England's new low

England have stumbled from one disappointment to the next post the 2005 Ashes, winning just two series out of eight. But the humiliation by New Zealand in this Test really is something else: a new low for the England side.

New Zealand played very well, without doubt. They batted with immense patience and pugnaciousness, seizing the game with the 150-run stand between Brendon McCullum and Daniel Vettori. With the ball, they were relentless in their discipline, bowling cannily and with great skill on a docile track.

But still. This is a side who are ranked seventh in the world for good reason. Their best bowled by far, Shane Bond, has been scapegoated and banned for signing up with the ICL. Their bowling lacks any x-factor; even Dan Vettori averages in the mid-30s. Before this game, no one in their side averaged under 32 with the ball, or 40 with the bat, even allowing for a number of games against Bangladesh.

For their part, England were meek and timid. They were overwhelmed by fear with the bat as, save for some gorging on the awful West Indian attack, they have since Adelaide 2006. Scoring at 2 an over over 173 overs in their first innings defies belief in the modern Test game, especially against an attack not unreasonably considered toothless. Yes, New Zealand are perennially written off, but, for all their ODI qualities, they play less than half the number of Tests England do. Against South Africa - a side England would doubtless claim they would expect to beat - they were twice pulverised, failing to past 200 over four innings in the series.

In the first innings England's batting exhibited the familiar tendency of failing to reach a hundred (or even 70) despite being well set. Crease occupation has been a big concern, but the real problem was their overwhelmingly defensive mindset, paralysed by fear on a docile track against an attack that, for all their endeavour, are no world-beaters.In the second, they were simply pathetic, collapsing in time-honed fashion like a pack of cards. On both occasions, judicious batting with a sensible, positive mindset would have ensured against alarms. Paul Collingwood encapsulated the depressing timidity, crawling to a 50-ball two.

There seems to be a collective loss of self-belief and conviction, even afflicting Kevin Pietersen, that has engulfed the entire set-up, suggesting 'change for change's sake' may actually have some merit. Michael Vaughan's captaincy, albeit not his batting, has patently failed to impress since his return to the side. But on raw skill levels, too, England's deficiencies are increasingly apparent, despite their superlative catching in this game.

With the ball, England were equally pathetic, with Ryan Sidebottom's skill and indefatigableness unable to cover up for the lack of incision elsewhere, with even Matthew Hoggard seriously off the pace . Most people have long since had enough of Steve Harmison's little boy lost impression on tours, and he has run out of excuses. So, indeed have the side, who have truly hit a nadir.

The same was said when they were bowled out for 81 in Sri Lanka though. While Shah, Broad, Tremlett and especially Ramprakash and Caddick would be in the ideal XIs of many, the grim truth is this is more or less the best England have got.