- England’s cricketing failures and the pursuit of style over substance
- The paradox of embracing a creed while limiting autonomy and self-expression
- Nihilism disguised as courage: England’s approach to Test matches
And honestly, isn’t this what the people want? Australia may be on the verge of taking a 2-0 lead after enduring adverse conditions, the loss of their best spinner, and an out-of-form No. 3 batsman. But these are merely minutiae, and the men of Bazball are not concerned with such things. They could have exerted themselves more, perhaps. Could they have lost their wickets in even more mysterious circumstances? Could they have further enchanted us? When besieged, do not yield. Double your wager.
This Test was decided by the slapstick of the morning session, when England resumed their innings with a slender lead of 278 for four and was dismissed after just 15 overs. There is a school of thought that holds if you admired England’s cricketing manner when they were successful, it is unfair to criticize it when it fails. This is comparable to arguing that if you have ever relished a restaurant meal, you have no right to complain if they serve you E. coli on your next visit. It’s simply how they cook. They are adopting an entirely new approach to cuisine. Is there, in the end, any true distinction between fine dining and violent diarrhea?
In actuality, what we are being asked to embrace is not so much the vicissitudes of athletic performance, but rather a kind of inviolable creed.
Accept this in its entirety, as it is, with no conditions or restrictions. Your response is optional. Your judgment does not concern us. This is acceptable when you win 10 of 11 Tests. People will accompany you on your journey. The guiding principle of Bazball is sound and admirable: that sport is not just about winning, but also about style and enjoyment, creating memories, and leaving a mark. However, why not attempt both?
Let’s deal with the seven most ridiculous things in England in ascending order. Ben Stokes received a first-ball delivery from Mitchell Starc that leveled the pitch. Ben Duckett, at number 98, snagged a ball that could have been hooked. Jonny Bairstow attempted to smash the ball directly down the pitch, a shot at which he is demonstrably proficient. Zak Crawley attempted to reach the field by coming down the track to Nathan Lyon but was thwarted. These events occur.
To the central position. Harry Brook was run out while attempting to cut a bouncer that was aimed at his left ear. The play was grotesque, but not entirely illogical, given that there were only three fielders in front of the square. Ollie Pope was caught on the boundary after Cameron Green duped him into an uncharacteristic display of machismo, the cricketing equivalent of Ed Miliband proclaiming, “Hell yeah, I’m tough enough.”
Early in his innings, Joe Root was captured attempting to swipe a bouncer from Starc.
Root possesses not only the greatest variety of strokes, but also the confidence, judgment, and experience to employ them as he sees appropriate. Why not the uppercut, a move he is consistently excellent at, as opposed to the frantic swat, which he is not? Pope and Root are perhaps the finest examples of how a philosophy based on autonomy and self-expression has given way to an oddly restricting uniformity. You are allowed to play your natural game, provided that it is identical to ours.
Steve Smith is the finest example of a great batter who projects a sense of permanence. They are demoralizing. You begin to lose hope of ever removing them. This strategy is not synonymous with stoic resistance; this is essentially how England triumphed last summer. Stokes vs. South Africa at Old Trafford, Pope vs. New Zealand at Trent Bridge, and Bairstow vs. India at Edgbaston: these were innings of substance as well as flair, exciting and aggressive, but also intelligent. When the field is behind, it is not a betrayal of principle to accept five easy singles per over. Waiting for the opportunity to attack while playing out a few calm overs is not a humiliating retreat. It is the only surefire method to win Test matches.
Instead, we observe a form of nihilism, a self-protective timidity masquerading as courage.
We hear a lot about bravery in this England, but has there ever been a more courageous cricketer on either side than Usman Khawaja, who has bravely weathered everything England has hurled at him while remaining unwaveringly confident in his technique and method in foreign conditions? Is it not courageous to refuse to be indifferent to the possibility of failure?
If you lock away your heart, it will never be broken. We’re in the entertainment business, not the sporting business,” Stokes likes to say, and if you follow that strand to its natural conclusion, perhaps this is the result: a team that is fatally committed to the bit and has begun actively seeking adversity to overcome. They continue rolling, swiping, and swiping while beaming in their bucket hats, frantically pursuing their next buzz.
