This, been saying it for years. People made the mistake of assuming thta becuase we were beating Australia and winning games consistently we were mint. But Australia were really very poor, and even then we didn't whitewash them at any point. We wern't beating vintage Australia, we were beating an ok-average team. Likewise we beat other ok-average teams, an ailing India, and that was it. Got to no 1 in the world, but it was an easy road. This crop of players still haven't beaten South Africa in a series, or looked close to doing so, and they have been comfortably a way in the distance for as long as we've been this supposedly great team. So we've somehow been amazing, yet not even been the best team in the wolrd at any point.
People just can't keep England's sporting performances, at anything, in perspective. We're either shite or amazing, when in reality we tend to hover between competent and pretty good. This England team was around the pretty good mark for two years, but never close to being one of the greats. English teams also rest once they achieve a certain level. Rugby team did it in 2003, Cricket team did it as of 2011. They're content with where they're at and stop working at keeping themsleves there.
What's happned this series is that England have taken the 3-0 as read, rather than realise how flattering the whole summer was, believed their own hype, failed to look at how average every win was more or less, and come a cropper of a hurting, vengeful Australia side who have patently worked and thought very hard for this.[DOUBLEPOST=1386438317][/DOUBLEPOST]
Not a bad side, just an average one. And avergae sides don't tend to win series in Australia.
