After losing to Sri Lanka on Friday, a frustrated Eoin Morgan was curt in his response to press questions.
“When we get beaten, we tend to come back quite strong,” the England skipper said, eyes fixed. “We tend to resort to aggressive, smart, positive cricket.”
In the days leading up to Tuesday night’s anticipated clash against Australia, he was equally assured of his side’s overriding philosophy, staying similarly on-brand. “Our strengths with the bat have been being aggressive, positive, but playing smart cricket along the way.”
It’s been England’s mantra since the last World Cup; aggression, on top of aggression.
‘Positivity’ trumping all. The philosophy hasn’t just worked in theory, but delivered stunning results on the field.
Before this World Cup, the hosts had won 13 of their last 15 bilateral series. There was no stopping the England machine prior to this World Cup and with that pre-tournament column inches pondered whether England could in fact post 500.
How the game moves on.
Eoin Morgan (AP Photo/Rajanish Kakade)
Two exceedingly poor performances with the bat have called into question England’s seemingly unwavering dogma. Bowled out for for 221 and 212 in their last two innings, they’ve proven incapable of changing with the conditions.
First, on a tacky surface in Headingley, they crumbled when patience was needed. At 3/127 chasing just 232, Morgan’s side stuck by the aggression-at-all-costs mantra and failed spectacularly.
Then at Leeds on Tuesday, they would abide by only 50 per cent of the ‘aggressive, smart’ philosophy. Having witnessed Australia bat first on a spinning wicket – grinding out early overs and reaping rewards – they failed to weather the inevitable early storm.
Morgan, by stark contrast with his opposing skipper Aaron Finch, wanted to hit his side out of a rut when arriving at the crease at 2/15. Early in his innings he gave himself room, exposed all three stumps and flailed wildly at a Starc delivery outside off, missing.
Surely then, at that moment, the mantra could have been shelved? In a vital World Cup clash, the inflexible philosophy could be discarded in favour of, well, digging in?
To hell with that, Morgan thought, attacking a Starc bouncer only to be caught at fine-leg the very next over. It left his side at 3/26 and essentially out of the game.
It’s not the first time England has struggled on a big stage when the wickets offer bowler assistance. In the 2017 Champions Trophy they cruised through the group stages with two scores of 300-plus, then 240 in 40 overs against Australia in a rain-affected clash.
Then, in the semi-final, they were rolled by Pakistan for 211 on a pitch that offered assistance to the spinners. Morgan lamented the pitch post-game rather than looking inward. “I don’t think there was any home advantage,” he said, a comment which garnered criticism.
He would similarly deflect on Tuesday evening after the loss to Australia. “Of course he did”, he replied bluntly when told Jason Behrendorff suggested England might have bowled too short.
But the thing is, they had. The beehive graphic unequivocally proved it. “Thanks mate, nice”, he sarcastically finished when answering a question about England’s World Cup record against Australia.
Will Jason Roy make a difference? (David Davies/PA via AP)
Morgan’s insistence that panic hasn’t set in is starting to look dubious.
Understandably, the England skipper is frustrated. So accustomed to things going their way in recent years, it’s crumbling at the only moment that truly matters.
Amongst all the doom and gloom, however, England are far from out of it at the World Cup. They’re simply the party host who’s gone missing for an hour.
While the steadfast Morgan maintains their destiny is currently in their own hands, that is true only if they win both of their last two games against India and New Zealand who, along with Australia, represent the two toughest assignments at the World Cup.
If they claim just one win, it will rely on certain results going against Pakistan, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka. If they don’t claim one, well, it’s see ya later.
I’m still expecting them to progress to the semi-finals, where they’ll still be a dangerous prospect. Years of dominance don’t go out the window in two games. But if the pitch isn’t flat, England’s rather rigid tactics shifts them from strong favourite to outsider.
Jeff
Roar Rookie
Agreed. Personally, I'm really enjoying the way this WC is playing out. There's only 1 game in the remaining in the last 10 (AFG v WIN, next Thursday) that doesn't have an impact on the finals - and it may very well be that that is the case right up to the last day of the group stage. An none of the games going in looked like absolute gimmes - perhaps other than those involving AFG after it became apparent they weren't where we thought they would be competitive wise (though the IND game turned out to be v close).
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
I don't have a problem with this format. Just saying that the exclusion of the associates, who had this one time every four years where they could get on the field with the big boys, was the main complaint I heard about the 10 team format leading into the WC. I actually think allowing them to play each other more and the bottom ranked teams in the top 10, rather than bringing them into the main WC draw so they can get smashed by the top teams, is probably better.
Paul
Roar Guru
16 Tests and an average of 30 suggests he might not be an ODI slogger as you claim, but's he's not that good a Test bat either and that's what this side needs when Plan A isn't working
Jeff
Roar Rookie
Oops. Dave. Apologies.
Peter Warrington
Guest
Morgan is like their Khawaja, but with a higher gearing he averages almost 40 but only goes at 91. has 2 tests centuries despite the other night x 2, he is not a slogger
Paul
Roar Guru
almost like having a new born, isn't it? Lucky this only happens every 4 years and not all Cups are played in the northern hemisphere.
Jeff
Roar Rookie
That will allow me to focus on tonight's match and further exacerbate my sleep deprivation. 3-4 hours shut-eye post-game prior to child-rearing at about 7am, ahead of a full day's work, is really starting to take its toll :(
Jeff
Roar Rookie
Nice one :)
Paul
Roar Guru
I still like biros & paper, Jeff. I regularly have a meltdown or twelve with my confuser, so know what you mean As for the Morgan issue, happy to leave it alone because it's only a point of interest, not a really burning issue.
Jeff
Roar Rookie
Associates had their chance to qualify via lead-in tournaments. Limited chance perhaps, but what’s the point of having teams play in the showpiece conclusion, just for the sake of having them play. Not forgetting that WIN had to also qualify via 6 team tournament in ZIM last year (WIN & AFG made it through). ZIM, SCO, IRE & UAE missed out. Each team playing every other team – provides some real context/comparison to performances leading into knockouts. Top 4 – no context is an issue. Unconventional, but I would incentivise top 4 finishing position by giving 1st ranked team the right to choose their semi final opponent (but who they choose then has choice of bat/field first – that would make a team think twice about who they choose).
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
Starc has had many situations where he's got through a test series, but then had niggles to recover from meaning he's been rested from ODI's. So he hasn't played a lot of ODI's because of that. But when he does he's still one of, if not THE most dangerous ODI bowler on the planet.
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
Assuming you meant to say “Lords” not “Leeds” in the article.
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
Maybe, but since the order of the top four could partially end up being determined by who had washouts and who didn't significantly favouring the teams that finished higher up may not necessarily be the right thing either.
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
I don't think the format is that bad either. It's mostly just the associate nations who don't like it because they don't get the chance to play at the World Cup. But coming to a world cup to get smashed by 200 in every game can't really be that much fun!
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
If New Zealand had won last night, I might have backed England to win one of their last two and make the Semi's. Really not sure the likelihood of them winning both of them. Their only real chance appears to be if they get a couple of absolute roads with 350+ par scores. Anything less and they look very vulnerable.
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
NRR can only hurt Pakistan if they win both their last two games and so do England, and Australia also beat NZ leaving Pakistan level with NZ and it being down to NRR. Since Pakistan have a washout 1 point and England don't, those two will never go down to NRR.
Jeff
Roar Rookie
Well thought-through, articulated and reasoned argument there James. Perhaps post-tournament is the right time to analyse and be the told-you-so keyboard warriors. And then we can do some really aggressive group-think pile-on! In the interim, leave it to Fleet Street to heap the pressure on ENG internally! Though that does take the fun out of the hypothetical analysis and predictions which you can be ring-fenced against until at least post-game. And by which time the article that you posted your comments on has dropped off into the aether ????
Jeff
Roar Rookie
I disagree Paul. But far out, I had just typed a reply outlining my points and pressed the bloody "back" button and lost it all. Now I'm frustrated at myself and need to recall my train of thought. May take me till later tonight to build up to having to retype it all. Or may just have to agree to disagree to avoid me having an IT-induce meltdown. As I approach 50, my IT skills and general intolerance to digital-anything - are going backwards.
JohnB
Guest
Neither winning both is also a possibility. But yes, certainly possible for NZ to lose both.
Paul
Roar Guru
gee Jeff, your comments are pretty harsh on Morgan. I watched the edited highlights of that interview after the Australia game and I thought he was fine to begin with but got really fed up with some bloody stupid questions. One bloke asked a long winded question about their attacking mantra to which Morgan replied "it's been evolving over the past 2 years", but clearly the guy wasn't listening and that frustrated Morgan. As for the Behrendorff comments, Morgan was quite right to say as he did. The Poms weren't that far away from having both openers out in the first half dozen overs and before this bowling effort, it really was a case of Jason who? In fairness I thought he did well to a) get through that media farce who wanted him to give answers he wasn't prepared to offer and b) not retaliate with a few choice words.