Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
England Cricket 2025
Comments
-
Carey stands up to the stumps and catches Jacks off Boland bowling at 136 kph0
-
Piss poor it really is.0
-
Carse bowled by Boland for a duck.
Still need 3 runs to avoid a follow on0 -
Turn off the lights.0
-
Please make this the last time I ever have to watch Carse in an England shirt.0
-
So, who has played their last series?
can’t imagine Pope even playing in next test at all.0 -
At the time this felt rather dismissive so I didn’t follow up but I hope you’ll allow me to revisit this now we’re halfway through the third Test and on the brink of going down 3-0.Addick Addict said:Callumcafc said:
I don’t know how anyone can say this with confidence about this particular pitch given that each innings lasted 32.5, 45.2, 34.4 and 28.2 ovs respectively and the two longest partnerships of the match were between ovs 0.5 & 16.2 (Pope & Duckett) and 11.3 & 26.5 (Head & Labuschagne).Addick Addict said:
Stokes is just in total denial. Whether that is pure arrogance or whether that is something they will address behind closed doors I don't know. Smith summed the pitch up perfectly - once you got to 30-40 overs it got easier. We were all out in both innings inside 35 overs playing rash shots rather than digging in.killerandflash said:I'm not sure Stokes in the post match interview has entirely learned the right lessons from that defeat.
Nobody is saying we shouldn't be positive, but you also have to leave as well. And work out which shots are too risky to play, and which ones are worth the risk.
Crawley's drive, in the first over of the Ashes, could almost be as defining as Harmison's wide. It's the way we play.
Think it was a late Day 2 and the pitch flattening out moreso than it was the ball getting old.
Head won the match for Australia by “bazballing” on a flatter pitch.
I'm afraid "Bazballing" has become a bit of a euphemism for "brain dead cricket".
"Bazballing" is trying to drive a wide ball on the up when it simply isn't there to do so on a track you haven't even worked out what the ball is doing in the first over of an Ashes.
"Bazballing" is trying to ramp a first delivery, a la Root, when you are one of the best technical batsman in the world because that is what the coach has told you to go out and do.
"Bazballing" is taking on the short ball as we did at home when Lyon couldn't even stand on one leg only to hole out, one after another - then to repeat the dose time and time again as we did in this first innings when the five man trap.
"Bazballing" is scoring so fast that your bowlers get next to no time to rest in a Test match. It's been pointed out how down our speeds were in that second innings. Even a differential of 5mph, especially when the ball has stopped doing what it was in the first innings, is massive.
"Bazballing" is not learning from one's mistakes or adapting to the circumstances. Against lesser teams you might get away with doing that. A lot of the time you won't against the best which is why, despite all our money and facilities, we are sixth in the current Test standings and finished fifth in the last one.
"Bazballing" is not what Head did. Head had 12 dots in his first 14 balls. He assessed, He then attacked but this still wasn't "must hit every ball" - he had 26 dot balls in his first 44 deliveries, This was selective hitting and respecting the good balls until such time as he was "in". By then, he'd been out there for 16 overs and seen from both ends what the ball and wicket was doing. Then it was all out attack. The damage was done. He knew, at that point, that we couldn't bowl to him on that deck. He then hit 72 off the next 38 balls.
We can argue 'til the cows come home at what point the pitch flattened out or when the ball went soft. What we can't argue is that, until we learn to earn that right to intimidate the opposition then against best in the world we are going to lose from winning positions. And we've done that too often now in what have turned out to be crucial Tests that mean the difference between winning and losing a series. That's "Bazballing". To call what Head did "Bazballing" is somewhat undermining his innings and how he went about it in my opinion.
McCullum and Stokes have brought some real positivity. The trouble is that it becomes a strength overdone when we consistently fail to recognise that line between being positive and becoming reckless. A "leave" to a wide, good length ball moving way can actually be positive. Throwing your hands at it in the hope you find the middle of the bat is reckless.
Over the last two days, I think it’s irrefutable, looking at the relative dismissals of both sides, that the Australians were the more reckless of the two sides. Yet they look to be holding a 150+ lead going into their second innings.
I think what is proving to be true is that Australia are better at bowling, they are better at batting to defend, they are better at batting to attack and they are better in the field to top it off.
No amount of philosophy is going to overcome such a significant talent gap.1 -
Just checked the score..... Oh dear oh dear oh dear. I joked yesterday about waking up to 160/6 or something but it's somehow worse?0
-
If only this was being played at Old Trafford. We might have a chance due to rain.2
-
213-8 at stumps. Trail by 158.
Run rate 3.13 (compared to Australia’s 4.06).
Stokes 45 (151)
Archer 30 (48)0 -
Sponsored links:
-
Well batted Stokes and Archer. Showing some fight at least0
-
RIP Bazball.2
-
Hopefullycantersaddick said:RIP Bazball.0 -
Bazball wasn’t the problem today, the Aussies were just better2
-
The Smith wicket is wild, from what they showed there’s a clear gap between bat and ball but the umpire completely ignores it1
-
Will be interesting to see how many changes are actually made after this series. Feels like you probably need to go for a complete clean slate - new management structure, new opening pair (I'm fine with Duckett) , new No3, probably someone else with the gloves and a couple of new bowlers + a spinner.
A lot of changes to be made ahead of next summer's series's against New Zealand and Pakistan.0 -
The series against NZ and Pakistan are the start of the preparation for 'The Ashes 27 - the Reclamation Series'4
-
Just seen there is no Old Trafford test next time
- 1st test - Edgbaston, Birmingham
- 2nd test - Lord’s, London
- 3rd test - Trent Bridge, Nottingham
- 4th test - Ageas Bowl, Southampton
- 5th test - The Oval, London
0 -
Or Headingley, there was a lot of fuss when announced that there's nothing north of Nottingham.MrOneLung said:Just seen there is no Old Trafford test next time- 1st test - Edgbaston, Birmingham
- 2nd test - Lord’s, London
- 3rd test - Trent Bridge, Nottingham
- 4th test - Ageas Bowl, Southampton
- 5th test - The Oval, London
0 -
I think that there is a difference between "reckless" and playing strong shots at the right time. Bazball is reckless and it is that which has caused out batters to have such muddled thinking in the middle.Callumcafc said:
At the time this felt rather dismissive so I didn’t follow up but I hope you’ll allow me to revisit this now we’re halfway through the third Test and on the brink of going down 3-0.Addick Addict said:Callumcafc said:
I don’t know how anyone can say this with confidence about this particular pitch given that each innings lasted 32.5, 45.2, 34.4 and 28.2 ovs respectively and the two longest partnerships of the match were between ovs 0.5 & 16.2 (Pope & Duckett) and 11.3 & 26.5 (Head & Labuschagne).Addick Addict said:
Stokes is just in total denial. Whether that is pure arrogance or whether that is something they will address behind closed doors I don't know. Smith summed the pitch up perfectly - once you got to 30-40 overs it got easier. We were all out in both innings inside 35 overs playing rash shots rather than digging in.killerandflash said:I'm not sure Stokes in the post match interview has entirely learned the right lessons from that defeat.
Nobody is saying we shouldn't be positive, but you also have to leave as well. And work out which shots are too risky to play, and which ones are worth the risk.
Crawley's drive, in the first over of the Ashes, could almost be as defining as Harmison's wide. It's the way we play.
Think it was a late Day 2 and the pitch flattening out moreso than it was the ball getting old.
Head won the match for Australia by “bazballing” on a flatter pitch.
I'm afraid "Bazballing" has become a bit of a euphemism for "brain dead cricket".
"Bazballing" is trying to drive a wide ball on the up when it simply isn't there to do so on a track you haven't even worked out what the ball is doing in the first over of an Ashes.
"Bazballing" is trying to ramp a first delivery, a la Root, when you are one of the best technical batsman in the world because that is what the coach has told you to go out and do.
"Bazballing" is taking on the short ball as we did at home when Lyon couldn't even stand on one leg only to hole out, one after another - then to repeat the dose time and time again as we did in this first innings when the five man trap.
"Bazballing" is scoring so fast that your bowlers get next to no time to rest in a Test match. It's been pointed out how down our speeds were in that second innings. Even a differential of 5mph, especially when the ball has stopped doing what it was in the first innings, is massive.
"Bazballing" is not learning from one's mistakes or adapting to the circumstances. Against lesser teams you might get away with doing that. A lot of the time you won't against the best which is why, despite all our money and facilities, we are sixth in the current Test standings and finished fifth in the last one.
"Bazballing" is not what Head did. Head had 12 dots in his first 14 balls. He assessed, He then attacked but this still wasn't "must hit every ball" - he had 26 dot balls in his first 44 deliveries, This was selective hitting and respecting the good balls until such time as he was "in". By then, he'd been out there for 16 overs and seen from both ends what the ball and wicket was doing. Then it was all out attack. The damage was done. He knew, at that point, that we couldn't bowl to him on that deck. He then hit 72 off the next 38 balls.
We can argue 'til the cows come home at what point the pitch flattened out or when the ball went soft. What we can't argue is that, until we learn to earn that right to intimidate the opposition then against best in the world we are going to lose from winning positions. And we've done that too often now in what have turned out to be crucial Tests that mean the difference between winning and losing a series. That's "Bazballing". To call what Head did "Bazballing" is somewhat undermining his innings and how he went about it in my opinion.
McCullum and Stokes have brought some real positivity. The trouble is that it becomes a strength overdone when we consistently fail to recognise that line between being positive and becoming reckless. A "leave" to a wide, good length ball moving way can actually be positive. Throwing your hands at it in the hope you find the middle of the bat is reckless.
Over the last two days, I think it’s irrefutable, looking at the relative dismissals of both sides, that the Australians were the more reckless of the two sides. Yet they look to be holding a 150+ lead going into their second innings.
I think what is proving to be true is that Australia are better at bowling, they are better at batting to defend, they are better at batting to attack and they are better in the field to top it off.
No amount of philosophy is going to overcome such a significant talent gap.
That's not to say that Australia aren't better than us. The one thing I have stressed on here though for at least the last five years is that there is no substitute for time in the middle and trusting a pathway. I will repeat this once more. Australians do not see it as a downgrade to be playing club cricket let alone the Sheffield Shield. We see central contracts as our "shield" and the excuse for ours to not have to play in the County Championship. Quicks have a modicum of an excuse not to be turning out. Batters don't.
We pick batters because they "look good". The Aussies pick 'em because they've proven themselves.3 -
Sponsored links:
-
22-4-51-2 (Economy Rate 2.32)
20-3-105-2 (Economy rate 5.25)
Those figures sum up our issues with picking a spinner now. You have to pick one that will take wickets and give the quicks some respite. You're looking for one that will give us speed, spin and accuracy. The issue with someone like Rehan Ahmed is that he isn't going to give us that control and in the first innings of Test cricket in somewhere like Australia.
You reap what you sow.1 -
Well thats that,like many others I looked forward to this series with hope,inside 2 matches and 2 days,half way through,absolute crap.Our front line batsman just do not have the balls to see off their fast bowlers,rabbits in headlights comes to mind.We have to have a complete rethink,dont ask me for names,but new faces have to come in.We need opening stands of 90-100 runs,not losing openers for low scores all the time.Look at them,Starc gets 55,Carey a ton middle to low order batsmen out scoring our top order by a mile.0
-
Is this for the Ashes? That's poor if so.North Lower Neil said:
Or Headingley, there was a lot of fuss when announced that there's nothing north of Nottingham.MrOneLung said:Just seen there is no Old Trafford test next time- 1st test - Edgbaston, Birmingham
- 2nd test - Lord’s, London
- 3rd test - Trent Bridge, Nottingham
- 4th test - Ageas Bowl, Southampton
- 5th test - The Oval, London
Not sure Southampton needs one. Should stick with tradition.
And I'm pretty sure as recently as 1997 there were six Tests in the home series?0 -
So much focus from the media has been about "snicko". There is no doubt that this might have made a meaningful difference. But please let's have a reality check here. We are about to go 3-0 down to a side that, at times, have been missing three of their four best bowlers and are without their best batter in this Test.
Hazlewood hasn't bowled a ball, Cummins was injured for the first games, Lyon was left out of the last one and Smith is ill here. Our one and only absence is a soon to be 36 year-old who last picked up a Test wicket 16 months ago.
"Snicko" is a diversion from our inherent problems.3 -
But Bazball will always be the problem when you've been drilling it into your chosen ones for two years and then ask them to play serious test cricket when the penny finally drops that it will never work against a team with serious nouse.fenaddick said:Bazball wasn’t the problem today, the Aussies were just better3 -
Two things can be true at once. The biggest talking points of today and yesterday probably are snicko. That doesn’t mean the media aren’t also talking about failings in performance, if you aren’t seeing that discussion you’re looking in the wrong placesAddick Addict said:So much focus from the media has been about "snicko". There is no doubt that this might have made a meaningful difference. But please let's have a reality check here. We are about to go 3-0 down to a side that, at times, have been missing three of their four best bowlers and are without their best batter in this Test.
Hazlewood hasn't bowled a ball, Cummins was injured for the first games, Lyon was left out of the last one and Smith is ill here. Our one and only absence is a soon to be 36 year-old who last picked up a Test wicket 16 months ago.
"Snicko" is a diversion from our inherent problems.1 -
There's a difference between discussion and headlines. "Snicko" is the headline. It isn't the root cause of our issues. "Snicko" did not take eight wickets today. We had exactly the same thing when Carey was called a "cheat" for the Bairstow incident. It's all pure deflection from the fundamentals that are so, so wrong.fenaddick said:
Two things can be true at once. The biggest talking points of today and yesterday probably are snicko. That doesn’t mean the media aren’t also talking about failings in performance, if you aren’t seeing that discussion you’re looking in the wrong placesAddick Addict said:So much focus from the media has been about "snicko". There is no doubt that this might have made a meaningful difference. But please let's have a reality check here. We are about to go 3-0 down to a side that, at times, have been missing three of their four best bowlers and are without their best batter in this Test.
Hazlewood hasn't bowled a ball, Cummins was injured for the first games, Lyon was left out of the last one and Smith is ill here. Our one and only absence is a soon to be 36 year-old who last picked up a Test wicket 16 months ago.
"Snicko" is a diversion from our inherent problems.
When Michael Kasprowicz was given out to enable us to win that iconic Ashes Test by two runs, how many headlines from us that the Aussies were robbed? Not one. It was all about celebrating a fantastic game and a magnificent win.
As they say in cricket "look in the book because that's what matters".
0 -
Baz ball worked against many sides but in Australia where England had lost 15 and drawn 2 of the last 17 matches since they won at the SCG in January 2011, the Laissez-faire philosophy of Stokes and McCullum was unlikely to stop the rot.
Others have already stated how under prepared this team were and Ben Stokes left his speech too late before the Adelaide test as for years they left it to the batsmen to always take the game to the opposition instead of using some nous and playing the situation. The two day 1st test when England snatched defeat from the jaws of victory was a sorry indictment of the nebulous attitude which has affected this golf loving squad and management.
It's been men against Boys and despite the gamesmanship, Shithousery and aggression from the Aussies the so called average bowlers like Neser in the first test and Boland in all 3 matches hit their mark with great discipline and then let the batsmen fall on their sword.
Starc has been class with bat and ball and the unpopular Carey with England fans have been brilliant with bat and gloves and has shown in this series why he has a master's degree in gamesmanship.
To be able to bring Captain Cummins and Nathan Lyon back for Adelaide was just too much for a shell shocked England team who were suddenly expected to lower the jeopardy on their batting ! Ironically most of the team got out playing defensive shots from some Jaffas (not Pope)
Sorry Ben but perhaps the "Dinosaurs" were correct in saying this squad were undercooked for a 5 match test series down under.
3 -
Come on AA, you know headlines aren’t for those actually interested in cricket or discussions of substance, they’re a hook to get clicks/readers because “England batting collapse” happens so often most people will skip byAddick Addict said:
There's a difference between discussion and headlines. "Snicko" is the headline. It isn't the root cause of our issues. "Snicko" did not take eight wickets today. We had exactly the same thing when Carey was called a "cheat" for the Bairstow incident. It's all pure deflection from the fundamentals that are so, so wrong.fenaddick said:
Two things can be true at once. The biggest talking points of today and yesterday probably are snicko. That doesn’t mean the media aren’t also talking about failings in performance, if you aren’t seeing that discussion you’re looking in the wrong placesAddick Addict said:So much focus from the media has been about "snicko". There is no doubt that this might have made a meaningful difference. But please let's have a reality check here. We are about to go 3-0 down to a side that, at times, have been missing three of their four best bowlers and are without their best batter in this Test.
Hazlewood hasn't bowled a ball, Cummins was injured for the first games, Lyon was left out of the last one and Smith is ill here. Our one and only absence is a soon to be 36 year-old who last picked up a Test wicket 16 months ago.
"Snicko" is a diversion from our inherent problems.
When Michael Kasprowicz was given out to enable us to win that iconic Ashes Test by two runs, how many headlines from us that the Aussies were robbed? Not one. It was all about celebrating a fantastic game and a magnificent win.
As they say in cricket "look in the book because that's what matters".1 -
I am not sure what we are aiming to be good at anymore. I accept being world champions at Test level, One-Day level and T20 level is a big ask. I accept I have a bias and would like us to the best Test team in the world rather than other formats; I accept others may disagree. However, we are clearly failing at Test level, basically due to the simple fact that we don't have many Test players (Root, Archer, Stokes, and that's about it if you exclude the permanently injured) and none of them play any/much 4-day County cricket. We have no cricketers who play 50-over One Day cricket, and our success at T20 is moderate at best against the stronger teams. We could learn a lot from the way Australia handles its players. They are not packed with superstars in this series, but they are getting the best out of what they have.4
