It's The Ashes (again)

[rsbaggy2]

England need to make full use of the overhead conditions .. unlike morning of day 1.

[Cheshire East Baggie]

This England team are full of morons. Get a fucking grip.

---

Bazball really is a moronic way to play the game. It's all well and good thinking it's the best thing since sliced veg because we can beat Ireland in a one off Test. But when we come up against the top sides we will (and are) get unstuck - see New Zealand in the winter and the Edgbaston Test. For the second Test running Australia have outsmarted and outplayed England. Now we may well win this Test still, we're good enough to, but if we don't we'll be 2-0 down in a series where we've had more than enough chances to be 2-0 but for a pig headed ignorance.

I know I'll get labelled as miserable and negative but this style of cricket is really frustrating me and, in all honesty, pissing me off.

Time to get back to basics, get a reality check, tell some home truths to players and drop those who aren't performing. Play the match situation, not your arrogant and deluded ideals.

Labels don't help, and apparently the England squad don't like the "Bazball" tag. There's nothing wrong with being aggressive and using offence as the primary weapon instead of defence. What I don't like about the current vibe is the smugness, the determination to stick with a failing plan. Duckett had "no regrets" at being out on 98 at Lords. Crawley was going to "beat Australia by 150 runs". It's a childish approach, full of hubris, the kind of attitude you'd expect from a bunch of Eton posh nobs playing the oiks from the comprehensive school down the road. In the end, I think I dislike "Bazball" because I just don't like Ben Stokes, I'm tired of the cronyism that keeps Anderson in the team at 41 and brings Moeen back with no match practice, the arrogance which made them think that a week playing golf after an easy match against Ireland would be the best preparation to face the Aussies.

Of course, Jimmy will take five this afternoon now I've got that off my chest 

[SuperBob2002]

This England team are full of morons. Get a fucking grip.

---

Bazball really is a moronic way to play the game. It's all well and good thinking it's the best thing since sliced veg because we can beat Ireland in a one off Test. But when we come up against the top sides we will (and are) get unstuck - see New Zealand in the winter and the Edgbaston Test. For the second Test running Australia have outsmarted and outplayed England. Now we may well win this Test still, we're good enough to, but if we don't we'll be 2-0 down in a series where we've had more than enough chances to be 2-0 but for a pig headed ignorance.

I know I'll get labelled as miserable and negative but this style of cricket is really frustrating me and, in all honesty, pissing me off.

Time to get back to basics, get a reality check, tell some home truths to players and drop those who aren't performing. Play the match situation, not your arrogant and deluded ideals.

Labels don't help, and apparently the England squad don't like the "Bazball" tag. There's nothing wrong with being aggressive and using offence as the primary weapon instead of defence. What I don't like about the current vibe is the smugness, the determination to stick with a failing plan. Duckett had "no regrets" at being out on 98 at Lords. Crawley was going to "beat Australia by 150 runs". It's a childish approach, full of hubris, the kind of attitude you'd expect from a bunch of Eton posh nobs playing the oiks from the comprehensive school down the road. In the end, I think I dislike "Bazball" because I just don't like Ben Stokes, I'm tired of the cronyism that keeps Anderson in the team at 41 and brings Moeen back with no match practice, the arrogance which made them think that a week playing golf after an easy match against Ireland would be the best preparation to face the Aussies.

Of course, Jimmy will take five this afternoon now I've got that off my chest 

Excellent post. Nailed it.

[Lurker#3]

This England team are full of morons. Get a fucking grip.

---

Bazball really is a moronic way to play the game. It's all well and good thinking it's the best thing since sliced veg because we can beat Ireland in a one off Test. But when we come up against the top sides we will (and are) get unstuck - see New Zealand in the winter and the Edgbaston Test. For the second Test running Australia have outsmarted and outplayed England. Now we may well win this Test still, we're good enough to, but if we don't we'll be 2-0 down in a series where we've had more than enough chances to be 2-0 but for a pig headed ignorance.

I know I'll get labelled as miserable and negative but this style of cricket is really frustrating me and, in all honesty, pissing me off.

Time to get back to basics, get a reality check, tell some home truths to players and drop those who aren't performing.

The fact of the matter is, we haven't played baz ball since yesterday afternoon. That's why we haven't scored quickly enough for the amount of wickets we've lost. 

The stats were mentioned earlier. From 80% attacking shots v the short ball, yesterday early afternoon, down to 60% after stokes came in. Then down to 20% today.

Because they've been out-thought by Australia, who have simply played basic, but effective, cricket. 

There's a reason why Test cricket hasn't changed much in 100 or so years.

The point is, it isn't the "brand" that's cost us wickets today. It's been fantastic by the Aussie's and poor by us.

We're watching a different game. Attacking and trying to play shots consistently to short balls is a product of this ridiculous brand. Duck, evade and/or defend the ball, see off the bowlers and go again. It really is simple and basic. But our arrogance won't allow sensible cricket.

The stats don't support the assumption we've played attacking "baz ball" cricket. 

We've floundered and flailed around looking for rhythm, and we haven't commited to anything. That's what has cost us wickets. 

You either have to stick to your principles and keep playing your shots and accept you may lose wickets but continue to try and pressure the seamers by slapping them for regular boundaries. 

Or...

Duck, dive, evade and tire their seamers out. 

No issue with either. But I can't stand a 'nothing' approach, and that's what we've had since about tea yesterday.

[AnelkasBeard]

The fact of the matter is, we haven't played baz ball since yesterday afternoon. That's why we haven't scored quickly enough for the amount of wickets we've lost. 

The stats were mentioned earlier. From 80% attacking shots v the short ball, yesterday early afternoon, down to 60% after stokes came in. Then down to 20% today.

Because they've been out-thought by Australia, who have simply played basic, but effective, cricket. 

There's a reason why Test cricket hasn't changed much in 100 or so years.

The point is, it isn't the "brand" that's cost us wickets today. It's been fantastic by the Aussie's and poor by us.

We're watching a different game. Attacking and trying to play shots consistently to short balls is a product of this ridiculous brand. Duck, evade and/or defend the ball, see off the bowlers and go again. It really is simple and basic. But our arrogance won't allow sensible cricket.

The stats don't support the assumption we've played attacking "baz ball" cricket. 

We've floundered and flailed around looking for rhythm, and we haven't commited to anything. That's what has cost us wickets. 

You either have to stick to your principles and keep playing your shots and accept you may lose wickets but continue to try and pressure the seamers by slapping them for regular boundaries. 

Or...

Duck, dive, evade and tire their seamers out. 

No issue with either. But I can't stand a 'nothing' approach, and that's what we've had since about tea yesterday.

Completely agree.

[Bob Fossil]

The fact of the matter is, we haven't played baz ball since yesterday afternoon. That's why we haven't scored quickly enough for the amount of wickets we've lost. 

The stats were mentioned earlier. From 80% attacking shots v the short ball, yesterday early afternoon, down to 60% after stokes came in. Then down to 20% today.

Because they've been out-thought by Australia, who have simply played basic, but effective, cricket. 

There's a reason why Test cricket hasn't changed much in 100 or so years.

The point is, it isn't the "brand" that's cost us wickets today. It's been fantastic by the Aussie's and poor by us.

We're watching a different game. Attacking and trying to play shots consistently to short balls is a product of this ridiculous brand. Duck, evade and/or defend the ball, see off the bowlers and go again. It really is simple and basic. But our arrogance won't allow sensible cricket.

The stats don't support the assumption we've played attacking "baz ball" cricket. 

We've floundered and flailed around looking for rhythm, and we haven't commited to anything. That's what has cost us wickets. 

You either have to stick to your principles and keep playing your shots and accept you may lose wickets but continue to try and pressure the seamers by slapping them for regular boundaries. 

Or...

Duck, dive, evade and tire their seamers out. 

No issue with either. But I can't stand a 'nothing' approach, and that's what we've had since about tea yesterday.

Agree, It doesn't even have to be one or the other, all of the time. When the Aussies got on top, the senior players should have settled in for a period of consolidation, but they just get done playing ridiculous shots. Brook could have gone 3 times after he hit his 50 playing the same hopeless swing.

[Ted Maul]

It wasn't a nothing approach, they were still playing shots they didn't need to and got out. Just because we weren't hitting everything for six doesn't mean we weren't attacking. The last hour yesterday Stokes showed how to do it before he got a good one this morning.

For an hour yesterday afternoon and an hour this morning our batsmen shouldn't have played a single shot with a flat bat, if they'd have done so we'd still be batting now and would have given ourselves a real chance.

[Pragmatist]

England discovered a brand of attaching cricket which worked superbly against the teams that they played against, destroying all of them. But they hadn’t played Australia - the world’s number 1 Test side for a reason - and England haven’t yet adapted to this new challenge.

I really hope that instead of England abandoning this style of play, they learn to moderate it when necessary (which might only be when they play Australia!). This is why the batting line-up needs a couple of players who can - when needed - play in a more orthodox manner. Root is that player, and my view is that Foakes should be too. Those two at 4 and 7 can provide the ballast for when this style is going wrong.

[rsbaggy2]

As mentioned by others, there does seem to be a significant element of arrogance about England's approach. That would stem from the very top.

[CA Baggie]

As mentioned by others, there does seem to be a significant element of arrogance about England's approach. That would stem from the very top.

I don't think this arrogance is an ECB problem, the elitism arrogance is an altogether separate issue.

Their is an absolute belief that the aggressive route is for us and there's a fine line between confidence and arrogance.  They're so confident it's the right approach and the "no blame" culture when they give their wickets away breeds it.  When Brook was swinging and missing last night and almost got clean bowled he just laughed about it.  Stokes is smiling from the other end!  He should have come drown the pitch and bollocked him. 

This confidence\arrogance is coach and captain driven in a cult-like approach towards "We play this way, win or lose".  Which is slightly different to the Kohli arrogance towards umpires and the opposition who have the audacity to get or give him out.