made 36-9 - followed by losing 8 wickets for 40 runs today.
Obviously morale is bad. Self-confidence is bad. Belief is absent.
On the first evening of the match Darren Lehmann hinted that the players felt that Mitch Marsh had been lied to by the selectors about being given two Tests before he would be dropped.
And today, after the match, Steve Smith made clear that this is not the team selection that he wanted.
This capitulation is not just about 5 mediocre players in a team with 4 Test superstars.
Something is rotten at the heart of this team. And it will be interesting to watch this unfold.
Watch out Pakistan!
But Pakistan should be careful. Whichever Aussies take the field against them will be used to the conditions, and will have a lot to prove.
And Australia will still have 4 absolute Test match-winners in the team in the shape of Starc, Hazlewood, Smith and Warner.
