Aussies are Human?

Check out these 2 scorecards:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/shared/fds/hi/statistics/cricket/scorecards/2005/6/11995/html/scorecard.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/shared/fds/hi/statistics/cricket/scorecards/2005/6/11670/html/scorecard.stm

This week the Aussies were first bowled out in 14.3 overs (admittedly out of just 20 maximum, but even in Test matches it's an achievement to get all their wickets in ANY number of overs) by England, and then when they batted up a whopping score of 342 in a 50-over match vs. Somerset their vaunted bowling attack (albeit minus Shane Warne and Jason Gillespie) could not defend it. In fact Somerset had 3 overs to spare at the end.

Something tells me they'll have their "A game" going by the time the Ashes series begins late next month, but usually their "B game" (or just their reputation alone) will flatten even a strong opponent. This is the team which didn't lose a match in the 2003 World Cup despite the last-minute loss of Shane Warne and some injuries to others, including Jason Gillespie.

You certainly have to give some credit to the unheralded Jon Lewis (4 wickets) and Paul Collingwood (2 wickets + 46 runs off 26 balls) in the 20/20, and to Graeme Smith and Sanath Jayasuriya (opening partnership of 197) in the Somerset match, but I think the Aussies have lost the intimidation factor this summer.

Any opinions out there? Anyone who saw either of these matches have any perspective to add?