| Bazzball 07:00 - Jun 30 with 2532 views | BuffaloBill |
I think a lot of people are getting confused with it and the strategy.
If it was as simple as playing big shots and aggressive fields when you choose then that's just "normal cricket"
Bazball is based on chaos, it's going repeatedly hard more of the time. People are criticising yesterday after being 200-2 playing those shots, but that's what got them there, you kind of have to accept it warts and all for it to succeed.
You really can't have it both ways. |  |
| |  |
| Bazzball on 07:17 - Jun 30 with 2455 views | davblue |
They were on top of the game and didn’t need to play some of those shots. Entertainment without substance won’t fly for long.
I thought we were reckless and played Into the Aussies hands for that hour and it isn’t the type of cricket that wins you big test matches.
What come before that period was brilliant, positive cricket then Crawley gave his wicket away. We need to be more hard nosed. |  | | |
| Bazzball on 07:26 - Jun 30 with 2441 views | RamRob |
| Bazzball on 07:17 - Jun 30 by davblue |
They were on top of the game and didn’t need to play some of those shots. Entertainment without substance won’t fly for long.
I thought we were reckless and played Into the Aussies hands for that hour and it isn’t the type of cricket that wins you big test matches.
What come before that period was brilliant, positive cricket then Crawley gave his wicket away. We need to be more hard nosed. |
Tbh I think Crawley was a bit unlucky, ball turned quite a bit and flicked off his leg and Carey took it very well, could easily just have hit his leg and not gone anywhere.
Same with Duckett, he wasn't looking to hit it up, ball just got a bit big on him, so I'd say well bowled.
Pope on the other hand should have just let that one go, it may have even been a wide over head height.
Don't know what is going on with Root, got lucky with the no ball and then didn't learn from it. Stokes has shown you need to get yourself in on that pitch. |  |
| |
| Bazzball on 07:44 - Jun 30 with 2401 views | SaleAway |
If it's brainlessly going hard all of the time, then it is destined to fail. I thought it was more nuanced than that. What I've seen is a culture that encourages players to take positive options, that looks to move the game forward, and that looks to make the opposition react. Its already had a great affect on Australia, who have forgotten to attack england's openers, as they are too worried about going for runs.
Most of yesterday was brilliant, but that hour was brainless. They had already created chaos. They were faced with an opponent who went to short pitched bowling because they literally had no other options. If they'd dialled it back for about an hour, the aussies would have tired, and then you're into facing head, labushagne and smith, then you go hard.
At the moment, Australia are letting us play, and waiting for us to make mistakes. All we need to do is have the self control to take the easy runs on offer and make them work for wickets. Could have been 250-2 with a little bit of thought. |  |
| |
| Bazzball on 07:47 - Jun 30 with 2384 views | Ftnfwest |
Regardless of how they play its more the old underlying problem with English test cricket in that we've often had sides where we want them only to let them off. By and large the Bazball approach is great and certainly best for England as it masks the fact we have very few genuine test players left. Anderson, Broad and Stokes plus Root and the only one who'll be back in 4 years (maybe) is Root i'd say. We do have one or two genuine talents, more in terms of white ball, and if Brook gets going he could genuinely take the game away from the Aussies. |  | | |
| Bazzball on 08:10 - Jun 30 with 2315 views | Ftnfwest |
| Bazzball on 07:44 - Jun 30 by SaleAway |
If it's brainlessly going hard all of the time, then it is destined to fail. I thought it was more nuanced than that. What I've seen is a culture that encourages players to take positive options, that looks to move the game forward, and that looks to make the opposition react. Its already had a great affect on Australia, who have forgotten to attack england's openers, as they are too worried about going for runs.
Most of yesterday was brilliant, but that hour was brainless. They had already created chaos. They were faced with an opponent who went to short pitched bowling because they literally had no other options. If they'd dialled it back for about an hour, the aussies would have tired, and then you're into facing head, labushagne and smith, then you go hard.
At the moment, Australia are letting us play, and waiting for us to make mistakes. All we need to do is have the self control to take the easy runs on offer and make them work for wickets. Could have been 250-2 with a little bit of thought. |
With the approach you have to accept this can happen, but you're right and in my view they could have played a partnership like Brook/Stokes did after the second wicket went down. Would have been much better to be 250-2 at the close. Mind you Root's dismissal..... If there wasn't at least 'doubt' about that there's something wrong. | | | |
| Bazzball on 08:18 - Jun 30 with 2292 views | redrickstuhaart |
Playing those shots wasnt how they got there.
They played agressively. But they did not get there by walking directly into the short pitched trap with an entire team's worth of catchers on the boundary. | | | |
| Bazzball on 08:48 - Jun 30 with 2238 views | SaleAway |
| Bazzball on 08:10 - Jun 30 by Ftnfwest |
With the approach you have to accept this can happen, but you're right and in my view they could have played a partnership like Brook/Stokes did after the second wicket went down. Would have been much better to be 250-2 at the close. Mind you Root's dismissal..... If there wasn't at least 'doubt' about that there's something wrong. |
Yeah, I accept that we will lost the odd wicket to attacking shots, and I don't mind that, but yesterday, Australia were fundamentally gifted all 4 wickets to fall. We will never have better opportunities to grind this aussie side down, and we let them off a bit.
its not just this game. Its a long series, and if they are without a spinner, lets puts as many overs as we can into their pace bowlers. | |
| |
| Bazzball on 09:49 - Jun 30 with 2144 views | itfcjoe |
You still have to play the momentum of the test match |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Bazzball on 10:39 - Jun 30 with 2097 views | Guthrum |
It is true that the rate at which England's batters were scoring meant there was only one real failure yesterday (Root going for 10*, all others getting 40+).
However, there is a lot of time left in the game and no need to throw away wickets by rash shots. The only chaos it created was in England's ranks. Australia went from desperate to rejuvenated in a few overs.
I know this is an era of irrational extremes in many walks of life, but it is possible to temper aggression with pragmatism, without losing all the energy of the former. There is a middle ground between berserk and Boycott.
* Ironically, he had the lowest stike-rate of the dismissed batters, too. |  |
| |
| Bazzball on 10:46 - Jun 30 with 2070 views | ElephantintheRoom |
It’s PR for playing limited overs cricket in test matches. It works (as would ‘normal’ test cricket) against disinterested underprepared sides - but will predictably struggle against an interested, underprepared side. Injuries will help, as will the absurd schedule. | |
| |
| Bazzball on 11:19 - Jun 30 with 2037 views | TootingTown |
It's an interesting one isn't it. I feel like there is definitely a hyper analysis on every single English dismissal. It seems because they don't look 'traditional' then they have a lot more scrutiny on them.
Smith/Starc got out playing wild drives yesterday morning, if they would've hung around together they could've batted us out of the game but there is no mention of them at all. |  | | |
| Bazzball on 11:21 - Jun 30 with 2029 views | gainsboroughblue |
| Bazzball on 11:19 - Jun 30 by TootingTown |
It's an interesting one isn't it. I feel like there is definitely a hyper analysis on every single English dismissal. It seems because they don't look 'traditional' then they have a lot more scrutiny on them.
Smith/Starc got out playing wild drives yesterday morning, if they would've hung around together they could've batted us out of the game but there is no mention of them at all. |
Just on that topic. Green's dismissal was probably the most hideous of the series. |  |
| |
| Bazzball on 11:31 - Jun 30 with 2008 views | SaleAway |
| Bazzball on 11:19 - Jun 30 by TootingTown |
It's an interesting one isn't it. I feel like there is definitely a hyper analysis on every single English dismissal. It seems because they don't look 'traditional' then they have a lot more scrutiny on them.
Smith/Starc got out playing wild drives yesterday morning, if they would've hung around together they could've batted us out of the game but there is no mention of them at all. |
To be honest, I'm not bothered that they got out playing attacking strokes.... I've given Pope a pass, but at that point, and after Root was let off by the no-ball, you'd think a period of reflection on how best to approach it would be worth a thought. With that many back, you look at the risk/reward profile, and perhaps think that its not a great option.
And something we forget, is that this set of players aren't very good at defending, so for them, sometimes attack is the best form of defence. | |
| |
| Bazzball on 11:34 - Jun 30 with 2003 views | itfcjoe |
| Bazzball on 11:19 - Jun 30 by TootingTown |
It's an interesting one isn't it. I feel like there is definitely a hyper analysis on every single English dismissal. It seems because they don't look 'traditional' then they have a lot more scrutiny on them.
Smith/Starc got out playing wild drives yesterday morning, if they would've hung around together they could've batted us out of the game but there is no mention of them at all. |
I think whilst that happens, it's more for me when you can see it coming and nothing is done. Every batsman will play bad shots, it happens - but when Lyon had gone out of the attack yesterday and they were just bowling short stuff we had a good opportunity just to knock them about for 3-4 an over for an hour and just really get back into the game but weren't doing it and it was all so predictable.
There are times when you have to out your foot on opponents throat, and suffocate them - in both tests we've failed to do that when an opportunity has been there through not adjusting approach when needed to.
Look at how Stokes batted yesterday, is he getting the correct message across to the team? Because he seems to know when and how to put pressure on but others don't. | |
| |
| Bazzball on 11:35 - Jun 30 with 1998 views | gordon |
Personal view is that in relation to batting there's two interrelated things going on:
The general attitude to batting that has completely changed is that - if you get out playing a positive shot, you're going to be supported rather than criticised in the dressing room - this has allowed talented, aggressive players like Harry Brook and Ben Duckett to come in an be successful, because they're no longer worried about failure and can have a really positive mindset.
Compare that to players like Alex Hales and Jos Buttler in the past, who were never fully supported in bringing their aggressive approach to test cricket, and thus didn't realise their talent.
The second aspect though, is the absolute commitment to never taking a backward step eg even against an obvious trap, which to me is just daft - particularly yesterday with the spinner out the game and England being very dominant against full-length bowling, there was really only one way England could fail to end the day in a good position to get the 500+ score they needed to be in position to win the game. |  | | |
| Bazzball on 13:39 - Jun 30 with 1830 views | Mookamoo |
How does bazball work if we need to bat for nearly 2 days in order to force a draw?
Are they still going to try and hook and pull their way out of this or is this the point we see some normal cricket? |  | | |
| Bazzball on 16:07 - Jun 30 with 1766 views | stonojnr |
You can and its how good Test cricket sides play, which is the whole point of 5 day cricket, understanding there is time in the game and there are times to attack, times to defend, times to wear out the opposition and never ever give away your wicket. | | | |
| Bazzball on 17:26 - Jun 30 with 1717 views | Trequartista |
I think there is a lot of fine tuning to be done, but I think it is worth noting that English batsman have been getting out too often playing poor shots long before bazball arrived. |  |
| |
| Bazzball on 17:37 - Jun 30 with 1709 views | redrickstuhaart |
| Bazzball on 11:35 - Jun 30 by gordon |
Personal view is that in relation to batting there's two interrelated things going on:
The general attitude to batting that has completely changed is that - if you get out playing a positive shot, you're going to be supported rather than criticised in the dressing room - this has allowed talented, aggressive players like Harry Brook and Ben Duckett to come in an be successful, because they're no longer worried about failure and can have a really positive mindset.
Compare that to players like Alex Hales and Jos Buttler in the past, who were never fully supported in bringing their aggressive approach to test cricket, and thus didn't realise their talent.
The second aspect though, is the absolute commitment to never taking a backward step eg even against an obvious trap, which to me is just daft - particularly yesterday with the spinner out the game and England being very dominant against full-length bowling, there was really only one way England could fail to end the day in a good position to get the 500+ score they needed to be in position to win the game. |
There is agression, and there is cowardice disguised as bravery.
These shots are like when someone doesn't fancy a penalty and just hits it as hard as possible, leaving it to chance.
Its an abdication of responsibility to the vagaries of chance. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
