West Indies Test Series

[Parkside]

Tbf don’t think either of us can really know under this regime who influences it the most Stokes or McCullum.

Stokes is brilliant a real team player and one of the most selfless players around.

Quite like the idea of McCullum been involved in any of the England teams.

I think him and Stokes have created a environment where players have been able to flourish and be themselves.

Top international sport is a very pressure environment and they seem to have the knack of getting players thriving in that environment and not buckling and tightening up which happens.

It’s a philosophy I love in other walks of life and other sports, allowing people to flourish and not making them feel too much pressure,

it works sometimes it doesn’t sometimes as has happened.

But it’s worked more often than not, and a massive improvement from before they took over.

Scoring at 5 an over has not been repeatedly found out at all, in fact it has won several games that historically would have been draws.

There have been some occasions where it has been wanting granted, but the games we have won using this approach has offset them occasions.

However people can focus on the negatives rather than positives if they want.

But imo this approach the positives have far outweighed the negatives while still taking the point that on occasions they have been far to gung ho.

The previous openers of Burns, Sibley and Hameed for example were no where near scoring regularly 100s and this opening pair record miles better than any pair since Cook.

As for your last sentence sure it must be a wind up, but just to indulge in for a second.

If like you say this is ‘ one of the poorest Englands side in living memory’

Why has this side won something like 15 tests out of the last 24 under this regime?

When the previous regime had won 1 out of 17 tests.

Now that is a massive improvement by anyones standards.

Either you wrong about this been a poor side or if you right and it is a poor side.

And if you right and this is the one the poorest sides in living memory what a job this coach and captain have done to win 15 out of 24 tests, with one of the poorest sides in living memory.

Either we a good side with that record or if we poor the coach has done a astounding job?

Which one is it? Can’t have it both ways?

Beginning to worry as I agree with most of what you say.Agree with most of Essex boys counter arguments also. McCullum has earned neither plaudits nor bricbats; he hasn't been tested yet.Obviously we have improved on the last regime but that's a pretty low base point. You're maybe correct in that we are winning when we'd previously have drawn but the counter argument is that we've also lost when we could have drawn. There have been plenty exciting drawn tests. A coach who can't see that is lacking something.

 

[chopsfc007]

Brook is not world class. He maybe in the future but needs runs all over the world first. Far too early in his career

Every test side has promising players

Woakes is world class at home


Scoring at 5 an over, which in effect is Bazball, has repeatedly been found wanting. Along with the fact the coach does not acknowledge draws. He is a 1 day coach who has come long at a good time with English cricket on its arse post Silverwood

A few mesmerising wins (new coach bounce) then the gaping cracks started to appear. What are the cracks?

Have our two opening bats kicked on to be regularly scoring 100s? No, still swashbuckling run a ball 50 merchants ie, 1 day batters

Have we unearthed a test number 3 in the mould of Trott? No, we have a guy who wouldn't get in Australua 2nd XI

Root went backwards and lost sight of being Joe Root. Now he plays his game again

Stokes still has no consistency as a batsman at 6. He should be at 7 but the coach can't see it. Worrying

Bar Wood the bowling is ordinary at best.

One of the poorest English test sides in living memory, shorn of quality bowlers, littered with 1 day batters and generally rudderless in testing conditions

Woakes gets his wicket 21 at home that's world class

 

[mackembhoy]

What's our test record against SA, Ind & Aus? Once Key has replaced Root the side picked up. Root was not a captain not sure why you think BM takes the glory for that one

A good test coach ala Fletcher improves players. Has Pope improved? Stokes? Bairstow? Crawley?

We won 2-1 against them under Stokes/McCullum in 2022 and not playing them again until the end of 2026.

We'll see how we go against India and Aus next year.

 

[essex boy]

Woakes gets his wicket 21 at home that's world class

A one trick pony whose that limited he doesn't get taken abroad

World class means you can perform on a world stage over a number of years in different countries

 

[chopsfc007]

A one trick pony whose that limited he doesn't get taken abroad

World class means you can perform on a world stage over a number of years in different countries

I said world class at home point stands anyone getting that record at home is excellent one trick pony or not he's very good at home.

 

[Voice of fair play]

What's our test record against SA, Ind & Aus? Once Key has replaced Root the side picked up. Root was not a captain not sure why you think BM takes the glory for that one

A good test coach ala Fletcher improves players. Has Pope improved? Stokes? Bairstow? Crawley?

Well from 1 test win in 17 before him to 15 in 24 under him is definitely improvement.

Not sure what your definition of improvement is but them facts kind of speak volumes

 

[essex boy]

Well from 1 test win in 17 before him to 15 in 24 under him is definitely improvement.

Not sure what your definition of improvement is but them facts kind of speak volumes

We replaced a wooden skipper in Root with the dynamic Stokes.

 

[Voice of fair play]

Beginning to worry as I agree with most of what you say.Agree with most of Essex boys counter arguments also. McCullum has earned neither plaudits nor bricbats; he hasn't been tested yet.Obviously we have improved on the last regime but that's a pretty low base point. You're maybe correct in that we are winning when we'd previously have drawn but the counter argument is that we've also lost when we could have drawn. There have been plenty exciting drawn tests. A coach who can't see that is lacking something.

I think we have won more games that would have been draws than we have lost that would have been draws with this approach.

My issue is when this approach sometimes does not to do well, people seem to be all over it with a rash.

Yet when we win games more of them with this approach imo the praise does come as much as with the criticism the other way.

Beginning to worry as I agree with most of what you say.Agree with most of Essex boys counter arguments also. McCullum has earned neither plaudits nor bricbats; he hasn't been tested yet.Obviously we have improved on the last regime but that's a pretty low base point. You're maybe correct in that we are winning when we'd previously have drawn but the counter argument is that we've also lost when we could have drawn. There have been plenty exciting drawn tests. A coach who can't see that is lacking something.

As regards draws I think they have a place in red ball cricket, always have, but firmly believe they should be a plan B or C after you have explored all options to win that game, I have always thought that for years since a kid.

Basically to use when you on the back foot behind in the game and need to bat out on the final innings, which you correct in that situation has been some nailbiting games.

Too often historically games have been draws because the wicket far too flat ( has happened to often on occasions in county championship).

Happened to regularly in places like Pakistan as well.

Games where teams have made 400/500 and simply run out of time for a result due to flat wickets, ball used etc etc, that far from exciting quite the opposite.

What Stokes and McCullum have done is make sure more often than not positive results now happen on very flat wickets, that not only good for fans watching them games because also great for the game as a whole.

We replaced a wooden skipper in Root with the dynamic Stokes.

Aye we have went from which I never forget turning down chasing 277 to win off 77 overs against New Zealand in the first test of a 2 match home series, when Root was captain, sending out Sibley to bat for a draw from ball one, which I said at time was a complete disgrace, Then losing that series as we lost second test.

To now where that would not even been considered.

Yeah it’s fair to see this team has improved both in terms of results and thinking.

 

[Parkside]

I think we have won more games that would have been draws than we have lost that would have been draws with this approach.

My issue is when this approach sometimes does not to do well, people seem to be all over it with a rash.

Yet when we win games more of them with this approach imo the praise does come as much as with the criticism the other way.

As regards draws I think they have a place in red ball cricket, always have, but firmly believe they should be a plan B or C after you have explored all options to win that game, I have always thought that for years since a boy

What Stokes and McCullum have done is make sure more often than not positive results now happen on very flat wickets, that not only good for fans watching them games because also great for the game as a whole.

In general fans tend to be more critical in defeat than they are of being praiseworthy in victory-it'not something new and specific to bazball.
As to having a plan B or C I'd claim the absence of that is the main weakness of Bazball-full throttle when batting regardless of the match situation and bowl short and intimadatory when a stubborn partnership develops. One size doesn't fit all.
We've beaten the lesser nations,fell short against the leading nations. I await playing the match situation and witnessing innovative and thinking outside the box when the team is being really tested before being convinced about McCullum.

 

[Voice of fair play]

In general fans tend to be more critical in defeat than they are of being praiseworthy in victory-it'not something new and specific to bazball.
As to having a plan B or C I'd claim the absence of that is the main weakness of Bazball-full throttle when batting regardless of the match situation and bowl short and intimadatory when a stubborn partnership develops. One size doesn't fit all.
We've beaten the lesser nations,fell short against the leading nations. I await playing the match situation and witnessing innovative and thinking outside the box when the team is being really tested before being convinced about McCullum

The only real failure imo was getting beat in India as every side does as before our series they had lost 3 in 46 tests!

And with our spinners opposed to theirs in them conditions don’t think the best coach and captain in the world would have avoided defeat there.

I think we went toe to toe with the Aussies in a classic series and done well and we’re very good against everyone else.

So I suppose technically we fell short against India in India like everyone does, but one series defeat in them conditions is not as black and white as saying we do well against lesser nations and fall short against better ones.

Yeah for balance I don’t like this short bowl approach either especially against the tail and criticism deserved on that score.

As for your first point, yeah sometimes fans are more critical than praiseworthy when looking at positives or negatives but surely that not a fair way to appraise a coach or captain don’t you think??

To me it’s a like a football team you may be too attacking at times and concede goals and lose some games, but if you winning a lot more and entertaining and following a philosophy in the process I will take that.


And think that my general point with McCullum and Stokes, while criticism at times is justified the positives far outweigh the negatives imo and the results back up that view?

 

[Parkside]

The only real failure imo was getting beat in India as every side does as before our series they had lost 3 in 46 tests!

And with our spinners opposed to theirs in them conditions don’t think the best coach and captain in the world would have avoided defeat there.

I think we went toe to toe with the Aussies in a classic series and done well and we’re very good against everyone else.

So I suppose technically we fell short against India in India like everyone does, but one series defeat in them conditions is not as black and white as saying we do well against lesser nations and fall short against better ones.

Yeah for balance I don’t like this short bowl approach either especially against the tail and criticism deserved on that score.

As for your first point, yeah sometimes fans are more critical than praiseworthy when looking at positives or negatives but surely that not a fair way to appraise a coach or captain don’t you think??

To me it’s a like a football team you may be too attacking at times and concede goals and lose some games, but if you winning a lot more and entertaining and following a philosophy in the process I will take that.


And think that my general point with McCullum and Stokes, while criticism at times is justified the positives far outweigh the negatives imo and the results back up that view?

Ok but the 2 crucial facts nevertheless are
We haven't beaten a leading cricket nation
Our cricket is 1 dimensional.
Until that changes I reserve judgement.

 

[Voice of fair play]

Ok but the 2 crucial facts nevertheless are
We haven't beaten a leading cricket nation
Our cricket is 1 dimensional.
Until that changes I reserve judgement.

Yeah that fine your preference, different opinions make the world go round.

While taking on board your fair opinions of we could have adapted better in certain match situations.

I personally think looking at the bigger picture this approach has been both refreshing and entertaining and in the main results have been good for the England team,

And the approach good for the game of cricket as a whole.

With all the talk about short format cricket and too much of it, it’s good for test cricket imo that we seeing more results than draws and it’s more entertaining imo that it has been for a long while and definitely when England playing.

 

[Parkside]

Yeah that fine your preference, different opinions make the world go round.

While taking on board your fair opinions of we could have adapted better in certain match situations.

I personally think looking at the bigger picture this approach has been both refreshing and entertaining and in the main results have been good for the England team,

And the approach good for the game of cricket as a whole.

With all the talk about short format cricket and too much of it, it’s good for test cricket imo that we seeing more results than draws and it’s more entertaining imo that it has been for a long while and definitely when England playing.

Don't get me wrong.It's been a refreshing and positive change and both Stokes and McCullum are intelligent cricketers.just waiting to see if they can read and adapt.

 

[essex boy]

Yeah that fine your preference, different opinions make the world go round.

While taking on board your fair opinions of we could have adapted better in certain match situations.

I personally think looking at the bigger picture this approach has been both refreshing and entertaining and in the main results have been good for the England team,

And the approach good for the game of cricket as a whole.

With all the talk about short format cricket and too much of it, it’s good for test cricket imo that we seeing more results than draws and it’s more entertaining imo that it has been for a long while and definitely when England playing.

Is turning England's test team into a glorified 50 over side really thst entertaining and refreshing? Each to their own but test cricket in its purest form is a spectacle in itself. I would argue BM is ignorant of this fact

 

[Voice of fair play]

Don't get me wrong.It's been a refreshing and positive change and both Stokes and McCullum are intelligent cricketers.just waiting to see if they can read and adapt.

Yeah that would be the perfect situation as long as their first thing is to look to win a game as first and foremost priority.

But agreeably that is what cricket is about in all formats at all levels, play the situation and conditions accordingly.

Is turning England's test team into a glorified 50 over side really thst entertaining and refreshing? Each to their own but test cricket in its purest form is a spectacle in itself. I would argue BM is ignorant of this fact

I bet if your football team that you support started winning games 5-2 regularly you would twist about the defence