Australia v England, 5th Test, Sydney, 3rd day January 5, 2014

543 balls, 20 wickets

England were bowled out twice in 90.3 overs in the Sydney Test. Stats highlights from another rout
  shares 31

Click here for Australia's batting and bowling averages in the series, and here for England's.

  • Australia's 5-0 victory is only the third such rout in an Ashes series, with all three such verdicts going in favour of Australia on their home soil: they had previously beaten England 5-0 in 1920-21 and 2006-07.

  • Overall, it is Australia's fifth such series verdict against any opposition - they have also beaten West Indies (2000-01) and South Africa (1931-32) by 5-0 margins. For England too, it's the fifth time they've been thrashed by a 5-0 margin - they suffered two such beatings versus West Indies in the 1980s.

  • England's second innings in Sydney lasted just 31.4 overs, their tenth-lowest ever against Australia. Eight of those were before 1910. Over the last 100 years and more, this is the second-lowest, after the 28.2 overs in which they were bowled out at the Gabba in 2002-03. Since 1910, England have been bowled out in fewer overs only five times by any opposition.

  • England lost 20 wickets in 543 balls in this Test; in other words, they batted 90.3 overs - which is three balls over a regular day's play - and were bowled out twice. Since 1910, only once have they lost 20 in fewer deliveries: against West Indies in Kingston in 1986, they lasted 530 deliveries and were bowled out for 159 and 152. Against West Indies at Edgbaston in 1995, they lost 19 wickets in 446 balls - Alec Stewart didn't bat in the second innings because of an injury.

  • England's average of 21.58 runs per wicket is their fifth-lowest in a series since 1910; two of those have happened in the last couple of years - against Pakistan in the UAE in 2012, they averaged 19.06 over three Tests, their lowest in a series during this period.

  • Australia's batsmen averaged 41.41 runs per wicket over the entire series, compared to England's 21.58. The difference of 19.83 between the two averages is the seventh-highest in any Ashes series. When Australia won 5-0 in 2006-07 the difference in averages was 26.42, while England averaged 21.91 more than Australia when they won 3-1 in 2010-11.

  • Mitchell Johnson's series haul of 37 wickets is the ninth-highest in an Ashes series, but the fifth-best in a five-Test contest. Jim Laker's 46 in five Tests in 1956 is the highest in any Ashes, while the best for Australia in a five-Test Ashes is Shane Warne's 40 in England in 2005. Johnson's 37 is the best by an Australia bowler in a five-Test Ashes series in Australia.

  • Johnson's 37 wickets also equals the record series haul by a left-arm fast bowler - Australia's Bill Whitty took 37 against South Africa in 1910-11.

  • Among bowlers who have bowled at least 1000 balls in an Ashes series, Johnson's average of 13.97 is the third-best, next only to Laker (9.60 in 1956) and Rodney Hogg (12.85 in 1978-79).

  • Ryan Harris' 5 for 25 is his fourth five-for in 12 Tests against England; out of his 93 Test wickets, 57 have come against England at an average of 20.63.

  • England's top five didn't score a single century in the series - the only hundred for the team came from Ben Stokes, batting at No.6. It's only the second such instance for England in an Ashes series of five or more Tests since 1900 - the previous instance was in 1972 in England, when their top five averaged 25.13, and scored four fifties in 48 innings. Here, they averaged 25.57, and scored nine fifties in 50 innings.

  • Australia's batsmen, on the other hand, scored ten hundreds in the series, which equals their record for an Ashes series. They also scored ten in 1920-21, 1946-47 and in 1993.

  • The 5-0 series drubbing has pushed Australia up to No. 3 in the ICC's Test rankings, while England have slipped to No. 4.

S Rajesh is stats editor of ESPNcricinfo. Follow him on Twitter

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • mjk45 on January 6, 2014, 23:08 GMT

    About the 100wickets the reason that there was no 100 wickets in 1920-21 is due to the fact that in the 2nd test the English player J.W Hearne was absent not able to play in both innings , so No_1_ again can tell his son there where in fact no English declarations.

  • on January 6, 2014, 14:57 GMT

    Get rid of Flower, Cook & all the coaching staff, start afresh with Englishmen who want to play & fight for the 3 Lions.

  • MrKricket on January 6, 2014, 9:26 GMT

    I've seen plenty of mentions of the 10 Australian centuries to one from England but the more important stat is the number of century partnerships. England got just the one too. Australia? Look it up. Tests are won by batsmen forming partnerships. Tests are won by bowlers breaking partnerships. I would guess the stats are similar (but reversed) for Australia's 0-4 result in India.

  • mrgupta on January 6, 2014, 8:40 GMT

    I have often seen people mentioning here on Cricinfo on How India manages to get thrashed outside but win handsomely in India. Why restrict to India? Aus lost 4-0 in India but won easily in Aus. England was winning everything in England but got thrashed in Aus. And yes both Eng and Aus are places where there are bouncy pitches, so guys if India cant play on bouncy pitches then neither can England and Aussies cant play on spinning tracks! Every team is winning in their own backyard and loosing outside!

  • on January 6, 2014, 8:34 GMT

    I loved the Ashes series too but before we Aussies get too carried away here's a different perspective on the Ashes which is unlikely to be highlighted in the (handwringing) English or by the (triumphant) Aussie media.

    Home track bullies rule.

    Home sides win test matches. No test side other than Zimbabwe lost at home in the last year. Since the start of 2013, there have been 42 test matches: - the home sides won 30 (slightly over 70%) - the away sides won just 2 (5%). In both cases the losing side was Zimbabwe who, in most people's opinion, are not of test quality. - there were 10 draws (25%).

    Conclusions a. at 70% won ratio, in a 5 test series the average result would be 3-0 or 4-0. Consequently England slightly underperformed when they beat Australia 3-0 at home and Australia only slightly exceed the norm winning 5-0. b. England are correctly judged by the bookies as equal favourites to retain the Ashes in 2015 at home.

  • Digimont on January 6, 2014, 7:36 GMT

    I think the most damning statistic of them all is that England failed to dismiss Australia's number 11 in the entire series.

  • sidh78 on January 6, 2014, 2:36 GMT

    every one always pointed out ins's 4-0 loss in aus & eng.that time india was very tired(after wc&ipl) & had very aging team.so they lost in alien conditions.ind also whitewashed aus 4-0.but now look at eng, whitewashed 5-0 in almost similar conditions of there own& not alien for engl.butu heared any time that ind whitewashed in subcontinante which has similar condn. like india but india always dominated in sc and played very well beside thay two eng - aus tour

  • on January 6, 2014, 0:46 GMT

    Find 10 more Stokes? Scott Borthwick, Chris Woakes, Moeen Ali, David Willey, Chris Jordan, Adil Rashid, Will Gidman, Luke Wright, Keith Barker... and Ned Eckersley. 11 allrounders including the wicketkeeper.

  • whensdrinks on January 6, 2014, 0:31 GMT

    It is the first time that all 100 English wickets have fallen in an Ashes series.

    This has happened before in other series e.g. Sth Africa lost 100 in the 1935/36 tour of Australia.

  • on January 5, 2014, 22:13 GMT

    @Yevghenny - i read "imported" instead of "important". Of course that would be correct too. Stokes is massively impressive. Imagine the thumping England would get against NZ if he played for his country of birth.

  • mjk45 on January 6, 2014, 23:08 GMT

    About the 100wickets the reason that there was no 100 wickets in 1920-21 is due to the fact that in the 2nd test the English player J.W Hearne was absent not able to play in both innings , so No_1_ again can tell his son there where in fact no English declarations.

  • on January 6, 2014, 14:57 GMT

    Get rid of Flower, Cook & all the coaching staff, start afresh with Englishmen who want to play & fight for the 3 Lions.

  • MrKricket on January 6, 2014, 9:26 GMT

    I've seen plenty of mentions of the 10 Australian centuries to one from England but the more important stat is the number of century partnerships. England got just the one too. Australia? Look it up. Tests are won by batsmen forming partnerships. Tests are won by bowlers breaking partnerships. I would guess the stats are similar (but reversed) for Australia's 0-4 result in India.

  • mrgupta on January 6, 2014, 8:40 GMT

    I have often seen people mentioning here on Cricinfo on How India manages to get thrashed outside but win handsomely in India. Why restrict to India? Aus lost 4-0 in India but won easily in Aus. England was winning everything in England but got thrashed in Aus. And yes both Eng and Aus are places where there are bouncy pitches, so guys if India cant play on bouncy pitches then neither can England and Aussies cant play on spinning tracks! Every team is winning in their own backyard and loosing outside!

  • on January 6, 2014, 8:34 GMT

    I loved the Ashes series too but before we Aussies get too carried away here's a different perspective on the Ashes which is unlikely to be highlighted in the (handwringing) English or by the (triumphant) Aussie media.

    Home track bullies rule.

    Home sides win test matches. No test side other than Zimbabwe lost at home in the last year. Since the start of 2013, there have been 42 test matches: - the home sides won 30 (slightly over 70%) - the away sides won just 2 (5%). In both cases the losing side was Zimbabwe who, in most people's opinion, are not of test quality. - there were 10 draws (25%).

    Conclusions a. at 70% won ratio, in a 5 test series the average result would be 3-0 or 4-0. Consequently England slightly underperformed when they beat Australia 3-0 at home and Australia only slightly exceed the norm winning 5-0. b. England are correctly judged by the bookies as equal favourites to retain the Ashes in 2015 at home.

  • Digimont on January 6, 2014, 7:36 GMT

    I think the most damning statistic of them all is that England failed to dismiss Australia's number 11 in the entire series.

  • sidh78 on January 6, 2014, 2:36 GMT

    every one always pointed out ins's 4-0 loss in aus & eng.that time india was very tired(after wc&ipl) & had very aging team.so they lost in alien conditions.ind also whitewashed aus 4-0.but now look at eng, whitewashed 5-0 in almost similar conditions of there own& not alien for engl.butu heared any time that ind whitewashed in subcontinante which has similar condn. like india but india always dominated in sc and played very well beside thay two eng - aus tour

  • on January 6, 2014, 0:46 GMT

    Find 10 more Stokes? Scott Borthwick, Chris Woakes, Moeen Ali, David Willey, Chris Jordan, Adil Rashid, Will Gidman, Luke Wright, Keith Barker... and Ned Eckersley. 11 allrounders including the wicketkeeper.

  • whensdrinks on January 6, 2014, 0:31 GMT

    It is the first time that all 100 English wickets have fallen in an Ashes series.

    This has happened before in other series e.g. Sth Africa lost 100 in the 1935/36 tour of Australia.

  • on January 5, 2014, 22:13 GMT

    @Yevghenny - i read "imported" instead of "important". Of course that would be correct too. Stokes is massively impressive. Imagine the thumping England would get against NZ if he played for his country of birth.

  • No_1_again on January 5, 2014, 21:24 GMT

    Folks, about 100 wickets. I had similar argument with my son and he cleared it for me. In 2005/06 series in the second test ENG declared and lost the test, thus AUS didn't require 20 ENG wickets to win that match. So no 100 wickets in that whitewash. Similar situation in 1920. Only this whitewash AUS took 100 ENG wickets (no English declaration in any of the innings).

  • Yevghenny on January 5, 2014, 18:13 GMT

    excruciating for English fans. Thank god it's over. The rebuilding begins, let us hope we try to find some aggression to get into this jaded side. The huge plus is Ben Stokes, potentially a massively important player for England

  • HolyShmoly on January 5, 2014, 16:50 GMT

    @akash112001, Agreed this is not a dream team of Ponting's, Hayden's, McGrath's, Warne's and Gilly's, However there are no ifs and buts, could've and should've in sports. You say if Cook & Peterson had shone...why not if only Carberry and Bell had batted properly and scored runs, if only Anderson and Swann had bowled, if only Prior had kept well, if only all the Englishmen had held the sitters, England would have avoided getting thrashed or perhaps would have hammered Australia 5-0 as well. The fact that a not so great Australian team walloped the so called great England says how bad England played. Give credit when it is due and let England go back home, take some time off with their families, do some self introspection and perhaps find a way forward out of this mess.

  • on January 5, 2014, 15:35 GMT

    Catches and stumpings have not been included with the batting averages, only with the bowling. So if anyone did not bowl, including the wicket-keepers on both sides, we do not know how many ct/st they took in the series. Please rectify this.

  • FurqanKhan on January 5, 2014, 13:33 GMT

    Impressed by the aggressive captaincy by micheal clarke even also in England... A lot of factors in aus's revival and english downfall this series but to me main two main factors from both sides were heroics of Haddin and Jhonson and downfall of Bell and Anderson...!!! Pathetic from England and Brilliant from Australia...now S.A-Aus series will be a cracker with the pace attack of both sides...S.A may have a home advantage but both sides are coming from series victories...!!!!

  • Back-Foot-Cringe on January 5, 2014, 13:08 GMT

    "Australia's batsmen, on the other hand, scored ten hundreds in the series, which equals their record for an Ashes series."

    Second innings in Melb, Clarke declared. Warner was 83 not out = a cinch for another ton. Would've bet my house on that one.

  • the_voice_of_reason on January 5, 2014, 12:59 GMT

    thejesusofcool: England did not lose all 100 wickets in 1920-21.

    J. W. Hearne fell ill after the first day of the second Test in Melbourne and was absent ill both innings - England thus only lost eighteen wickets in that defeat

  • akash112001 on January 5, 2014, 12:04 GMT

    This is not a dream team of pontings, haydens, gillys, McGraths and Warnes... If Cook & Peterson would have shined, easily the thrashing could have been avoided.

  • Back-Foot-Cringe on January 5, 2014, 12:04 GMT

    Add two more balls. Those belonging to Mitchell Johnson for coming back from physical & psychological adversity to take 37 wickets @ 14 runs apiece @ 30.6 strike rate.

  • Smahuta on January 5, 2014, 11:09 GMT

    Well played Australia, England were severly hammered and looked out of their depth all series long. Looking forward to a good series against South Africa soon where Australia will find a much tougher opponent I am sure. It is a pity this is not a 5 test series as well because I am sure it will not be a one sided affair like this dull ashes series was. Not to take anything away from aus amazing win but this was the poorest cricket in an ashes series I have seen in a long time.

  • thejesusofcool on January 5, 2014, 11:03 GMT

    Hi Sundara

    No, it's not a record, the 100 wickets falling-I just looked it up on Archive here & the 1920/21 team lost all 100 wickets, too.

    BUT that was the first tour to Aus where ALL Tests were played to a finish & some lasted 6 or 7 days as a consequence-this only applied between the 2 World Wars by the way.

    So it is a record, at least in some people's eyes!

  • HatsforBats on January 5, 2014, 10:49 GMT

    Since THAT 2005 Ashes series the ledger stands at 13-10 to Aus (4-2 to Eng). Swings & roundabouts. I'm glad we won, but I'd be happier if it was 3-2 after Sydney. Both teams need work, but all England need to do is find 10 more Stokes, my word he was impressive.

  • AidanFX on January 5, 2014, 10:46 GMT

    Can anyone here with supreme knowledge share some stats related to 100 wickets (100%) in a 5 Test series and how that squares?

  • AidanFX on January 5, 2014, 10:31 GMT

    The Australian batting has improved heaps. Yes I heard it a gazillion times about how much trouble they have been in in each Test. It is true there are some holes to fill; vulnerability is certainly there but it is improving. In some measure all the batsmen over both innings have performed (including to a lesser extent Bailey). They have a long way to go but the improvement under Leeman is noteworthy. I think they need to be careful especially with their first innings.

  • SoorajPA on January 5, 2014, 10:28 GMT

    Is this the first time England had eight left handed batsmen?

  • SoorajPA on January 5, 2014, 10:26 GMT

    All English Bowlers in this match were right hand bowlers, but left hand Batsmen!!!

  • on January 5, 2014, 10:15 GMT

    isn't this a unique series where 100 English Wickets fell in the series? shouldnt this also be counted as a record?

  • chicko1983 on January 5, 2014, 10:02 GMT

    Australia to defeat South Africa, India and Pakistan this year. Then win the t20 World Cup, then win the World Cup at home. By march 2013, they will be triple world no.1 over the three formats and normality will be restored.

  • DaisonGarvasis on January 5, 2014, 9:52 GMT

    After each collapse by England batting one would think, another one of those is not gonna happen in this series. And guess what, England ended series with two of such collpases in one match. Since England Team didnt not keep their feet on the ground when the going was easier, they (and their supporters) deserve every bit of the humiliation they got this series.

  • Rohit... on January 5, 2014, 9:43 GMT

    MJ rocks... And by MJ, I don't mean Michael Jackson.

  • K.M.Salik on January 5, 2014, 9:18 GMT

    it was as if england (not australia) trying to wrap up the match quickly...truly reflects how the series unfolded for england.....australian bowlers getting into their nerves

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • K.M.Salik on January 5, 2014, 9:18 GMT

    it was as if england (not australia) trying to wrap up the match quickly...truly reflects how the series unfolded for england.....australian bowlers getting into their nerves

  • Rohit... on January 5, 2014, 9:43 GMT

    MJ rocks... And by MJ, I don't mean Michael Jackson.

  • DaisonGarvasis on January 5, 2014, 9:52 GMT

    After each collapse by England batting one would think, another one of those is not gonna happen in this series. And guess what, England ended series with two of such collpases in one match. Since England Team didnt not keep their feet on the ground when the going was easier, they (and their supporters) deserve every bit of the humiliation they got this series.

  • chicko1983 on January 5, 2014, 10:02 GMT

    Australia to defeat South Africa, India and Pakistan this year. Then win the t20 World Cup, then win the World Cup at home. By march 2013, they will be triple world no.1 over the three formats and normality will be restored.

  • on January 5, 2014, 10:15 GMT

    isn't this a unique series where 100 English Wickets fell in the series? shouldnt this also be counted as a record?

  • SoorajPA on January 5, 2014, 10:26 GMT

    All English Bowlers in this match were right hand bowlers, but left hand Batsmen!!!

  • SoorajPA on January 5, 2014, 10:28 GMT

    Is this the first time England had eight left handed batsmen?

  • AidanFX on January 5, 2014, 10:31 GMT

    The Australian batting has improved heaps. Yes I heard it a gazillion times about how much trouble they have been in in each Test. It is true there are some holes to fill; vulnerability is certainly there but it is improving. In some measure all the batsmen over both innings have performed (including to a lesser extent Bailey). They have a long way to go but the improvement under Leeman is noteworthy. I think they need to be careful especially with their first innings.

  • AidanFX on January 5, 2014, 10:46 GMT

    Can anyone here with supreme knowledge share some stats related to 100 wickets (100%) in a 5 Test series and how that squares?

  • HatsforBats on January 5, 2014, 10:49 GMT

    Since THAT 2005 Ashes series the ledger stands at 13-10 to Aus (4-2 to Eng). Swings & roundabouts. I'm glad we won, but I'd be happier if it was 3-2 after Sydney. Both teams need work, but all England need to do is find 10 more Stokes, my word he was impressive.