The Australian media has lambasted their struggling cricket team following their Lord's hammering at the hands of England.
England's whopping 347-run victory puts the hosts 2-0 up with three Tests to play.
And the Australian leader writers and journalists are already asking the question: 'Is this the worst side Australia has sent to England to compete for the Ashes?'
The Herald Sun said: "England's mocking media are in danger of being right. This could well be the worst Australian side ever to embark on an Ashes tour.
"Australia has never lost more than three Tests during a series in England. On the back of a depressing 347-run, four-day defeat in the second Test at Lord's, this side may well lose all five."
It added: "There is a sense of foreboding about what lies ahead, with (Sunday's) enormous loss the second worst runs defeat by Australia in Ashes history and the worst in England...
"Australia must find a way of scoring runs or be consigned to the dust bowl of history."
The Age newspaper is hoping that amidst the "carnage", the Aussies unearth some diamonds for the future.
It said: "Australia's bowling is young and inexperienced, but promising... the current batting line-up deserves to be ranked with previous underachievers. And unfortunately, it lacks their excuses.
"A glance back provides evidence that, for batting at least, this could indeed end up the 'worst-ever'.
"Let's hope that somewhere amid the carnage, we uncover the players who will make us competitive again, whether departing, or returning to our shores."
The Sydney Herald compared the Lord's hammering to the made-for-television film Sharknado, in which people are eaten by sharks.
Under the headline "Schlock horror at Lord's as Australians follow all too predictable script", the Herald said the weakness of the Australian side was a concern for everyone.
"It's a concern for cricket... if its premier contest becomes a no-contest. Perhaps not so much for England supporters or players in the near term."
The Courier Mail suggested the former coach Mickey Arthur - sacked just before the series began - had been made a convenient scapegoat.
It said: "Arthur may have had his shortcomings, but how the world loves a scapegoat, a man whose nose we can gleefully rub in the dirt because it stops us from looking at the place we loathe most - the mirror.
"In the blissful three-week period between Arthur's sacking and the second Ashes Test, Australia have been living in a fool's paradise where the systematic denigration of Arthur created the impression one man alone was responsible for the slide in our cricketing fortunes.
"Never mind the fact that we couldn't bat (shhhhhh) and the captain (Michael Clarke) and his allrounder (Shane Watson) have been at loggerheads long before Arthur arrived.
"With the Australian side's disciplinary levels fading with their performances, Arthur, it was reasoned, had to be the problem. Surely, it could not have been - gulp - us?"