I would be interested in the thoughts of Australians about a possible crossroads (might it exist?) in the WAY that Australia play their cricket. I do not think it would be going too far that this tour represents the final end of the "Border approach" to test cricket. When histories are written about the dominance of Australia over England one of the factors often cited is the order by Border on that 1989 tour not to socialise etc with the England players. It was the epitomy of the "win at all costs" attitude (and is the basis for many of the English jibes whenever this current team have complained about upholding the "spirit of cricket). Over recent years and culminating in this tour one has got a very noticeable sense that many members of the australian team (with Gilchrist being the most obvious figure and leading figure) are fed up with their reputation and have been almost yearning for the days of the past. Some of them almost seemed to be enjoying the experience of losing to England, so much pleasure did it seem to be giving the English crowds.
Meanwhile one has heard mutterings from the likes of Border and Waugh, openly questioning whether the attitude that the Australian team has taken has been a major factor in their defeat.
Does this represent a crossroads for the Australian approach to cricket, especially once the losing of the Ashes, and the realisation that a golden era of great players may have passed sinks in?