Pat Cummins and Nathan Lyon put together 55 runs for the ninth wicket as Australia managed to chase down the 281-run target on the final day and win the first Ashes Test. Ever since that defeat on Tuesday night, there is a chorus targeting England’s Bazball style of play.
Former England captain Nasser Hussain during the post-match discussion on Sky Sports said, “You can't hide behind that (wanting to entertain), and I can almost read Ricky Ponting's mind because he's a winner.” Pinpointing England’s inability to finish Test matches, Hussain said, “England lost [the final Test by one run] in New Zealand as well, if you remember. I know they've had Ireland in between, but now they've lost here and there are two games of cricket they could have won, should have won.”
True that England should have won both games, but it’s not the Bazball approach that is responsible for the losses. Bazball is not a result-driven model, but rather a process that seeks full commitment to pursue victory till the last breath. England captain Ben Stokes in the post-match presentation after the loss at Edgbaston said, “Not putting the result at the top of everything that we think about actually really helps us go out and play free-spirited cricket.”
If not Bazball, then where did England fail? The answer lies in the execution of the plans created via Bazball.
Six drop catches, 1 missed stumping and a wicket off the no-ball
If six catches are dropped, a dolly of a stumping is missed, 23 no-balls are bowled and one of those balls gets a wicket and all this happens in the same Test, it is only fitting that the team responsible for so many mistakes lose the game. This happened with England.
More From This Section
Jonny Bairstow behind the stumps caught Marnus Labuschagne brilliantly on Day 2, but other than that, he was just average. It is fine to play Bairstow as a pure batter but as a Test keeper, he can’t be a team’s first choice.
No, the declaration was alright on Day 1
The most discussed aspect of the Bazball has been England declaring on Day 1. The idea behind the declaration was to test the Aussie openers for 4-5 overs at the end of the day. The conditions were not testing, but England wanted to put pressure on Australia. Had the four overs resulted in two wickets, the same declaration would have been termed a masterstroke.
Batting for the remaining six overs or trying to get to 450 would not have benefited England more given that rain was always going to play a part in the Test. Remember, that Bazball means going for a win all the time. And this was the reason that the declaration was made.
In hindsight, everything can be critiqued. There was also a possibility of England getting bowled out for 393 in the next two deliveries and Australia would have batted on Day 1 anyways. So, to blame the declaration which was based on clearly evident merits just because the players were not able to execute the plans better is not the right approach to judge Bazball.
Wrong shot selection in the second innings
England went Bazball in the second innings as well. They had a seven-run lead. They tried to increase it, but overcast conditions resulted in Aussie bowlers getting the ball to swing and picking early wickets. Then rain halted the progression with England at 28/2 at the end of Day 3.
On Day 4, the English batters kept up with a high rate of scoring but got out trying to play silly shots on balls that didn’t deserve a wicket. Those shots should have never been played. It was another reason why England couldn’t get past the 300 mark in the third innings. 320 would have been the ideal target that England wanted to set up for the Aussies. But they were 40 short only because of the wrong shot selection.
Not going for the kill
The last and final nail in the coffin was put by England’s approach after the fall of the eighth Australian wicket. Joe Root managed to get Alex Carey and give England a chance to win the game. With 54 to defend and having a tailender, Lyon, at one end and Cummins at the other, Stokes didn’t take the new ball fearing that would give easy runs from the edges to the Aussie batters.
The short-ball ploy was applied against Lyon with the old ball but Stokes dropped him. Instead of bowling Root even after his job was finished with Carey’s wicket, Stokes should have gone for the kill. He should have taken the new ball, brought his pacers into the attack and set three slips and one gully to try and catch out the remaining two Aussie batters and win the game. Had they lost doing that, there would have still been merit in the argument that the other team was better. But here, they just gave up.