Duh-shes! England fell into Australia’s ‘Bazball’ trap as easily as children would fall for toffees
We have had seven days of play in Ashes 2023 and England, as promised, have struck to their ‘Bazball’ philosophy, even at the cost of losing. Day 2 of the Lord’s Test on Thursday was yet another illustration of England's unwillingness to change their attacking philosophy.
Responding to Australia’s first-innings total of 416, England were well-placed at 188/1. They were playing aggressive cricket for sure and reaping the rewards for the same.
A smart change in tactic from Australia, ironically forced by an injury to lead spinner Nathan Lyon, however, once again exposed England’s lack of versatility in their batting. A short-ball ploy suggested by Steve Smith was implemented to try and play on England’s ego (read Bazball) and the hosts fell into the trap as easily as children would fall for toffees.
And so, Ollie Pope (42), Ben Duckett (98), and Joe Root (10) sacrificed their wickets in the name of playing positive cricket irrespective of the situation. The result? England went from a position of strength to a somewhat tricky situation in a matter of a few overs.
There were always concerns over England’s ‘Bazball’ theory heading into Ashes 2023. Yes, they have tasted amazing success against most other nations playing the same brand of cricket. However, facing Australia in Australia is a completely different cup of tea. The sooner Ben Stokes and Brendon McCullum realize this, the better it will be for England.
Of course, one is not saying that the hosts should completely abandon their ultra-aggressive philosophy. After all, it is by playing that brand of cricket that England have been able to completely overturn their sinking fortunes in Test cricket. At the same time, they need to sit back and conduct a periodical assessment of where the no-holds-barred attitude is taking them.
A stunning knock, Ben ✊
So unlucky to come up short ❤️
#EnglandCricket | #Ashes https://t.co/BpxwCe8w5K
In the first Test at Edgbaston as well, England literally conceded the game to Australia on a platter. And no, we are not talking about their first-innings declaration on 393/8. While there might have been mixed views over it, the decision still had some cricketing logic behind it as England could have put Australia under pressure by claiming early wickets before the close of play on Day 1.
It was the hosts’ batting approach in the second innings that was catastrophic. England’s bowlers had done well to ensure the hosts gained a slender seven-run lead despite Usman Khawaja’s defiant hundred scored in traditional Test match fashion.
Like on Day 2 at Lord’s, England’s batters threw their wickets away as if they were distributing free pamphlets. Three batters were dismissed in 40s and the entire England team for 273 in 66.2 overs. ‘Cumball’ did the rest for Australia as they secured a come-from-behind two-wicket win.
The comments coming out from the England camp following the loss made little sense, with entertainment being given priority over cricketing logic. Be it any sport, the end aim of the team or an individual remains to try and emerge victorious. All efforts should thus be directed towards the same. The fundamental principle applies to the England Test team as well.
Do England have an answer to Australia’s ego play?
We are not yet halfway into Ashes 2023, but it is already pretty clear that England’s one-dimensional approach towards batting will not work against a well-rounded Australian bowling attack.
Even in the absence of Nathan Lyon, they will remain dangerous. Speaking of Lyon, the seasoned off-spinner’s possible unavailability gives England a chance to make a strong comeback into the series. The Lord’s Test is finely poised and could go either day depending on how England face their demons on Day 3.
Nine wickets ☝
Three hundred and thirty-five runs 🏏
Another day of Test match cricket to savour 👇 https://t.co/48K4lXmk2J
So far, Australia have thrived by encouraging England to dig their own grave. The plan is pretty clear and the trap will be set again. The big question is, will the hosts be any smarter this time round or will they continue to be on an ego trip to misadventure? Over to Stokes and Co.