After winning the toss, to 246 all out within an hour after lunch. For England, it passes off as Bazball. In other words, full-scale aggression of a kind that is now England cricket’s trademark. But if you delve deep, some of the shots played were just poor. Not Test match batting by any stretch of imagination. And yet, it’s Bazball. So, it’s all permissible and okay. The best batter on show was Ben Stokes, and whatever he played wasn’t Bazball for sure. He gritted it out for the first 50 balls, and only when he had the tail with him, did he decide to cut loose.
By then, he was well set and the approach was based on common sense. If Bazball becomes synonymous with reckless batting, it will be anything but good for England in Indian conditions. In fact, it could be entertaining but not effective. Good to watch, but with little impact. After winning the toss, here was England’s opportunity to score 350 and get themselves into a really strong position. More so after the start they managed to get. But this no-holds-barred approach, bordering on reckless, which passes as Bazball was their downfall.
This is what brings me to pose a question for our readers. Had the Indian batters played such silly shots on the first day of a Test match in either England or Australia, what would they be told? Would it pass as an attempted show of aggression or would they be castigated for being reckless? Frankly, we know the answer. There is way too much talk about Bazball. And if yesterday’s approach defines it, then one has to say it isn’t a template that will take England much further in conditions like they will encounter in India. How and why should gritty Test match batting of the kind that Stokes exhibited be considered inferior? Who has set these benchmarks and decided on these classifications? How is Bazball more effective than the way Stokes batted? And had India played similarly and gifted their wickets in an away Test, what would the fans say?
Also Read: IND vs ENG: On a day of brisk scoring, a lull swings things India’s way
For whatever reason, certain things and terminologies have come to pass muster with fans. Bazball is one such. Even if such an approach lacks common sense, it is deemed acceptable. This is because it has become fashionable and is a good subject of debate.
India too were motoring along when it was their turn to bat. Yashasvi Jaiswal was hitting every ball that there was to hit. But in Shubman Gill, India also had someone who was intent on defending. And may we say, that’s absolutely fine. On day 1 of the Test match with one side already bowled out for 246, India had all the time in the world to build their innings. Bazball or not, a lead of 100-125 could set up the match for India and be a match-winning one. It doesn’t really need to be entertaining. All India need to do is be clinical. That’s what will win the game, and that’s what matters in the end.
Indian fans shouldn’t mind Bazball. For, it could soon become a self-laid trap for England in these conditions. On turning pitches, Bazball might not work. And yet, England could be obstinate enough to carry on with it. In such a scenario, India will welcome Bazball, for it could influence the scoreline on their behalf. And no, India don’t need to adapt Bazball when touring abroad. In Test cricket, pragmatism over entertainment is often the recipe for success, and no amount of Bazball could match the sensation of a Test or series win like India enjoyed at the Gabba three years ago.