They’d probably still be batting, but that’s a whatif? Stokes body language after breaking the middle order, but still being behind after a healthy tail partnership indicated otherwise.

I get you, but the point of a long batting line up or at least bowlers who can hold a bat is to take advantage of tired bowlers and produce the sum total. The Aussies were criticised early in the series for a long tail. The Aussies seem to have produced the more telling partnerships throughout the series, whether time, blunting the attack, as well as then putting the bowling to the sword with assaults like Marsh, or cameos like Starc, Cummins, Lyon and Murphy. We’ve heard plenty about Wood & Woakes, even Broad holding up an end while Stokes did all the work, so I think our tail deserves a bit of credit in the totals produced.

They aren’t fans, they’re puerile spectators, emboldened and ramped up by one eyed Pommy trash media. Resembles the same rabid lunacy towards the Aussies and their family members from the crowd in South Africa in the Tests before the ICC banned one player for ball tampering and CA banned 2 others for being teammates. Interesting, until Khawaja pointing out the actual taunts at Head and what nobody is saying but has been obviously the treatment of at least Smith when fielding on the fence all series, that the Aussies have been bombarded and Warner’s fake smile shows they know the crowds are acting with impunity and at least one in the media – with Ward’s reaction – just think it’s funny.

England’s cricket fans have again shown their petulance with former Australia captain Ricky Ponting pelted with grapes They aren’t fans, they’re spectators. I’d like someone to confirm the story I heard the other day about McCullum going to Ponting whining that Root was upset with Ponting’s assessment of his form, claiming he’s a 10,000+ Test batsman and deserves better from commentators? My understanding is Ponting agreed to McCullum’s request for Ponting to talk to Root to clarify his comments. Is any of that actually true? Surely Root isn’t that mentally soft?

‘…but there comes a point where you hand back the confidence to the opposition by not scoring runs.’ Do you reckon at stumps the Poms feel confident their plan worked, when technically behind on the score board, in reality being basically all square? If they set themselves a target of batting for another ODI worth of overs and score 250 -300 and leave the Aussies 130 overs to get them, now knowing the Aussies are prepared to bat ugly to pass them or draw the game, are they still reasonably confident? The Aussies don’t have to play Bazball to win the series, they only have to draw the game, purely and simply because of the situation the Poms put themselves in earlier in the series! The Bazballers can play for media consensus approval, but the score will still be 2-1 and one of the closest set of Test matches in recent Ashes history will still be an away win to the Aussies. I expect the Aussies will be confident THEIR plan worked, not sure the ‘UK view’ will be as supportive then.

I like it! Then we have consensus run outs and stumpings based on whether someone thinks they would have hit them with their virtual throw! No matter if the ball actually went to the fence, if the fielder believes they virtually stop it and virtually throw it and his team mates think it virtually would have hit where their experience tells them the virtual stumps could be, then hey presto – virtual runout. No need for 3rd Umpires, who are slowing the game down, as for some reason they seem intent on looking at what actually happened!

Australia 2 – England 1. All square after an innings a piece in the final Test. I’m not sure the Aussies – nor most of their fans – made grand statements of domination, but what they are doing seems to have them in front in the series. Every player in the top six has scored at least a half century and their partnerships have created winning opportunities. There’ll naturally be changes in the next 12 months as the majority of this team is the wrong side of 30, but it would be foolhardy cricket as a young up and comer to play flogball in an attempt to get a spot if you don’t consistently make runs doing it AND you don’t have the mental capacity to realise it doesn’t help your side win in EVERY situation you’ll find yourself in an innings or Test. Many styles of cricket have been played since the 1700’s and one constant remains – the stumps are in the same spot and if you don’t have the mental game to know when to stop the bowler hitting them, then you won’t be there the next ball to score the winning run. No matter what these Bazballers tell the world about legacy, they’ll be judged on making selfless team judgements which result in wins and they’ll be selected on consistent runs and wickets. As the only guy in the team who played the ultimate Bazball innings to win a game, Stokes should be able to counsel his team from experience that lightning doesn’t usually strike twice, nor does it suit every situation. That surely needs to be the takeaway for the next tier Aussie Test batsmen, your game was good enough to get you selected, play it, not your opponents. Sadly through this series Root moved away from that and has slid down the consistency list because of it. His value to that team is building big scores and cameo partnerships around him to build big scores as 10,000+ Test runs attest to. If that top 6 can’t contain one batsman with that attribute and the record behind him, then the flaw in the Bazball is inherently that players AREN’T being supported to play their own game, they’re being moulded into 2 ODI innings per Tests players. Good luck to them if that’s their philosophy, but the situation of the series easily displays it isn’t the only way to play and definitely isn’t the only way to win, which still is the aim of cricket.

Apparently the Aussies batting as they determine to make more than the ‘future of cricket’ and outscoring them, is FAR worse than when the Aussies made 60 in England! Vaughan is a dial-a-quote.

UK View: blah, blah, blah, must play like us, blah, blah, Aussies fault that umpires make their own decisions, blah, blah, third umpires should give special dispensation to our backstop as he can’t concentrate for normal cricketing periods, blah, blah, blah, not fair they made as many as us with three days left, blah, blah, blah, we should be World Test Champions not them, blah, blah, we’re reinventing cricket and our legacy will show how four day Tests MUST be played, blah, blah. Australia 2 – England 1. Half a Test to play, thank god, then the Poms can annoy the Afghanistan or Kenyan press with their UK cricket view!

That’s a discussion for another site obviously, as your mention of evidence is intriguing in an era of consensus, however this one is a)- a sport site and b)- rampant with editorial cancel culture. I do however see your point with the Bazballers.

No ifs, it’s sport. As a fan it’s natural to be frustrated with some play, but there’s two sides out there and it’s how you adjust to the situation you’re now in. The whole series has had frustrations, poor shot selection, no urgency on singles and rotation, persistence with short sheet in the other Tests, but it was obvious early on that this would be a seesaw series as the Poms have bowled garbage with the odd good spell from Broad, Wood, Tongue, Woakes, as have the Aussies with a poor early bowling plan. The odd cameo from their batsmen but only a couple of quality partnerships, but that’s allowed the Aussies to dig in building partnerships with more contributors to produce the same scoring result, as it has here again. If the Aussies had done this or that doesn’t change what they have done. That’s prove that there isn’t one way to win a Test Match, flaws exist, captaincy and plans can fail in situations, but with the time allowable in Tests and players batting and bowling in partnerships you give your team a chance to rectify an error.

More manufactured controversy in a close series which doesn’t need third parties lodging themselves in the way! As has been the case since both first innings of the first Test were done, too many talking heads, not enough letting the pictures do the talking. Thankfully the Aussies backed their own plan, not the media’s decision that that MUST play like England. Ultimately end of day two, all square, Australia’s bowlers only bowled half the overs the Poms did, so should be fresher to bowl their final innings of a Six Test condensed period against two form Test nations. Three days to let the cricket tell the story, before the inevitable inkblot army try to give you your opinion!

Interesting take, Noel. You’re right about Paul, he’s laid it out well. You’re confusion with equating Trump supporters with Woke ‘winning isn’t as important the fun we produce’ Bazballers is bizarre however.

Well said Flem, joining Ponting as the critical thinker in the room, instead of the groupthink hysteria of what coulda been! You can’t change results from the changeroom, whether you’re there because it’s raining or not. The result at the end of the rainout was the same as the start of the Test; 2-1.
The Poms had their chance to change that result in those games, a win here would still only make it 2-2. Whatif’s might float Piers Morgan’s paper boat on a flooded oval, but doesn’t change results.

In a best of three series, they still lost 2-1.

Ah Broad, lurching between the class clown and village idiot! Imagine if you weren’t 2-1 down? Imagine if you weren’t playing in your own country where 18 degrees is a heatwave and rain a summer standard? Imagine if you engaged your brain before your mouth? It appear certain he’s in for a long ‘career’ as a dial-a-quote a la Neil Harvey and Ian Chappell!

Ironically Head’s short ball problem is…..in his head! He played a couple of sublime pull shots in the first innings off Wood when the ball was at chest height. He appears to be thinking shot first, not ball. Nothing 10,000 hours won’t help, which he should be at least 2,000 hours into at his time in Tests. I had a coach who avoided a couple of snorters in a Grand Final once by ending on his back, to the mirth of the opposition. He ducked all short stuff for the next hour, brought up his 100 a coupla hours later with a hooked six. He ducked for half an hour at the start of day 2 and then proceeded to destroy the attack, bringing up his 150, 200 and 250 with hooked or pulled sixes. He ended with 291*. He told me early on that I could be a more consistent middle lower order if I watched the ball more, because it trains you to recognize the ball you should leave. He then started wanging random balls at me, with some at my chin height and told me to watch the seam. I thought he was crazy, but it showed me I wasn’t actually watching the ball, or the tell all bowlers have when they go short. It certainly improved my ability to determine which to leave until you have seen what the track, bowler and conditions are doing, then be selective. It also taught me to use my wrist more when bowling a short ball, as an opening bowler, to disguise the tell as much as possible. Head can easily improve his ability to judge when and if, he just needs self control!

Agreed on the approach to Stokes, they were playing him with a 2019 mindset and that’s why I believe they have a confused ‘plan’. They know if he has a day out those grounds are too small, but that he wants to score. I can’t for the life of me work out why you would ring the boundary and bowl short with a Test attack which has won ODI world championships by mixing pace and starving pet shots to force a shot maker to make his own pressure to relieve it by playing cement foot across the line slaps. The fact it finally worked to dismiss him seems lost on the hierarchy as they revert to the bowl short on leg to all of them and hope they hole out!

It isn’t often the media gets anything right, as their agenda is always fully on display in all articles, but the current situation in the 4th Test is so bleedingly obvious, even they have provided some accuracy. The Aussies lost their way part way through the second Test with the loss of Lyon creating ‘can’t beat ’em, join ‘ em ‘ bowling tactics which don’t suit Australias attack. Then the refusal to drop Warner and freshen the batting compounds the inept bowling ‘plan’.
To be in the situation the Aussies are in now having been 2-0 up as WTC shows poor selection, poor coaching and poor leadership. It’s evident in players who seem incapable of completing the ‘plan’. If that’s so, then the innate abilities on display for the WTC Final and first Test means the plan is reactionary and unsuited to the players abilities. If the players are choosing this reactionary approach (highly possible with their firing of Langer) then the leadership; selectors, coaches and captain aren’t poor, they’re incompetent, as 2-0 in the Ashes isn’t the time to tinker with changing to Bazball, it’s the time to be ruthless and win an away series from an incredibly strong position! They may very well get an undeserved rain reprieve for this match, that’s cricket, but the real work begins behind closed doors to find out what the future of Aussie cricket looks like with Head, Green and the next generation. Will they continue to play another country’s plan or develop one suited to the attributes of their players. Head can take on bowling, but there’s no future in Green bowling short rubbish in whatever it actually is that Cummins, McDonald and Vettori think their bowling plan represents!

Ease up on Renshaw mate, he was picked as a 21yo and told he was too slow. Went away to become a cement foot slogger and got a game in the middle order. Harsh to claim he has had plenty of chances.

‘If that was supposedly the case 20 years ago, how would you describe the current situation with David Warner?’ I describe it as a Selector problem! Warner doesn’t select the team by announcing HIS timeframe, the selectors choose, on form, for the team needs in a current series and the experience to be gained by selecting a future tourist. So….absolutely nothing to do with the retirement announcement of a Captain 20 years ago.

Carey didn’t think what through? That the pommy media would have a dip at an Aussie and keep flogging a dead horse because their relevance is attached to cricket fantasy, while fans actually watch the play unfold and determine their own reaction long before the chip wrappers come out? It’s 2023 not 1933. It’s a single wicket in an overblown media fantasy, not Jardine combating Bradman!

You make your own luck and usually based on the hard training yards. Khawaja bucked the trend early because he saw the ball and judged it on it’s merits. All the others apparently seem to think they have a date with destiny and while a Stokes, Marsh, Head have the ability to switch gears, because that’s the style they’ve honed, the rest need to find the technique they were taught and bat within their limitations. Similarly the bowling, Wood, Starc and Cummins can bowl 150+ bouncers, but this diet of slinky balls is bewildering, especially from the Aussies. It’s like they’ve never played the Poms at home on their playground size ovals in ODI’s before. Set fields for your strengths and stop playing on their terms, otherwise send Boland home and bring out Meredith, at least he’s 15kph quicker.

What typical Pommy frontrunning! Poetic justice for not playing to the moral code the whingers decided on the day? Seriously, talk about tiresome 90’s inkblot ‘journalism’!
Vaughan was right in his preview to this Test. He said they’d win this one and Wood would be the difference on the Headingley surface. Actually both he and Starc were the difference, in a series where short sheet is apparently stock bowling, on this surface their 150kph+ bowling is what bouncers are made of, not the steady diet of 125kph slinkies looping over batsmen and bouncing again in front of keepers. That same pace on the stumps is finding cement footed slappers out too!
I can’t for the life of me understand why bowlers refuse to change pace as they do in white ball! Oh wait, yes I can, ridiculous field placings for top edge hooks set for days on primary school size playgrounds, instead of straight for misjudged drives against change of pace fuller balls. Who’s advising Cummins on field settings, he can’t even get it right for his own bowling in this series!
Any wonder Boland can’t get a wicket, they may as well not play him if their theory is short rubbish, he’s a top of off workhorse not nine on the fence slinky bowler.
Good on the Poms, a series like this wasn’t going to be a whitewash, but the world would be a better place without ‘journalists’ quoting each other when the pictures already painted a thousand sensational disjointed words.

I see sport as 90% mental, writing as 90% menial!