KEY POINTS:
This is a message to all those doomsayers who believed England would crumble in the face of a near-obsessed Australian team; would lose the Ashes and would probably finish last in the one-day tri-series as well.
Um, it actually looks a lot worse than that.
Call it a knee-jerk reaction, but the first couple of days at Brisbane went a long way towards confirming some nagging doubts about England, while highlighting Australia's ability to lift themselves for any occasion.
It's true, there could be something like 1500 more deliveries to be bowled at the Gabba and to be writing off the visitors so early in the contest might sound a trifle pessimistic or cynical.
Nevertheless, when England spearhead Steve Harmison opened proceedings on the first day with a delivery that travelled directly and without deviation into the hands of Andrew Flintoff at second slip, it was difficult - even for the staunchest supporter - not to fear the worst.
After all, it was about a dozen years ago that England began their quest for the Ashes with a similarly calamitous beginning at Brisbane.
On that occasion, an unsuspecting Phil DeFreitas began the much-awaited first test with his customary half-paced sighter, only to see Michael Slater smash it for four as if he'd already been batting for an hour.
Slater carried on to make 176, Australia finished the day at 329 for four, won the test by 184 runs and went on to secure the series 3-1.
And in England's last tour Downunder (2002-03), skipper Nasser Hussain took leave of his senses after winning the toss at the Gabba and opted - against all conventional wisdom - to insert his hosts.
By the time stumps were drawn on the first day, Steve Waugh's mob had RSVP'd the invitation to the tune of 364 for two, following centuries from Matthew Hayden and Ricky Ponting.
Australia went on to win the test by 384 runs and the series 4-1.
English online newspapers have been running hot with feedback from readers indignant at the suggestion that England have already blown their chances in this series, and that Australia will regain the Ashes with a swagger. Respected scribes such as the Guardian's Lawrence Booth have been taken to task for daring to propose that, far from the first two days being an aberration, they looked more like a sign of things to come.
The most desperate of the hopefuls are recalling their favourite memories from last season, when England lost the first test at Lord's before roaring back to win the Ashes for the first time in 18 years.
But that was in England, at a time when Glenn McGrath was injured, Damien Martyn was being sawn-off by poor umpiring decisions in almost every innings, and when Michael Vaughan's side were close to full strength.
This is much different. Australia are at home in familiar conditions, they are stronger than their opponents in terms of batting and bowling, and they have much better access to replacements should anyone fall over.
There also appears to be an enormous difference in attitude between the sides. Australia are playing like the hunters, England like the hunted.
There is a fragility about the tourists; a mental flakiness that undermines almost everything they seek to accomplish, as if they can't quite bring themselves to believe that they can beat Australia.
You can see it in the players' eyes and in their body language. You can see it in the way they've so readily adopted the underdogs' role and in the way they've accepted another appalling start at Brisbane, as if it was half expected.
But, above all, you can see it in the confidence levels of the Australians. That, more than anything else, could mean another long tour for England.
