What's new

What have England got to show for their 5-match series against India?

MenInG

PakPassion Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 2, 2004
Runs
218,167
In my opinion, the whole trip was designed for Anderson to get to 700 wickets.

Apart from that, given tactics and performances, I do not see any reason why the ECB would spend money to come back home with a 4-1 drubbing?

What were/are the positives from this trip for England?
 
There is no substitute for technique. Slog sweeps, reverse sweeps, cross batted slogs are not substitutes. Would have been 5-0 but for INdia taking their foot off the gas in the first test.
 
Positives will be the new spinner Bashir. And hopefully now they have seen the futility of Bazball as ‘the future of test cricket’ & learn from these mistakes while prepping for Ashes.

Otherwise this whole series has been a disaster, to put it mildly. Bazball has now become the laughing stock in the cricketing world.
 
A lot of learning.

1. Develop proper batters who can perform in all conditions and average over 40 in a long run. To be considered a top team, you need 3-4 such batsman in the team. England in last 10 years got only one.

2. Develop all conditions and all types of bowlers- pacers, spinners and seamers. Tall and bouncy hit the deck pacers, quality spinners and extremely skillful swing bowlers.

3. Most importantly, stick with the process and wait for better output rather than creating fake hype of revolutionizing test cricket by following impractical and unfeasible approach like the one they had in last 12 months.

Once they execute these things, they will finally start winning matches in India and Australia as well.
 
Truth be told, even winning a single test in India is a great feat. India has lost 4 tests at home in the last 10 years and only 3 with both Ashwin and Jadeja playing, so the Hyderabad victory will rank as one of the greatest wins in the history of English cricket, especially considering how they came back after conceding an enormous lead. Pope's 196 is probably the greatest knock by an English batter in any format, in their history. That they failed to capitalize on that win is a different matter but due credit should be given to them for that win. I rate their win in first test above their 2019 WC win, the scale of difficulty here was a different level.
 
the 2 new rookie spinners & huge question mark over being mindlessly brave 24/7 in Tests , more so against quality bowlers .
 
The first Test was a huge positive for England.

After that, it’s been slim pickings. I will go for: Bashir’s emergence as he looks a genuine find, Hartley putting in a good effort, Crawley’s improvement as a batsman, Root reversion to batting normally again with no more reverse dilscoops, Foakes wicketkeeping (but not his batting), Stokes returning to bowling fitness, 700 wickets for Anderson, and finally 100 Tests for Bairstow (because it means that he can now be dumped guilt-free into retirement…)
 
Bashir has been the find of the series. Consistency has been phenomenal.

Crawley has been good.

Pope's knock is an extreme outlier. One of the luckiest knocks ever.

Apart from Bashir and Crawley, no positives whatsoever.
 
Bashir and Hartley have bowled much better than Moeen, Leach and Adil Rashid from previous tours to India. Swann and Monty were exceptional in 2012, especially Monty. But apart from that, usually English spinners struggle in India, so that has to count as a positive.
 
Apart from Bashir and Crawley, no positives whatsoever.

Hartley has done himself proud in my opinion, a complete rookie and yet he got 22 wickets @ 36 which is not too bad for a first tour of India when your team is getting flogged. He also bowled England to victory in the first Test on his debut. So I’m etching him into the positives column.
 
Hartley has done himself proud in my opinion, a complete rookie and yet he got 22 wickets @ 36 which is not too bad for a first tour of India when your team is getting flogged. He also bowled England to victory in the first Test on his debut. So I’m etching him into the positives column.
Baptism by fire for these young spinners, and they have been more than decent. They can build on this and win England tests in Pakistan later this year.
 
India have been all over the English.

England just weren't the same after their golf tour of Abu Dhabi. They came back completely out of sorts.

Serious questions need to be asked as to why they needed to leave India part way through the tournament. I hope an Indian journalist grills them on what they felt India lacked as a country that stopped them from staying there continuously.
 
Hartley has done himself proud in my opinion, a complete rookie and yet he got 22 wickets @ 36 which is not too bad for a first tour of India when your team is getting flogged. He also bowled England to victory in the first Test on his debut. So I’m etching him into the positives column.

He's alright. Not as consistent. And on tours where you need only 1 specialist spinner , Id pick Bashir over him .

Hartley is not that much better than Leach. So I expect him to not be first choice SLA when England tour Lanka and PAK.
 
India have been all over the English.

England just weren't the same after their golf tour of Abu Dhabi. They came back completely out of sorts.

Serious questions need to be asked as to why they needed to leave India part way through the tournament. I hope an Indian journalist grills them on what they felt India lacked as a country that stopped them from staying there continuously.

As good an excuse as any I suppose - golf.
 
England will continue Baz balling in July Vs The West Indies. Root should be allowed to bat like a proper test batter though.
 
He's alright. Not as consistent. And on tours where you need only 1 specialist spinner , Id pick Bashir over him .

Hartley is not that much better than Leach. So I expect him to not be first choice SLA when England tour Lanka and PAK.

Bashir absolutely first choice for me, 100%.
 
As good an excuse as any I suppose - golf.
Are there no golf courses in India?

If England left Australia to go to Bali for a week then the media would have crucified them.

Baz and Stokes should give some answers why they felt a mid tour escape from India was necessary.
 
Are there no golf courses in India?

If England left Australia to go to Bali for a week then the media would have crucified them.

Baz and Stokes should give some answers why they felt a mid tour escape from India was necessary.
There are quite a few golf courses in India. In fact , they just played golf in Bangalore before this Test.

A better question for journos to ask would be why English seamers are so ineffective
 
There are quite a few golf courses in India. In fact , they just played golf in Bangalore before this Test.

A better question for journos to ask would be why English seamers are so ineffective
Coz they are generally rubbish away from home.
 
They don’t have to show much, but we learned the following facts:

1. Bazball is a scam. It is the not revolutionary brand of Test cricket that England think. It is a rubbish, unsustainable way of playing Test cricket.

2. The narrative that Bazball takes pressure off from the players is nonsense. In reality, it has the opposite effect and creates additional pressure, because the England players are under an obligation to prove that their way is the right way every time they step onto the pitch.

3. Ben Stokes is a finished cricketer. He is a liability in his individual capacity and England should look to drop him before the summer.

4. Ben Stokes is not the great captain and tactician that England fans think. His and McCullum’s little drama is over.

5. England fans have surpassed Pakistani fans when it comes to being delusional. They still think Stokes, McCullum and Bazball is the way forward and all they need is to tweak a little but Australia will burst that bubble as well.

6. Joe Root is a far greater player than Stokes and deserves far more respect.
 
Coz they are generally rubbish away from home.

Jimmy and Wood on their last tours of Australia and Pakistan

Jimmy - 23 and 18.5
Wood - 26 and 20.

They are not rubbish away, generally.


Jimmy has been protected too much. England played a 4 man attack where Jimmy didn't share enough of the workload. Every time out batters hit him , Stokes immediately took him out .

Put a lot of pressure on other 3 bowlers and Root to bowl much more.

Young Hartley and Bashir had to bowl a huge workload and be effective.

Even now, critique of Bazball has focussed on batting. It's the bowling that's costing them
 
7. Ben Stokes is not a great player. He is an average player who produced a few great moments.

Great players show great consistency. He has never been good enough to do so. The English like to hype themselves up too much - Stokes played a blinder in the 2019 Ashes but Kusal Perera played a better knock in South Africa in tougher conditions but no one talks about him as a Sri Lankan legend.

He played a good innings in the World Cup final but it was a stroke of luck that got him over the line and besides, many players have played such knocks in World Cup finals. Not all of them are greats of the game.
 
Ollie Pope's mammoth inning and then he failed in the other games. Shoaib Bashir is a big positive and Anderson's 700 scalps.
 
Last edited:
Many positives :

— I think Bashir was a real find and credit to the English management (Stokes/ Key/McCollum) for picking him. It took huge courage given his FC record. Hopefully he will continue to develop.
— The chastening defeat will hopefully instill a degree of humility in the way England behave, and certainly talk about themselves
— Deluded individuals, many of whom posted on this forum about how “Bazball” was the way Test cricket should now be played and Pakistan should mirror this, have proved to be totally wrong.
— Batsman who are prepared to grind out runs in Test cricket are jewels — Root’s century contained 48 singles and was at a SR of 50-60.
— As a passionate cricket fan, it was a most enjoyable series to watch on good cricketing wickets with some wonderful perfomances — watching Jaiswal, Ashwin and Bumrah has been a treat
 
Jimmy is an England great no doubt about that. But his away records improvement have been driven by a narrative revolving around bowling averages and not wickets. Similar to a batsman record accentuated by not outs.
 
Ben Stokes speaking at end of the 5th Test:

"Now that the series is done, I must admit that we were outplayed by the better team after the first test match. We had a few games where we gained a bit of momentum, but we were not able to maintain it for long. If you’re not going to do that against a stronger opposition, especially one so dominant in their home conditions, you’re always going to struggle to compete.
It’s important to note that we came here with high hopes and performed very well, but I must say that we were beaten by the better team in the last four games of the series."

"Our batting line up is = the best 6-7 better in England but it always does not work out as you want it to work. You back your best players and pick your best team. When you look at the last three years and what we have managed to achieve, I’m not going to let the last two years go to waste."

"Looking ahead over the next 12-18 months, we have six test matches in England, Pakistan, and New Zealand. We are looking for positives that we can take from this series. We are always looking to drive the team forward."

"When you look at the top order, Zak Crawley and Ben Duckett have consistently asserted their dominance. I’m not sure about the stats, but they must be averaging around 40 or 50 runs together so far and have been putting the bowling line up under pressure from ball 1. “

“What we’ve seen from Shoaib and Tom Hartly, who have so little experience coming into the series, is great not only for this team but also for the format of English cricket. I’m very impressed with Tom Hartly throughout the whole series. He had to take on the role of lead spinner, but he had to go home due to an unfortunate injury. We’re obviously looking at the batch coming into international cricket and making such a big impact. Eight wickets in the last game and 2nd five-fer in this game is another massive positive for us.”

I’ve been on the field a lot with Jimmy anderson and have seen many of his milestones. He’s not the type of person who plays cricket for all those milestones, but he is the type of person who plays cricket for his teammates and for England. I’ve played a lot of games with him, but I’ve never seen him this physically fit. At 41 years old, he’s an amazing person. He’s a great role model for anyone who wants to be a fast bowler."
 
England men's cricket team this winter

Lost six out of nine matches at the World Cup
Lost both 50-over and T20 series in West Indies
Lost Test series in India 4-1
 
A lot of learning.

1. Develop proper batters who can perform in all conditions and average over 40 in a long run. To be considered a top team, you need 3-4 such batsman in the team. England in last 10 years got only one.

2. Develop all conditions and all types of bowlers- pacers, spinners and seamers. Tall and bouncy hit the deck pacers, quality spinners and extremely skillful swing bowlers.

3. Most importantly, stick with the process and wait for better output rather than creating fake hype of revolutionizing test cricket by following impractical and unfeasible approach like the one they had in last 12 months.

Once they execute these things, they will finally start winning matches in India and Australia as well.
Are those learnings or a shopping list of resources every Test nation desires ? Who doesn't want to produce 40+ averaging batsmen, tall hit the deck bowlers who can overcome benign surfaces, or quality spinners ?

Cricket like any team sport is about maximising the resources you have, not creating gameplans based upon imaginary resources you don't have.

If England had a conveyor belt of technically correct, high averaging batsmen who can consistently grind out long innings then the phrase Bazball would've never been uttered. But they don't, and thus decided an ultra-positive approach would maximise their output while masking their defensive vulnerabilities.

Although I dislike Tests becoming elongated ODIs and the arrogant statements about "reinventing" Test cricket - it's succeeded against all their opponents bar Australia and India whose excellent attacks have neutralised them. That's still progress from where they were 2 years ago.

In case anyone needs reminding - when Stokes and McCullum were appointed England had 1 Test win in 17 including their first winless home summer in 20 years and 5 consecutive series defeats. That was the result of the "traditional method" of playing Test cricket - the process you and your friend argue they should've stuck with ?
 
Yes let's sack a captain for losing their first Test in two years, that too being India away.

I salute your analytical skills.

Same time 10 years ago, Stokes was the toast of town. He was the sole shining figure after the disastrous 2013/14 Ashes and great things were expected of him.

Fast forward to today - he's become too English and sulky faced: won't bowl if he doesn't feel like it, won't play some series if he isn't up to it it, and is quite an average performer overall. Can't average 40+ with the bat. Can't average 30- with the ball.
 
Same time 10 years ago, Stokes was the toast of town. He was the sole shining figure after the disastrous 2013/14 Ashes and great things were expected of him.

Fast forward to today - he's become too English and sulky faced: won't bowl if he doesn't feel like it, won't play some series if he isn't up to it it, and is quite an average performer overall. Can't average 40+ with the bat. Can't average 30- with the ball.
Different debate.
 
Young spinners and one test win in India.

Both are huge for Eng. India rarely loses a test at home and Eng won one despite being behind in that test. Eng rarely gets good spin talent. They bowled long overs without giving it up any time. Spinners were actually impressive given their lack of experience. I hope Eng does not let them go to waste and develop them.

Scoreline does not suggest but India had to work hard in the first part of this series and Eng had many chances to take the game way. It reminds me of India touring Eng 5-7 years back with simialr scoreline despite series being a lot closer in first half.
 
Truth be told, even winning a single test in India is a great feat. India has lost 4 tests at home in the last 10 years and only 3 with both Ashwin and Jadeja playing, so the Hyderabad victory will rank as one of the greatest wins in the history of English cricket, especially considering how they came back after conceding an enormous lead. Pope's 196 is probably the greatest knock by an English batter in any format, in their history. That they failed to capitalize on that win is a different matter but due credit should be given to them for that win. I rate their win in first test above their 2019 WC win, the scale of difficulty here was a different level.

I still can't believe we lost that 1st test ... should have easily won that one too but for irresponsible batting in 1st innings. Soo many bad shots
 
Otherwise this whole series has been a disaster, to put it mildly. Bazball has now become the laughing stock in the cricketing world.

This was definitely the Bazball-iest series. 100 sixes were hit in a test series for the first time.
 
Yes let's sack a captain for losing their first Test in two years, that too being India away.

I salute your analytical skills.
@Mamoon does have a point though.

Team Batting average ratios for IND/ENG for last 4 tours

2012/13 - 0.84

2016/17 - 1.54

2020/21 - 1.43

2024 - 1.55


The gap has been the biggest, marginally ahead of 2016/17, on this tour.

Root and Silverwood were more competitive despite the onslaught of Covid.

Some more , underlying numbers from analysts.

India attacked 29 % of the balls and scored at 138 strike rate and lost a wicket every 41 balls while attacking averaged England attacked 35 % and scored at a strike rate of 126 and lost a wicket every 28 balls.

India have attacked less but have been more brutal and fine it for longer without losing wickets.

But if you thought that was bad for England , the data for defending/rotating was absolutely damaging for England.

While looking to defend/rotate , England lost a wicket every 52 balls and averaged 13 with the bat.

India averaged 23 with the bat while defending/rotating but it took them on average , 103 balls to lose a wicket while doing so!

The Indian bowling attack was of such quality that they could rip wickets out at half the rate of the English attack !


Outgunned in every department.
 
The things we can conclude from this series:

- England's Bazball cannot work against all opponents and in all countries. They need to modify it sometimes. If they played sensibly, they could've won the series 3-2 instead of losing 1-4.

- England found some good spinners. Hartley, Rehan, and Bashir were good.
 
In India even if you three sessions India can do damage in one session that offset the failures in the 3 sessions. They are that potent. That is why it is very very hard to win in India.
 
This was definitely the Bazball-iest series. 100 sixes were hit in a test series for the first time.
Bazball was done by india here. Absolutely smashed enland and I seriously believe now that the first test victory was a big fluke. England has nothing to show apart from Anderson's 700 wickets landmark, shoaib Bashir's performances and Ollie pope's 190 plus as I mentioned earlier.
 
Are those learnings or a shopping list of resources every Test nation desires ? Who doesn't want to produce 40+ averaging batsmen, tall hit the deck bowlers who can overcome benign surfaces, or quality spinners ?

Cricket like any team sport is about maximising the resources you have, not creating gameplans based upon imaginary resources you don't have.

If England had a conveyor belt of technically correct, high averaging batsmen who can consistently grind out long innings then the phrase Bazball would've never been uttered. But they don't, and thus decided an ultra-positive approach would maximise their output while masking their defensive vulnerabilities.

Although I dislike Tests becoming elongated ODIs and the arrogant statements about "reinventing" Test cricket - it's succeeded against all their opponents bar Australia and India whose excellent attacks have neutralised them. That's still progress from where they were 2 years ago.

In case anyone needs reminding - when Stokes and McCullum were appointed England had 1 Test win in 17 including their first winless home summer in 20 years and 5 consecutive series defeats. That was the result of the "traditional method" of playing Test cricket - the process you and your friend argue they should've stuck with ?

I don't think you need gifted talented players to start expecting them to average 40+. If Root can average 49-50, how much it takes for the other middle order batters in England to average 40+? Really not much. It's just about being focused, resolute and hunger of runs, is that what England lacks? If yes, they need to work on their game, you won't get it from any shop or store.

There is still a major gulf in difference between India or Australia and England because England have failed to beat them in home conditions and got humiliated in their backyard. New Zealand are running England very closely and South Africa have the talent to recover and take up that 3rd slot if they rub off this quota policy nonsense.

As for the traditional method of playing Test cricket, weren't England winning home series vs Australia and India one after another using that method only? Weren't they winning vs South Africa and a good SA side with that method?

The only change this Bazball has brought is it allows England to bash minnow or weaker nations better than it did before. The scorelines of 2-1 or 3-2 vs the likes of Windies, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh at home might change to 2-0 or 3-0. Yes, Pakistan don't fall in minnows category but the same Pakistan team did lose to the likes of Australia and New Zealand also at home so Stokes side winning it is not some kind of achievement.
 
Different debate.

Does he merit a place in this English side?

He is worst batsman of the team. Doesn't bowl. Currently playing more like specialist captain while England keep waiting for repeat of Headingley performance.
 
Additionally, @Markhor , as for that one test win in 17 matches is concerned, how many of them did Stokes run away from playing? Imagine, Root deciding not to play in the tests that Stokes is captaining, England would probably stoop to a new low of embarassment where they would probably be competing with Bangladesh in home conditions with the series going into the decider and Bangladesh favourites to win.
 
Former England spinner Graeme Swann doesn't believe Rohit Sharma's captaincy was better than Ben Stokes' in the five-match Test series.Swann told local indian media in an exclusive chat after India inflicted an innings and 64-run defeat on England in the fifth and final Test in Dharamsala:

"He's been good don't get me wrong, Rohit Sharma, but, I don't think if you pick this apart and say Stokes has captained badly, I think you are barking up the wrong tree there."

"Rohit Sharma's bowlers have really come to town for him, come to the party for him, in the last four Test matches, they didn't in the first one but they have done for the last four."

"I don't think we have seen Bazball in this trip whatsoever, we saw it for one innings of this Test series, that's when Ollie Pope got a 190, and that was the definition of bazball."

"I think England, where they have fallen flat in this series is, they have not been brave enough. I don't think they have played what you guys in the media call Bazball."

"I think if they had, I think this series would have been closer if I am honest."

"India were just too good for England in this game. It's always at the end of a series if it's already been won by one team, you worry that this will happen, the resistance will be completely blown away and it was in this Test match."

"So England will have to go home and shake themselves off wondering where it went so badly wrong. India are world class especially their bowling attack, and that was really shown again in this Test match."

"You know what it's brilliant, to get a fifer on his hundredth Test match. I have not actually seen him, I was looking to go and congratulate him myself but I will have to do that at the hotel later.

"Bowling so well and making those early inroads, that was brilliant, possibly one of his best fifers in his 100 Test matches, so you have got to take your hat off to Ashwin."

"He's a joke, Jimmy is an absolute joke, how he has kept going for all this amount of time."

"When I say it's a joke I mean that in a good way, he's been incredible, and to get 700 wickets, well you know it's almost nonsensical the achievement and I love him to bits."

"I was kind of hoping when he almost bounced Kuldeep out, almost hit his gloves and bobbled in the air, that would have been the dream for Jimmy, because he has not bowled a decent bouncer for 10 years, but he has now."
 
I don't think you need gifted talented players to start expecting them to average 40+. If Root can average 49-50, how much it takes for the other middle order batters in England to average 40+? Really not much. It's just about being focused, resolute and hunger of runs, is that what England lacks? If yes, they need to work on their game, you won't get it from any shop or store.
Shan Masood is a focused, hungry and resolute cricketer who constantly works on his game - what's his Test batting average ? A batsman cannot simply boost their average from 30 to 40 by sheer resoluteness without adequate skill.

Why England lack technically strong batsmen with skills to counter all conditions is due to a flawed County system which'll take years to fix. In the meantime you gotta create a way to maximise your output with your available resources. Stokes/McCullum decided, for better or worse, an ODI-style approach is that way. While there's been setbacks, one Test series defeat in two years doesn't suggest a massive error of judgement.

There is still a major gulf in difference between India or Australia and England because England have failed to beat them in home conditions and got humiliated in their backyard. New Zealand are running England very closely and South Africa have the talent to recover and take up that 3rd slot if they rub off this quota policy nonsense.
I never claimed England were on the level of India and Australia. However they're ranked 3rd in ICC rankings which's an improvement from two years ago when they were 6th after a loss to a poor WI side - the final straw in Root's captaincy. To use your friend's favourite buzzword, that defeat was a humiliation.

I disagree NZ are running them closely after being whitewashed in England in 2022 before scraping a 1-1 draw at home. NZ drew a blank in Pakistan, and India (where they haven't won a Test since 1988) whereas England whitewashed the former and took a Test off the latter.

As for the traditional method of playing Test cricket, weren't England winning home series vs Australia and India one after another using that method only? Weren't they winning vs South Africa and a good SA side with that method?
Again your resources define your style of play. During the 2009-15 period where England routinely defeated Australia, they had several 40+ averaging batsmen from Cook, Trott, Bell, Pietersen, Root, Collingwood etc with tight defences who could play the traditional way.

However since 2014 only three English batsmen average 40 in Cook, Root and Duckett (who didn't improve his average playing the way you advocate).

The only change this Bazball has brought is it allows England to bash minnow or weaker nations better than it did before. The scorelines of 2-1 or 3-2 vs the likes of Windies, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh at home might change to 2-0 or 3-0. Yes, Pakistan don't fall in minnows category but the same Pakistan team did lose to the likes of Australia and New Zealand also at home so Stokes side winning it is not some kind of achievement.
England under Root lost 0-1 and 1-2 to NZ and India respectively in 2021, their first winless home season in 20 years. The following year with a nearly identical squad - they whitewashed NZ 3-0 and beat India chasing 370. In 2018 they lost away to NZ. In 2023 they drew away to NZ. I hardly class these as weak teams.

The goal of a captaincy change is not perfection but to improve on previous results. Now your friend continually ducks these questions so perhaps you'd like to answer:

1) Would any captain anywhere bar Zimbabwe, Ireland and Afghanistan survive a run of 1 win in 17 Tests ? Reckon Rohit Sharma survives such a run ?

2) Do you believe a captain ought to be retained after 1 win in 17 - while a captain that loses one Test series in two years merits sacking ? Yes or no ?
 
@Mamoon does have a point though.

Team Batting average ratios for IND/ENG for last 4 tours

2012/13 - 0.84

2016/17 - 1.54

2020/21 - 1.43

2024 - 1.55


The gap has been the biggest, marginally ahead of 2016/17, on this tour.

Root and Silverwood were more competitive despite the onslaught of Covid.

Some more , underlying numbers from analysts.

India attacked 29 % of the balls and scored at 138 strike rate and lost a wicket every 41 balls while attacking averaged England attacked 35 % and scored at a strike rate of 126 and lost a wicket every 28 balls.

India have attacked less but have been more brutal and fine it for longer without losing wickets.

But if you thought that was bad for England , the data for defending/rotating was absolutely damaging for England.

While looking to defend/rotate , England lost a wicket every 52 balls and averaged 13 with the bat.

India averaged 23 with the bat while defending/rotating but it took them on average , 103 balls to lose a wicket while doing so!

The Indian bowling attack was of such quality that they could rip wickets out at half the rate of the English attack !


Outgunned in every department.
Nikhil I'm not here to defend England's batting performance or suggest they were anything but outplayed by India.

I'm merely highlighting the absurdity in the argument that a captain ought to survive a run of 1 win in 17 Tests while a captain that loses 1 Test series in 2 years deserves firing.

Does Bazball irritate me with its cultlike preaching and arrogance ? Yes.

However unlike some who pander for cheap likes with sensationalist statements or allow personal emotions to cloud their thinking - I'll always give credit where due and recognise reality. And the reality is England, despite losing to a rampant Indian team at home, are in a better place now than 2 years ago.
 
Former England spinner Graeme Swann doesn't believe Rohit Sharma's captaincy was better than Ben Stokes' in the five-match Test series.Swann told local indian media in an exclusive chat after India inflicted an innings and 64-run defeat on England in the fifth and final Test in Dharamsala:

"He's been good don't get me wrong, Rohit Sharma, but, I don't think if you pick this apart and say Stokes has captained badly, I think you are barking up the wrong tree there."

"Rohit Sharma's bowlers have really come to town for him, come to the party for him, in the last four Test matches, they didn't in the first one but they have done for the last four."

"I don't think we have seen Bazball in this trip whatsoever, we saw it for one innings of this Test series, that's when Ollie Pope got a 190, and that was the definition of bazball."

"I think England, where they have fallen flat in this series is, they have not been brave enough. I don't think they have played what you guys in the media call Bazball."

"I think if they had, I think this series would have been closer if I am honest."

"India were just too good for England in this game. It's always at the end of a series if it's already been won by one team, you worry that this will happen, the resistance will be completely blown away and it was in this Test match."

"So England will have to go home and shake themselves off wondering where it went so badly wrong. India are world class especially their bowling attack, and that was really shown again in this Test match."

"You know what it's brilliant, to get a fifer on his hundredth Test match. I have not actually seen him, I was looking to go and congratulate him myself but I will have to do that at the hotel later.

"Bowling so well and making those early inroads, that was brilliant, possibly one of his best fifers in his 100 Test matches, so you have got to take your hat off to Ashwin."

"He's a joke, Jimmy is an absolute joke, how he has kept going for all this amount of time."

"When I say it's a joke I mean that in a good way, he's been incredible, and to get 700 wickets, well you know it's almost nonsensical the achievement and I love him to bits."

"I was kind of hoping when he almost bounced Kuldeep out, almost hit his gloves and bobbled in the air, that would have been the dream for Jimmy, because he has not bowled a decent bouncer for 10 years, but he has now."
If it works then Bazball and if not that is no Bazball is what Swann is basically saying..
 
Nikhil I'm not here to defend England's batting performance or suggest they were anything but outplayed by India.

I'm merely highlighting the absurdity in the argument that a captain ought to survive a run of 1 win in 17 Tests while a captain that loses 1 Test series in 2 years deserves firing.

Does Bazball irritate me with its cultlike preaching and arrogance ? Yes.

However unlike some who pander for cheap likes with sensationalist statements or allow personal emotions to cloud their thinking - I'll always give credit where due and recognise reality. And the reality is England, despite losing to a rampant Indian team at home, are in a better place now than 2 years ago.

I think it's a little unfair to Root. Thats the whole issue.

Root was captain for 5 years and 3 months. His captaincy was more than adequate for 4 years.

But because of recency bias, people only remember the last 15 months starting from the 2nd Test in India .

I believe until then Root had won 25 and lost 16 Tests against the Top 8 sides.

England were prioritising white ball cricket and by the India tour 2021, Covid had peaked and England were going from bubble to bubble.

We have to look at the 1/17 era in the proper context.

I fear that Bazball is just a temporary fix and simply papering over the fact that CC is simply not producing elite red ball cricketers that they need.

There are structural changes that are needed in English cricket and this discussion about various approaches is kinda misleading.

Crawley makes statements like "I don't need to work on my defensive game" very publicly. And this regime endorses it.

Whether they admit it or not, England judge themselves by Ashes series and by tours of India

These are the 2 most potent attacks that will consistently challenge your defence. I'm not sure how forgetting about your defensive game is a good idea when the teams you most desperately want to beat are the ones that are going to test your defense the most.

Then there is the bowling. Picking a 4 man attack with a geriatric Anderson who can , at this stage, neither share the workload by bowling long consistent spells or offer consistent wicket taking threat meant that Bashir had to bowl 30 overs on the bounce in one innings.

Stokes himself averages only 33 with the bat in this era and imo should not even play unless he can bowl as well.

Somehow Anderson in particular and Stokes generally have become sacred cows who cannot be criticised despite them damaging that bowling balance.

Root would have been destroyed publicly had he made such decisions as captain.
 
I'm with @Markhor here.

A team's average ability isn't going to change overnight, but Bazball increases the standard deviation of England's scores.

If they normally average 300 with the bat, with a range of 270-330, then Bazball increases that range to 200-400.

This is especially helpful in chases that you are otherwise destined to lose with the smaller range of scores. Hence, England's success in chasing totals.

And if you encounter a timid opposition like Pakistan who react exclusively to the upper bound of that range, then you can run riot over them.

On the flip side, you turn modest defeats into shellackings like in the 3rd and 5th test of this India tour. But that's a price England have deemed worthy to increase their odds of winning.
 
I'm with @Markhor here.

A team's average ability isn't going to change overnight, but Bazball increases the standard deviation of England's scores.

If they normally average 300 with the bat, with a range of 270-330, then Bazball increases that range to 200-400.

This is especially helpful in chases that you are otherwise destined to lose with the smaller range of scores. Hence, England's success in chasing totals.

And if you encounter a timid opposition like Pakistan who react exclusively to the upper bound of that range, then you can run riot over them.

On the flip side, you turn modest defeats into shellackings like in the 3rd and 5th test of this India tour. But that's a price England have deemed worthy to increase their odds of winning.
Biggest downside is selling this as a fool proof winning formula. It takes you from worse to bad. You are still bad. Also this method relies a lot on form/luck. Even elite batsman like Sehwag could not always be in form. Average batsmen like Crawley, Duckett are not going to sustain their approach for a long period. England will give preference to these "blind hitters" because of that while ignoring proper long format players. It is a stop gap solution. Not a viable long term solution. If they had accepted and not told everyone "this is how test should be played" "We are here to entertain" people would not have been critical. Another side effect is altering of the approach of classical batsmen like Root. One more issue is fast scoring accelerate bowler burn out. This also involves a lot of strategy. Too mcuh strategy if i may say so. Every ball field change. It impacted over rate. They didn't pay attention to these side effects. There is some merit to this approach. But there are a lot of demerits that will impact them even harder in the long run.
 
India v England: Brendon McCullum says his side have been 'exposed'

England have been "exposed" in India and have some "deep thinking" ahead, according to coach Brendon McCullum.

The tourists won the first Test but then suffered four losses to go down to their first series defeat since McCullum took charge in 2022.

"A lot of good will come out of this tour. I'm 100% positive about that," McCullum told BBC Sport.

"We will be a better cricket team for the experience, although it hurts a lot at the moment."

England's victory in the first Test in Hyderabad was one of their greatest overseas wins, particularly given India's formidable home record - the hosts have not lost a Test series in this country in 12 years.

But the tourists squandered strong chances in the second, third and fourth Tests and were 100-1 on the first morning of the fifth before unravelling to lose by an innings and 64 runs.

The latest reverse in Dharamsala means England have been beaten in seven of their past 12 Tests and are winless in three series.

And New Zealander McCullum said this tour had "taught him more" about his team than ever before.

"Sometimes you can get away with things, but when you're exposed in the way we have been in the back end of this series in particular, it does require some pretty deep thinking and some adjustment to make sure we're staying true to what we believe in," added McCullum.

"If anything we got more timid as the series went on and that was because of the pressure that was applied to us by the Indian line-up."


 
I think it's a little unfair to Root. Thats the whole issue.

Root was captain for 5 years and 3 months. His captaincy was more than adequate for 4 years.

But because of recency bias, people only remember the last 15 months starting from the 2nd Test in India .

I believe until then Root had won 25 and lost 16 Tests against the Top 8 sides.

England were prioritising white ball cricket and by the India tour 2021, Covid had peaked and England were going from bubble to bubble.

We have to look at the 1/17 era in the proper context.

I fear that Bazball is just a temporary fix and simply papering over the fact that CC is simply not producing elite red ball cricketers that they need.

There are structural changes that are needed in English cricket and this discussion about various approaches is kinda misleading.

Crawley makes statements like "I don't need to work on my defensive game" very publicly. And this regime endorses it.

Whether they admit it or not, England judge themselves by Ashes series and by tours of India

These are the 2 most potent attacks that will consistently challenge your defence. I'm not sure how forgetting about your defensive game is a good idea when the teams you most desperately want to beat are the ones that are going to test your defense the most.

Then there is the bowling. Picking a 4 man attack with a geriatric Anderson who can , at this stage, neither share the workload by bowling long consistent spells or offer consistent wicket taking threat meant that Bashir had to bowl 30 overs on the bounce in one innings.

Stokes himself averages only 33 with the bat in this era and imo should not even play unless he can bowl as well.

Somehow Anderson in particular and Stokes generally have become sacred cows who cannot be criticised despite them damaging that bowling balance.

Root would have been destroyed publicly had he made such decisions as captain.

Biggest downside is selling this as a fool proof winning formula. It takes you from worse to bad. You are still bad. Also this method relies a lot on form/luck. Even elite batsman like Sehwag could not always be in form. Average batsmen like Crawley, Duckett are not going to sustain their approach for a long period. England will give preference to these "blind hitters" because of that while ignoring proper long format players. It is a stop gap solution. Not a viable long term solution. If they had accepted and not told everyone "this is how test should be played" "We are here to entertain" people would not have been critical. Another side effect is altering of the approach of classical batsmen like Root. One more issue is fast scoring accelerate bowler burn out. This also involves a lot of strategy. Too mcuh strategy if i may say so. Every ball field change. It impacted over rate. They didn't pay attention to these side effects. There is some merit to this approach. But there are a lot of demerits that will impact them even harder in the long run.
These are entirely fair criticisms. There must be more nuance than the binary and simplistic debate where Bazball is either the saviour of cricket or the devil's creation as per some.

I agree Bazball is a cricketing version of a heroin high and not a sustainable way to play Test cricket - at least against top sides like Australia and India. They've invited much criticism because of their bombastic statements.

Ultimately England must confront the structural flaws in County Cricket with its thin distribution of talent across 18 teams, poor scheduling with FC cricket competing with 3 white ball formats, and uniformity of conditions. To only produce 3 batsmen averaging 40 in 10 years shows something has gone wrong. However these will take years to address.

Therefore what the critics of Bazball must answer is how to deliver results in the short-term ? If not Bazball, then what ?

Some are suggesting bring Root back. However that regime ran its course as evident to anyone who saw his last series as captain in the Caribbean where in the final Test, England were reduced to 114-9 and 120 all out courtesy of Kyle Mayers' 115kph thunderbolts. Is that approach any more defensible than the sometimes suicidal aggression of Bazball because England were playing "the correct way" ?
 
@Ab Fan

When Stokes did the mental health drama and ran away like a coward, he missed only one Test series if I recall correctly, and it was the blockbuster home series vs India.

He missed that series and the T20 World Cup before returning for the Ashes in Australia to expose himself as the fraud cricketer that he is.

Batting average 23
Bowling average 71

Stokes has been a liability for about 90% of the Tests that he has played, simultaneously weakening England’s batting and bowling at the same time by contributing nothing in both departments.
 
These are entirely fair criticisms. There must be more nuance than the binary and simplistic debate where Bazball is either the saviour of cricket or the devil's creation as per some.

I agree Bazball is a cricketing version of a heroin high and not a sustainable way to play Test cricket - at least against top sides like Australia and India. They've invited much criticism because of their bombastic statements.

Ultimately England must confront the structural flaws in County Cricket with its thin distribution of talent across 18 teams, poor scheduling with FC cricket competing with 3 white ball formats, and uniformity of conditions. To only produce 3 batsmen averaging 40 in 10 years shows something has gone wrong. However these will take years to address.

Therefore what the critics of Bazball must answer is how to deliver results in the short-term ? If not Bazball, then what ?

Some are suggesting bring Root back. However that regime ran its course as evident to anyone who saw his last series as captain in the Caribbean where in the final Test, England were reduced to 114-9 and 120 all out courtesy of Kyle Mayers' 115kph thunderbolts. Is that approach any more defensible than the sometimes suicidal aggression of Bazball because England were playing "the correct way" ?

I've already hinted at a couple of things in my post.

India's selections of Jurel, Patidar, Padikkal, Sarfaraz, Akashdeep were all based on the recent Lions tour of India and they all performed in the Tests to varying degrees(Patidar apart) .

In that same tour , Keaton Jennings was the best English batter by far and Matthew Potts was comfortably the best seamer. His numbers were excellent.

And yet, old man Jimmy , a highly inaccurate Mark Wood, unproven Atkinson and Robinson who hadn't played much cricket in months were selected but Potts didn't find a place in the squad.

There is a bit of doublespeak from McCullum and Stokes . They publicly say that they encourage everyone to work their own methods to score runs but they only ever pick blokes from county who bat aggressively .

Jennings topped the 2022 charts and had a good Lions tour here and is a good player of spin .


But he clearly won't even get into the squad because he doesn't bat the "right" way.
 
Shan Masood is a focused, hungry and resolute cricketer who constantly works on his game - what's his Test batting average ? A batsman cannot simply boost their average from 30 to 40 by sheer resoluteness without adequate skill.

Why England lack technically strong batsmen with skills to counter all conditions is due to a flawed County system which'll take years to fix. In the meantime you gotta create a way to maximise your output with your available resources. Stokes/McCullum decided, for better or worse, an ODI-style approach is that way. While there's been setbacks, one Test series defeat in two years doesn't suggest a massive error of judgement.


I never claimed England were on the level of India and Australia. However they're ranked 3rd in ICC rankings which's an improvement from two years ago when they were 6th after a loss to a poor WI side - the final straw in Root's captaincy. To use your friend's favourite buzzword, that defeat was a humiliation.

I disagree NZ are running them closely after being whitewashed in England in 2022 before scraping a 1-1 draw at home. NZ drew a blank in Pakistan, and India (where they haven't won a Test since 1988) whereas England whitewashed the former and took a Test off the latter.


Again your resources define your style of play. During the 2009-15 period where England routinely defeated Australia, they had several 40+ averaging batsmen from Cook, Trott, Bell, Pietersen, Root, Collingwood etc with tight defences who could play the traditional way.

However since 2014 only three English batsmen average 40 in Cook, Root and Duckett (who didn't improve his average playing the way you advocate).


England under Root lost 0-1 and 1-2 to NZ and India respectively in 2021, their first winless home season in 20 years. The following year with a nearly identical squad - they whitewashed NZ 3-0 and beat India chasing 370. In 2018 they lost away to NZ. In 2023 they drew away to NZ. I hardly class these as weak teams.

The goal of a captaincy change is not perfection but to improve on previous results. Now your friend continually ducks these questions so perhaps you'd like to answer:

1) Would any captain anywhere bar Zimbabwe, Ireland and Afghanistan survive a run of 1 win in 17 Tests ? Reckon Rohit Sharma survives such a run ?

2) Do you believe a captain ought to be retained after 1 win in 17 - while a captain that loses one Test series in two years merits sacking ? Yes or no ?

Shan Masood is an arbitrary example. What would you make of Azhar Ali then? Are you saying a focused hungry resolute Ben Stokes is not capable of averaging 40+ in Test cricket with bat? That's false, England have enough revenue to invest and produce players of that calibre. This idea that England don't have the skills or resource to produce 40+ averaging proper test bats doesn't make sense to me atleast.

This also puts further emphasis on the real argument here- if England don't have the skills and resources, what is this hype and false bravado for Bazball after winning 2-3 series, it doesn't take the ECB media time to hype their captain as the best thing to have happened to England as soon as he hits a hundred vs even Windies. Is this guy not capable of averaging 40+ as a batsman but whenever he plays a top knock ( which usually happens once in a year or sometimes two), he seems to be put on pedestal like none.

So, basically all you are trying to conclude here is that Bazball is just a fake imaginary web which was built to delude people that England are in some way trying to teach the world how to play test cricket in modern era but in reality, it is just an alternative to escape from the real flaw which is with the county system and incapability of England to produce world class test cricketers except for Joe Root in past 10 years.
 

Bin off Bazball?

Bazball - the word we just cannot leave alone. England dislike it and it is getting a bit boring writing it but it has come to define this team.

Used as a positive when they win - as they did in 10 of the first 11 Tests under Brendon McCullum and Ben Stokes after a painful run of one victory in 17 before that - and used as a stick to beat them with when they lose - as they have done in seven of their 12 games since that near flawless start in the hedonistic summer of 2022.

The term, in its most basic form, means taking the positive option, something McCullum, Stokes and their players have stressed does not always equate to belting sixes and fours but by putting the opposition under pressure.

Bazball is a mindset, not an order. It is up the batters at the crease to take responsibility, something Ben Duckett and Ollie Pope perhaps did not do in the Dharamsala defeat.

Duckett spooned to cover in the first innings and was bowled on the charge in the second, while Pope was limply stumped on the stroke of lunch first time around and caught on the sweep on the final day as his series petered out after a stunning 196 in Hyderabad.

Joe Root may also still be ruing his ill-timed reverse scoop in the third Test at Rajkot, which triggered a collapse of 8-95 when England had the game by the scruff of the neck and India spinner Ravichandran Ashwin was absent for personal reasons.

Speaking on the Sky Sports Cricket Podcast, Michael Atherton said: "The team is in a far better state than it was when McCullum and Stokes took over and I would not like to see England go back to the timidity that we saw before, no retrenchment.

"But there have been times against Australia and India where they have not been smart enough, or good enough, or hard enough, to take advantage of winning positions."

McCullum says there will be "refinement" to the model, which could be code for more judicious strokeplay, but also felt his team were too "timid" at times against India, so don't expect Bazball to be dispensed with entirely.

Considering the success it has brought and the shot in the arm it has given English Test cricket, that is probably wise. It's time for evolution, not revolution.

What England fans may want to hear less of, though, is the grating rhetoric, such as when Duckett replied "the more the better" when asked what his team could realistically chase in the fourth innings in Rajkot. Less waffle, more wins is what supporters will be after.

Bairstow, Foakes, both or neither?

While Bazball is named after McCullum and been ingrained into the side by Stokes, it was Jonny Bairstow who lived it to the fullest two years ago, scoring four centuries in six Tests at a strike rate of 96.59, truly kicking off the new era with a 77-ball hundred during a post-tea onslaught against New Zealand at Trent Bridge.

The Yorkshireman suffered a horrific leg break later that summer and has not been able to scale those heights since, averaging 28.87 across his last nine Tests with two half-centuries. Bairstow reached double figures eight times out of 10 in India this winter but never made it past 39.

With Harry Brook, who missed the subcontinental tour for personal reasons, to return the middle order at some stage, Bairstow's spot looks vulnerable, unless he takes back the wicketkeeping gloves from Ben Foakes, as he did ahead of last summer's Ashes series.

Foakes was silky behind the stumps in India - when is he anything but? - yet was unable to truly impose himself with the bat, although he was often left operating with the tail such was the brittleness of England's middle order as collapse followed collapse and 400 was only breached once.

Bairstow's more bombastic batting - Foakes has readily admitted he is not what you would call Bazball - could tempt England into picking him as wicketkeeper ahead of the steadier Foakes - or they could say sayonara to them both and pump for someone in the next generation of glovemen.

Somerset's James Rew, 20, perhaps heads that group, after averaging 57 in County Championship Division One in 2023 with five hundreds, but Surrey's Jamie Smith, 23, is also an option His issue, though, may be that Foakes is likely to keep for his county.

What's becoming clear is that there is probably not room for both Bairstow and Foakes in the same England side, not unless Baz and Ben have concerns over vice-captain Pope at No 3.

Pope made a divine intervention in Hyderabad with that sweep-laden century but has been febrile at the crease and short of runs either side of that, while he has been dismissed for less than 20 in more than half of his 77 innings in Test cricket.

What to do with the bowlers?

As much as England's Test cricket has changed over the last two years - so much of it for the better, let's not forget - some things have remained the same, namely James Anderson taking wickets.

Test cricket's most prolific seamer hit a new high on Saturday, becoming the first fast bowler to 700 scalps and shows no signs of slowing down, despite the fact he will turn 42 in July.

England must do succession planning for when Anderson is no longer around but that is hard when he keeps succeeding and you sense he will be a key cog in the attack against West Indies and Sri Lanka in the summer and possibly Pakistan and New Zealand next winter as well.

We might not be able to say the same about Ollie Robinson with the seamer highly ineffectual in his sole outing in India as fitness and conditioning issues continue to hold back a bowler with an immense upside - height, accuracy, the ability to move the ball both ways.

With Stuart Broad's retirement post-Ashes, there is an opening in the England bowling line-up on home soil and Robinson will feel he can seize it if he can get plenty of county cricket under his belt for Sussex between the season starting in April and the first Test against West Indies.

If he cannot, however, then you are probably looking at Matthew Potts, Josh Tongue and Gus Atkinson as the men to support Anderson, Mark Wood, Chris Woakes - the latter is likely to be involved in England taking into account his home Test bowling average of 21.88 - and hopefully Stokes, with the skipper eyeing full all-rounder status once again after knee surgery.

Jack Leach is favourite, and a Stokes favourite, but injuries continue to strike the likeable left-armer, with a stress fracture of the back seeing him miss the Ashes and a knee knock forcing him to return home from India after one Test.

Off-spinner Shoaib Bashir, 20, and Leach's fellow left-armer Tom Hartley, 24, staked their claims in India, with Hartley taking a seven-for on debut and claiming 22 wickets in the series.

But Bashir, whose guile and change of pace helped him to 17 wickets, is seen as having the higher ceiling and Atherton thinks he could be the one - if he can play domestically that is, with Leach currently ahead of him in the pecking order at Somerset and a two-spinner attack unlikely early season. A loan move may beckon.

 
Shan Masood is an arbitrary example. What would you make of Azhar Ali then? Are you saying a focused hungry resolute Ben Stokes is not capable of averaging 40+ in Test cricket with bat? That's false, England have enough revenue to invest and produce players of that calibre. This idea that England don't have the skills or resource to produce 40+ averaging proper test bats doesn't make sense to me atleast.
Your argument is England's batsmen can improve their averages by playing traditional cricket in a more determined way. The obvious counter is their record pre and post-Bazball.

England's openers are a perfect microcosm. They tried countless gritty, orthodox batsmen from Lees, Stoneman, Burns, Robson etc. What's their Test records ? Now with two aggressive openers they've a settled pairing who infact were England's leading runscorers vs India.

Pre-BazballPost-Bazball
Zak Crawley28.6036.28
Ben Duckett15.7146.68
Ollie Pope28.6639.41
Joe Root49.1952.77
Jonny Bairstow34.5345.96
Ben Stokes35.8933.91
Ben Foakes28.1130.14

So, basically all you are trying to conclude here is that Bazball is just a fake imaginary web which was built to delude people that England are in some way trying to teach the world how to play test cricket in modern era but in reality, it is just an alternative to escape from the real flaw which is with the county system and incapability of England to produce world class test cricketers except for Joe Root in past 10 years.
This is just Mamoon-style hyperbole and the lack of nuanced analysis I referred to earlier where Bazball is either black or white. All teams, not just England, develop styles of play based on available resources and the conditions they face.

Perth Scorchers in BBL under Langer were the anti-Bazball team. The WACA was a low scoring ground thus, as termed in the book Hitting Against the Spin, opted to "shrink the game" meaning their scoring rate was slower than average opting to preserve wickets, even during the PP, while maintaining low economies with the ball. They're the most successful BBL franchise.

Sure they haven't given it a name or marketed it as reinventing cricket. However it's as legitimate a way of playing cricket as Bazball that masked their limitations and delivered results.

Will Bazball always work ? No. However you've acknowledged yourself they've improved from being ranked 6th to 3rd and lost only 1 series in 2 years. You can criticise the bombast and arrogance, yes. But the progress is indisputable. Now I've asked what's the alternative - and it's basically return to Mar 2022 when England was ranked 6th, won 1 of their last 17 Tests, lost 5 consecutive series, and got rolled over by Kyle Mayers' 115kph thunderbolts ! That brings me back to the questions your colleague has ducked for months. Again I ask and no essays, straight answers please:

1) Would any captain anywhere bar Zimbabwe, Ireland and Afghanistan survive a run of 1 win in 17 Tests ? Reckon Rohit Sharma survives such a run ?

2) Do you believe a captain ought to be retained after 1 win in 17 - while a captain that loses one Test series in two years merits sacking ? Yes or no ?
 
Former England Captain Alastair Cook spoke to a local sports channel, discussing the team's performance in the recent match:

"They’ve tried to push boundaries to try and get this group of players playing to the best of their ability."

"That’s what Bazball is about, to have the freedom to go and play your style, and try and have a positive impact on the game."

"It’s freed up a number of players and their records have improved. The litmus test in terms of batting in India is that there are a few basics that you can’t not have, actually."

"Even if you go back to Ollie Pope’s extraordinary [first Test] innings of 196 [in Hyderabad]; yes he was positive, yes he had great intent, but he still played the situation very well. He mixed his defence and attack, he took the right options."

"Ben Duckett is a great example of it, brilliant hundred [in the third Test in Rajkot], he’s been superb actually in this series in terms of the starts he’s got, but the bottom line is that you do need to be able to have the option of defending against world-class spinners."

"You saw he really did struggle to line up [Ravichandran] Ashwin towards the end of that series. You get worked out, you get worked out without a solid defence."

"I would like these players - they’re a great side to watch, it’s been thoroughly entertaining cricket - but you want these players to kick on and be the best they can be."
"There is going to be hard yards for all of them, because you have to. I think James Anderson shows those serious hard yards of constantly trying to improve. He’s lengthened his run-up, or he's run in a bit faster trying to be better. I hope the same for a player like Duckett, that he looks at this and goes ‘really now I’ve got to improve my defence a bit more’. Ollie Pope, ‘how do I start my innings better’."

"All these kinds of things which this series has thrown up, I hope they don’t - I'm sure they won't - go ‘oh it’s India away, no one wins there’. Well it’s true, not many sides do win there. However, you can always improve your game."

"That’s what this side needs to go forward. If they want to win the big moments in big series, that’s what has I suppose been lacking in this series, they haven’t won a big series yet. They've got a couple more in a year or two's time, they've got Ashes away [in 2025/26], they've got a chance to do that, they’ve got to build towards that you would say."

"You look at this group of batsmen, you've got [Zak] Crawley averaging 30 [32.63], Pope averaging 30 [34.04], [Jonny] Bairstow averaging mid-30s [36.39] – that’s where they’re at."

"To become great sides who win big series, you want them to be averaging 40-odd, 50 over a period of time, to help the side win."

"I just want to see this side evolve again, as every side needs to, under this leadership and their brand of cricket that they want to play."

"England cricket need to get back to winning ways," Cook said. "They’ve had a poor winter. I don’t think anyone really expected them to win this [India] series, if you had to put your mortgage on it at the start of it."

"They gave a decent account of themselves at certain times in the series and made it good, competitive cricket. But India are the better side in these conditions, they’re better players."

"However you’ve got to look – they lost the T20 series in the West Indies, they had a poor [ODI] World Cup as well."

"So English cricket needs to get back to winning ways. They need to wrest a bit more momentum back to English cricket and go again."
 
I fear that Bazball is just a temporary fix and simply papering over the fact that CC is simply not producing elite red ball cricketers that they need.

There are structural changes that are needed in English cricket and this discussion about various approaches is kinda misleading.

Well, yes. This is well known.

McCullum has consistently said that the way England play now is intended to maximise the talent they have and he believes it is their best chance of winning. He wouldn’t deny that the approach is a type of “battlefield bandage” if he was asked about it directly.

English cricket has got loads to sort out internally; its whole domestic structure, allegations of institutional racism, future of counties with most of them financially loss making, some grounds getting flooded every winter (etc) and a lot of the prominent international players from the last 10 years are reaching the end stage of their careers at more or less the same time: Broad, Moeen, Anderson, Woakes, Bairstow, Wood, etc, and possibly Stokes himself soon enough as well, which will require transition in the squad.

Bazball in my opinion gives England a chance to compete during this period…
 
Bashir has been the find of the series. Consistency has been phenomenal.

Crawley has been good.

Pope's knock is an extreme outlier. One of the luckiest knocks ever.

Apart from Bashir and Crawley, no positives whatsoever.
I dont know what you lot are seeing in Bashir. Looked very mediocre and darting it in without any guile or planning to get batsmen out. Got plummeted to the ground by Indian batsmen.

Can't forget the most mindless slog that he played off the first ball and getting out while Root was set on the other end.
 
Some decent performances from England but overall nothing much to show, as the score line suggests. Bashir is overrated- an average of 33.35 on spinning tracks is nothing to write home about. He’s going to be playing in England and other SNA countries which won’t support his darting style bowling. Poor tour overall other than some noteworthy individual performances.
 
Can't forget the most mindless slog that he played off the first ball and getting out while Root was set on the other end.
You can expect such stuff from a tail-ender who si pretty young tbh and has very little experience of such situations. He has been good overall as a bowler, and will improve more in the future. England would love the rise of Tom Hartley though. He was fantastic ut was unfortunate that he got injured.
 
For some reason i think Hartley should be the guy forward for England. An upgrade over Leach. Bashir is being overrated here for obvious reasons.
 
Positives will be the new spinner Bashir. And hopefully now they have seen the futility of Bazball as ‘the future of test cricket’ & learn from these mistakes while prepping for Ashes.

Otherwise this whole series has been a disaster, to put it mildly. Bazball has now become the laughing stock in the cricketing world.
Bashir bowled a truckload of overs and only natural he ended up with some wickets. 5/170 odd is nothing to be really pleased about.
 
Truth be told, even winning a single test in India is a great feat. India has lost 4 tests at home in the last 10 years and only 3 with both Ashwin and Jadeja playing, so the Hyderabad victory will rank as one of the greatest wins in the history of English cricket, especially considering how they came back after conceding an enormous lead. Pope's 196 is probably the greatest knock by an English batter in any format, in their history. That they failed to capitalize on that win is a different matter but due credit should be given to them for that win. I rate their win in first test above their 2019 WC win, the scale of difficulty here was a different level.
Over 74 false shots were by Pope in that innings. He was blindly sweeping and reverse sweeping everything and miraculously almost all of them came off or landed in vacant spots or he edged them to avoid lbw. It was one of the all time fluke innings. The fact that he couldn't get to even a fifty in the other 9 innings and ended up with a series avg of 30 is enough proof of it.
 
Bashir has been the find of the series. Consistency has been phenomenal.

Crawley has been good.

Pope's knock is an extreme outlier. One of the luckiest knocks ever.

Apart from Bashir and Crawley, no positives whatsoever.
Bashir has been accurate and bowled a truckload of overs. That's good but nothing phenomenal in his performance. Returns of 5/173 are not phenomenal.

Crawley benefited from batting when the wicket is at its easiest. Opening in India is among the easiest jobs - with a freshly rolled pitch and not much lateral movement allowing Crawley and like to play through the line. He also benefited from some debatable tactical captaincy by Rohit who persisted with seamers I stead of trying spinners early. Once the pitch lost its initial sheen, and spinners came on , Crawley has struggled to get going - hence his highest score in the 70s.

Agree on Pope.

Basically there is nothing positive. Perhaps except for Root realizing that he is far better off playing like himself than trying to be funky. And Hartley who droned on tirelessly throughout the series and batted competently as well. Bashir and Rehan benefited from seeing Indian spinners up and close.and can hopefully learn from them.
 
India have been all over the English.

England just weren't the same after their golf tour of Abu Dhabi. They came back completely out of sorts.

Serious questions need to be asked as to why they needed to leave India part way through the tournament. I hope an Indian journalist grills them on what they felt India lacked as a country that stopped them from staying there continuously.
And they went to Abu Dhabi when it was raining there makes it even more ridiculous.
 
Bashir bowled a truckload of overs and only natural he ended up with some wickets. 5/170 odd is nothing to be really pleased about.
For a newbie from a SENA country, it definitely is. Both him & Hartley did pretty well. On hindsight it was great that Leach got injured, don’t think he would have done well in India.
 
Jimmy and Wood on their last tours of Australia and Pakistan

Jimmy - 23 and 18.5
Wood - 26 and 20.

They are not rubbish away, generally.


Jimmy has been protected too much. England played a 4 man attack where Jimmy didn't share enough of the workload. Every time out batters hit him , Stokes immediately took him out .

Put a lot of pressure on other 3 bowlers and Root to bowl much more.

Young Hartley and Bashir had to bowl a huge workload and be effective.

Even now, critique of Bazball has focussed on batting. It's the bowling that's costing them
Wood was understandably good in Aus as the pitches suited his style of bowling. He utterly failed in India and didn't make any impact at all. Very one dimensional bowler.

Agree on Anderson and the way he has been protected.
 
7. Ben Stokes is not a great player. He is an average player who produced a few great moments.

Great players show great consistency. He has never been good enough to do so. The English like to hype themselves up too much - Stokes played a blinder in the 2019 Ashes but Kusal Perera played a better knock in South Africa in tougher conditions but no one talks about him as a Sri Lankan legend.

He played a good innings in the World Cup final but it was a stroke of luck that got him over the line and besides, many players have played such knocks in World Cup finals. Not all of them are greats of the game.
So true !
He has been useless with both bat and bowl in India in the last 2 tours. He and Bairstow are absolute wastage of specialist batter spots. His captaincy too was pretty bad most of the times and how he let even debutant batters get away during pressure times.

And we saw a legendary all round performance from Jadeja in this series. Hit a rear guard 100 and took India to a good total at Rajkot when the team was floundering at 32/3 and followed it up with a fifer that demolished England. Can't ask for better all-round performances than that !
 
England has another thing to show and that is stokes' failure. He was no less than a tail-ender the whole series. Should be sacked asap.
 
In case anyone needs reminding - when Stokes and McCullum were appointed England had 1 Test win in 17 including their first winless home summer in 20 years and 5 consecutive series defeats. That was the result of the "traditional method" of playing Test cricket - the process you and your friend argue they should've stuck with ?
It should be 2 wins in their last 18 tests - as England won the first test at Chennai during 2021 tour of India.

Also, those 18 tests included two of the toughest tours - India and Australia. They lost 3-1 in India and 4-0 in Australia.

Also it includes a 3 test tour of West Indies which has surprisingly not been a happy hunting place for England traditionally even with weakened hosts.

Further, India also toured England during this period and led the series 2-1. They are a team that won twice in Australia and at their peak.

McCullum and Stokes didn't face such tough tours or oppositions in their first year except an India coming to play a one off test without any prep. Their first true test came during 2023 Ashws where they had to contend with a draw at home - same result what they got under Root playing traditional cricket as well. And then they fared even worse than Root's team in India. So there has not been much uptick other than bullying of much weaker teams like Pakistan.
 
Back
Top