RIP Bazball

[Australian Randall]

Bazball is dead
It doesn't work against teams that play the game correctly
Let's be right this isn't a great aussie team but it's a well drilled one.
Crawley has got in twice in 6 goes but not affected the game
Duckett is a walking wicket
Pope is shit
Brook is brainless

You can't win with no runs on the board

 

[Bedi]

We should burn some bails and post an obituary in the paper

 

[Australian Randall]

At some point there has to be consequences for not making runs
If you bat up top you are going fail on occasion but the averages don't lie

 

[Blue1980]

At some point there has to be consequences for not making runs
If you bat up top you are going fail on occasion but the averages don't lie

Got a feeling Baz himself maybe feeling some consequences for the no consequences approach

 

[Moonwatcher]

Bazball is dead
It doesn't work against teams that play the game correctly
Let's be right this isn't a great aussie team but it's a well drilled one.
Crawley has got in twice in 6 goes but not affected the game
Duckett is a walking wicket
Pope is shit
Brook is brainless

You can't win with no runs on the board

I reckon if England take their catches they would be 2-1 up at worst.

 

[Gethelred]

I reckon if England take their catches they would be 2-1 up at worst.

I reckon if England made another 100 runs in the first test they'd have won it, and if they weren't weak as piss they'd have won the second test as well, and if they'd not completely wasted their momentum on day 2 of the third test they'd be three zip.

But they didn't, they are, and they did.

Bazball is about doing what you feel you need to to be at your best when the moment arrives. If that means you're playing a round of golf, get the caddy and off you go; if that means facing 1000 balls, they're gonna find you some net bowlers and wanger you some balls while they rest. But it also means that unless you're a fielding nut, you're just not going to be doing as much fielding as you need to to be seriously good at it.

They'll have their group training sessions of course, but at the end of the day they're simply not training it. Saying that 'if they took their catches they'd be up' is a hypothetical that not only didn't happen, wouldn't happen under the current leadership. That they dropped catches is entirely on them, both through who they selected and the lack of preparation.

 

[Freo Big Fella]

Bazball is about doing what you feel you need to to be at your best when the moment arrives. If that means you're playing a round of golf, get the caddy and off you go; if that means facing 1000 balls, they're gonna find you some net bowlers and wanger you some balls while they rest. But it also means that unless you're a fielding nut, you're just not going to be doing as much fielding as you need to to be seriously good at it.

They'll have their group training sessions of course, but at the end of the day they're simply not training it. Saying that 'if they took their catches they'd be up' is a hypothetical that not only didn't happen, wouldn't happen under the current leadership. That they dropped catches is entirely on them, both through who they selected and the lack of preparation.

It's interesting to compare the whole concept to the shift from Langer to McDonald on our end. Ostensibly it's a similar vibe - trust the players, manage your own workload, I'm not going to micromanage etc. I remember hitting the roof when we bombed out of the T20 WC (after losing to Afghanistan iirc) only for Cummins or McDonald to come out with something to the effect of "we're not fixated on individual results" or some such thing.

The difference is probably the mix of personalities - obsessives like Smith and Marnus. Competitive bulls like Starc and Lyon and Warner. People who take losing as a personal slight and want to make sure it doesn't happen again. Hard to see anyone on their side (Stokes and Root maybe the exceptions) with similar fire in the belly.

Certainly makes you wonder how much the departure/forced retirement of Anderson and Broad had in that regard.

 

[icyflakes]

It's interesting to compare the whole concept to the shift from Langer to McDonald on our end. Ostensibly it's a similar vibe - trust the players, manage your own workload, I'm not going to micromanage etc. I remember hitting the roof when we bombed out of the T20 WC (after losing to Afghanistan iirc) only for Cummins or McDonald to come out with something to the effect of "we're not fixated on individual results" or some such thing.

The difference is probably the mix of personalities - obsessives like Smith and Marnus. Competitive bulls like Starc and Lyon and Warner. People who take losing as a personal slight and want to make sure it doesn't happen again. Hard to see anyone on their side (Stokes and Root maybe the exceptions) with similar fire in the belly.

Certainly makes you wonder how much the departure/forced retirement of Anderson and Broad had in that regard.

There's a part of me that feels Bazball is seeing the ongoing success of this Aussie squad (post sandpaper) and trying to force the same culture without understanding the nuances of it.

Aussie squad are relaxed, encouraged to all be themselves and train/play how they want. Treated like individuals in a workplace who are adults and can manage themselves. That isn't going to always work, but it works for this particular squad. I've always said Mac is likely not the right coach as we transition to a younger playing group, where you need more heavy oversight.

What England think they have to do, is constantly tell everyone what their brand is. The Aussies say many things in press conferences that sound very similar to what the Poms do, but it doesn't feel forced like it does with them. The Aussies are being themselves, the Poms are acting. Where the Aussies say "play how you want", England go "play how you want" and then drop good players that don't fit their particular mould.

It's trying to emulate the outcomes without understanding the context that led to where the Aussie team is at.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

McCullum, Stokes and those above that have enabled this must all be sacked. They couldn’t have got this more wrong if they tried.

Both are/were great cricketers but honestly, a pair of morons.

 

[Gethelred]

It's interesting to compare the whole concept to the shift from Langer to McDonald on our end. Ostensibly it's a similar vibe - trust the players, manage your own workload, I'm not going to micromanage etc. I remember hitting the roof when we bombed out of the T20 WC (after losing to Afghanistan iirc) only for Cummins or McDonald to come out with something to the effect of "we're not fixated on individual results" or some such thing.

The difference is probably the mix of personalities - obsessives like Smith and Marnus. Competitive bulls like Starc and Lyon and Warner. People who take losing as a personal slight and want to make sure it doesn't happen again. Hard to see anyone on their side (Stokes and Root maybe the exceptions) with similar fire in the belly.

Certainly makes you wonder how much the departure/forced retirement of Anderson and Broad had in that regard.

I mean, there's also the predilection within Australian cricket towards emphasizing fielding almost above your ability with bat or ball. It's why we've got so many bits and pieces all rounders coming through as juniors; it's easier to select someone who can bowl and take wickets and bat a bit who also is an absolute gun fielder and try and develop them into a bat or if they've the physical characteristics a quick, rather than take someone who's a gun bat and try and give them skills they don't already possess. England don't do that; you get gun fielders coming through and getting developed, but by and large they're treated as a third thing or a unicorn, something that's nice to have but a luxury rather than a necessity.

I also think the problem with McCullum's approach isn't the 'be who you are' stuff, but the complete lack of squad balance. Fair enough you want to go like a bull at a gate when you bat; it means you're going to spend a long time in the field, and to do that you're gonna need a workhorse medium-fast to keep it tight (Pete Siddle rather than Merv Hughes) and a spinner who can serve as both an attacking option and a holding option on all surfaces.

If you plonk Graeme Swann or - ironically enough - Nathan Lyon into this current English side, their bowling suddenly is immensely better.

The batting would work if there was a second half to Bazball, a side of it that kept their opposition to below 400 runs more often than not and didn't exhaust or injure their strike bowlers inside 80 overs.