It has been an enthralling few weeks. Grisly, but enthralling. It has been a celebration of the second most exciting thing in sport; that is to say, losing. The England cricket team, an inventive bunch, have found new and ever more fascinating ways of doing the oldest thing in sport.

Barring the extraordinary — and the last time I wrote those words, it was after the fourth day’s play in Adelaide and I was expecting a well-managed fighting draw — but, as I say, barring the utterly and unprecedentedly extraordinary, England will have lost the Ashes by the time you are reading this.

And while the defeat and the manner of it have been cruelly disappointing, it is undeniable that the story has, again, held us in its clutches. It has had so many vicious and bitter twists: the heroics of Andrew Flintoff, the boy on the burning deck during Australia’s opening jeu d’esprit of 602 runs; the defiance of Kevin Pietersen and Paul Collingwood; the great stand between the two in the next match; Matthew Hoggard’s bowling against the odds; and, in the latest match, Monty Panesar’s eight wickets and Alastair Cook’s century.

There has been some stuff to cheer, all right, but, alas, not enough. And so we need someone to blame, someone to suffer for our disappointment. Flintoff, the captain, is too well loved, so, naturally, the cry goes out: sack the coach. Duncan Fletcher must go.

But I have worked out the real reason why England have — barring the . . . etc, etc — lost the Ashes and am prepared to name the real culprits. Stand up and be blamed, Ricky Ponting, Glenn McGrath, Shane Warne. It’s your fault that England have been beaten. You have let England down by playing some wonderful bloody cricket.

It has become one of those unmentionable things. When England lose a match in any of the leading sports, every possible reason for failure is debated except the most important one of all, that the opposition played better. So hear a shocking truth — there is no rule in sport that says the opposition are not allowed to do so.

And that has been the truth of the matter. England have made mistakes, and we shall come to them in due course as the series continues to unravel, but the fact is that Australia won because they are better at cricket. They played better when it counted.

Defeat is not entirely a moral failing of the England cricketers and their coach. England have been up against three of the best ever to play the game: Ponting is in the form of his life and McGrath and Warne, in their declining years, are better than most other bowlers at their peak.

Grit your teeth and admit it, it has been a privilege to watch them. If you didn’t feel enriched by seeing this trio in action over the past three matches — three men on a mission to set things right after their defeat in England in 2005 — then you don’t really have sport in your soul. Only partisanship, and that is a poor thing on its own.

So it looks as if it’s all over. England are in the position of the skater who misses her first three triples and, already humiliated beyond bearing, must skate on, smiling horribly, knickers full of ice, until the witless music mercilessly grinds to its appointed finish. But we who merely watch can look away already, wondering about the future. An Ashes tour is not about development, last time I heard, but it is still true that when it comes to looking at the next five years of international cricket, I’d sooner have England’s players than Australia’s.

The dissolution of the great Australia team has been long predicted and long delayed. They are living — and living majestically — on borrowed time, but payback cannot be put off much longer. Like Private Godfrey in Dad’s Army, the great names of the Australia side must very soon ask to be excused.

At first glance, a search for Henman-esque positives for England to take away looks bitter and fruitless. But look closer.

Although it has been the batting that has been the greatest disappointment, there is potential for a very strong line-up indeed, with the intransigence of Collingwood, the genuine class of Cook, Ian Bell and Andrew Strauss, and the extraordinary Pietersen, who may yet prove to be one of the greatest players of all time. And in the bowling, Panesar at least gave grounds for optimism, while Hoggard is as solid as ever and Flintoff is always Freddie.

Over the 15 months since England won the Ashes, they have demonstrated precisely the wrong way to deal with victory. They learnt nothing from 2005. As a result, they must try to learn something from defeat.

If they can do this, we will be cheering again before too long. Perhaps in the summer of 2009.