What on Earth do they do now?

The second test match featured on hour or so of the worst test match cricket I have seen from England since the Adelaide test match in 2006. That game in 2006 was also a game that was almost impossible to loose…

A lot of the pundits say this it was a great test match. I am biased of course, but I am not sure you can call it a great test match when the result is decided by basic errors – and boy did we see some basic errors on Monday morning from the England bowlers and the Captain. Joe Root has chosen to heap the blame upon himself – credit to him for that – and he did get it very wrong. But he should not take all the blame. The wider team should have enough collective knowledge and experience to realise that bowling at the stumps is the way to get batters out. They should have enough self control not to become so angry about what happened on Day 2.

I have to admit to being highly concerned by the words of Michael Vaughan on the BBC. He said that ‘he knew England expected to win’ before day 5 started. Well I would suggest that when you have failed to win the last 6 games you have played, ‘expecting’ to win is extremely arrogant. If Vaughan is right England deserved to lose.

What can England do before the next game? They have to do something if they are to avoid defeat in the next 8 scheduled games (against India and Australia – and the West Indies will be optimistic about the series in in 2022).

My only suggestion is that they take a look at the England team who faced South Africa in 1998. After the first 2 games England were 1-0 down. They had played well in the first game at Edgebaston, but the second game at Lords featured some poor cricket. Somewhat questionably, England fast bowler Dean Headley decided to attack South African pace supremo Allan Donald with some bouncers in the first innings – and the England batters suffered later at Donald’s hands. Things got worse before they got better, as England batted badly at Old Trafford but they dragged it back by holding out for a gritty draw and when on to win the series. From somewhere, they found a degree of determination. They went on to compete well in the Ashes away which was closer than the scores suggested.

In that period around 1998, we saw that the difference between being a good side and a terrible side was not that great. England see-sawed from the bad (against South Africa) to the good (against South Africa and Australia) to the very, very, very bad against New Zealand in 1999. In 2000 they won 4 consecutive series. It was pretty much the same set of players that did all that (Atherton, Stewart, Hussain, Thorpe, Gough and Caddick were in the midst) but in 1998 and 2000 they found just that little bit more. The same sort of thing happened to Australia in 2013. Australia were a rabble when they arrived in England. By the time England left Australia in 2014, we knew who was boss, and the 2010/11 England side was forever broken. The Australian players had not changed that much, but by the end of the 2013 Ashes in England the team was settled with clear roles for key players.

So it is not all about personnel but it is about attitude. That being said, England have to drop some of this team that played so badly against India. Firstly they have to show some faith in the players who have had success in first class cricket. Secondly, they have to show that the England team is not above criticism and is prepared to make changes. But thirdly, the players they do pick have to show that they have something about them – in the way Ollie Robbinson has done. England moved away from aggressive test match cricket in 2019 and it seemed to make sense. But they had more luck with aggression, even if it was up and down. This attempt to replicate the 2011 England team with big first innings runs is just not working. So I would go back to that Trevor Bayliss approach with all the lows it brings.

So what changes would I make?

Personally I would drop both openers. Surely the case of Dom Sibley is clear, he has to go. Rory Burns has made runs, but consistently fails when most needed – Monday being an example. I am also fed up with watching stupid techniques – I cannot see Burns being successful at down under while he is looking at mid wicket when the bowler runs in. So I would drop both of them – but I suspect England will persist with Burns.

Haseeb Hameed is an opener so perhaps he should open the batting for England if he is going to play? How about playing players in roles they are used to? He must be given some time to succeed. So we need to look to county cricket for 3 batters to bring in. One of these will be Dawid Malan, either opening or at 3. Whilst it is tempting to say that nobody else good enough is available, a look at the first class batting averages for 2021 shows a number of players who have an average of 40 or more. The likes of Alex Lees, Alex Davies, Lewis Gregory, Tom Abell, Jake Libby. Or England could reconsider James Vince, Tom Westley or Adam Lyth, all of who looked more like test batters last time out than Burns and Sibley do now. Even Liam Livingstone has to be an option as he is clearly in the form of his life. England do actually have options, and a look at the current top 3 shows the bar is set pretty low right now.

Next we have to consider the place of Jos Buttler. Once again, we have a player who, before the stupidity of rest and rotation, was settling in to his role in the team, but now is struggling for his place. My view is that Buttler struggles unless he has a very clear role. Batting at 7 he does not know how much to ‘be a proper player’ or ‘throw the bat’ and he ends up doing neither. Jonny Bairstow on the other hand has shown the ability to be destructive at 7 where he has a good record, before he was messed around and asked to bat in every place in the team! It seems to me that Buttler has done better than Bairstow in the top 6, and Bairstow better than Buttler at number 7. Perhaps it is not what we expected or wanted from Buttler, but surely the solution is to put the players where they have had success. Bairstow gets the gloves, bats at 7 and gets until the end of the Ashes. If he fails, that is the end of his test match career. Buttler goes back to 6 and is given a clear role as a top order player. He only gets until the end of the India series to show his ability, or else he also is finished (by the way, Buttler does not become next wicket keeper in the list – Ben Foakes is next in line and then the esteemed BBC Foreign Corespondant and wicket keeper John Simpson must be worthy of consideration).

When it comes to the bowling, I would not have picked Moeen Ali at Lords but now he has been picked he has done enough to keep his place and England need to give him a good run now – again until the end of The Ashes. He goes in at 8 where he has had success before. Jimmy Anderson, Mark Wood (if fit) and Ollie Robinson play, but Sam Curran has not done enough. If Chris Woakes is fit he plays, otherwise Craig Overton plays. Saqib Mahmood and Brydon Carse must be close as cover for Mark Wood.

Whoever they pick, the England Management must commit to the players, back them but crucially give them clear roles. Make sure they know what they have to do to stay in the team. We also need to scrap this constant conversation about ‘big first innings runs’. England just do not have the players. Lets instead take a more attacking approach. It will not always work – but the current arrangement is not exactly a success either.

My team:

Hameed, Davies, Malan, Root, Vince, Buttler, Bairstow+, Ali, Robinson, Wood, Anderson