A 4–1 score-line is a fair reflection of how this Ashes played out. England were probably a  three out of ten overall, Australia closer to an eight, and that balance was evident across the  five matches. Both sides were affected by significant injuries, particularly in the bowling  departments, but taken as a whole it was a disappointing spectacle. Given the hype,  expectations, history and drama that always surround an Ashes series, it never truly delivered.  Two matches finished in two days, pitches were poor, technology failed at key moments, and  the quality of England’s cricket was below what the occasion demanded. When you look back,  it feels like a couple of months of genuine disappointment.  

That view isn’t driven by bias. Australia were clearly the better side. They were resilient under  pressure, they found ways to fight, and they consistently took control in key moments. England  played their part in allowing that to happen. Australia fully deserved to win the Ashes and  deserve huge credit for doing so.  

From an England perspective, it has been a tale of woe. There was a lot of discussion around  preparation before the first Test in Perth, and that match proved pivotal. England were  effectively at full strength while Australia were not. England had a decent first day and then a  real opportunity on day two, but they failed to capitalise and never truly recovered from that  point. Although they did manage to win one Test, the psychological momentum of the series  shifted dramatically after Travis Head’s century while chasing 200. That innings, played under  pressure, was arguably the key moment of the entire contest and had a massive influence on  the final outcome.  

England’s management have backed their players consistently over the past few years, with  very stable selection. In the end, that stability may have bred too much comfort and not enough  accountability. It’s difficult to know the true mood inside the dressing room from interviews  and press releases, but there needs to be a genuinely honest and introspective review. The group  has become too insular. That closeness can be understandable—players naturally retreat into  the dressing room under pressure—but in this case it appears they were not open enough to  external input, and that balance has been lost.  

Too many batters failed to take responsibility at crucial moments. Joe Root had a couple of  innings of substance, and Jacob Bethell was outstanding late in the series. As I had said before  the series, Bethell should have played earlier and I had said that in my series preview article  that he would make an impact when finally given the chance.  

There were many contributions without a decisive, match-defining innings. Zak Crawley, for  example, responded after a pair in the first Test with scores in the 70s and 80s, but those needed  to become 150s or 160s to properly set games up for England. He has been backed, nurtured  and given this series as his moment, and while he had flashes, it ultimately wasn’t enough. That  is something he, like others, will have to confront.  

With the ball, England were repeatedly ill-disciplined. There is a clear obsession with pace,  and pace is a valuable weapon—batters do not enjoy facing it—but pace without the  fundamentals of Test cricket is ineffective. Line and length remain the pillars of the format,  and England failed to hit them consistently. You cannot expect to beat a side like Australia  without mastering those basics. 

One of the enduring images of the series is Travis Head repeatedly cutting the ball for four.  Time and again England bowled into his strengths without adjustment, which speaks to poor  discipline and decision-making both on and off the field.  

There is sympathy for Ben Stokes. He is clearly the talisman of the side and looked increasingly  frustrated and mentally exhausted as the series wore on. In contrast, players like Root, Smith  and Head consistently showed their class. On difficult surfaces, when they got in, they made it  count and battled through tough periods. The reality is that this was a massive missed  opportunity for England—one they will talk about for years as the series they genuinely had a  chance to win in Australia.  

Some changes to personnel may come, whether among players, senior management or  backroom staff, though how dramatic those changes will be remains to be seen. There are still  many positives from the Stokes–McCullum–Key era, and dismantling everything would be a  mistake. However, what has crept in is a lack of accountability and an overly insular mindset.  Whatever the approach or philosophy, the basic principles of Test cricket do not change, and  England’s disregard for those principles at key moments ultimately cost them.  

It was surprising that Josh Tongue was not used more, and Bethell too could have featured  more prominently, though the issue goes beyond individual selections. Too many mistakes  were made, and England’s mindset, which is often inherently conservative, swung too far in  the opposite direction. The aggressive, refreshing style of the past few years has been exciting,  but it has become too extreme and too unaccountable. The hope is that reflection does not lead  to a full retreat back into conservatism, because there were genuine positives in the new  approach.  

Players will reflect individually as well. Crawley needs to become a consistent run-scorer, not  just a talented player. That means going back to county cricket, working hard, and developing  the instinct and confidence to score runs in key moments. Duckett may reflect on aspects of his  technique, Brook and Jamie Smith on how to handle the short ball better. These are the kinds  of specific lessons England will take away.  

Australia, meanwhile, deserve great credit. They may have expected to be tested more often  after the opening day in Perth, when England’s attack challenged them hard, but they adapted  and proved otherwise. They were resilient under pressure. Mitchell Starc was outstanding,  Travis Head’s Perth innings was massive despite coming in with little form, and Steve Smith  showed his enduring class. There are still issues for Australia moving forward—they are an  ageing side and unsettled at the top—but Alex Carey was excellent, and their bowling unit  remains organised and disciplined. Even when Cummins and Hazlewood were unavailable,  replacements like Scott Boland and Michael Neser stepped in effectively.  

In the end, it was not a memorable Ashes series. That isn’t said with bias, but with honesty.  There are lessons for both sides, but far more for England, who will find it difficult to look  back at the past couple of months and accept how a real opportunity slipped away.