The Ashes: Strong-minded management or pig-headed stupidity? Time will tell
THERE was once a football manager called John Beck who was utterly wedded to a certain way of playing.
Beck’s system demanded that the ball was pumped into the channels between the touchline and penalty area at every opportunity with the aim of winning long throws and crosses in the box.
If anyone disobeyed the orders, or passed the ball backwards, he was liable to be substituted - after one minute or 90.
Beck’s long-ball system became notorious and some said he sucked the blood from the game.
Bazball may be different in style and ethos; if anything, it is the complete opposite in that it positively encourages freedom of expression - too much freedom, some would say. But the same rigid commitment to playing one way and one way only is exactly the same, and it places extra scrutiny on results.
For as long as Beck was taking Cambridge United to the brink of the inaugural Premier League in 1992, his methods were largely tolerated by supporters. Less so when results turned and the novelty wore off, when his methods came under increasing attack.
Bazball, too, has had its moments of triumph - almost climbing to the summit as did Cambridge United back in the day. But too many chances have been lost, too many match-winning situations squandered through careless strokeplay at critical times for Stokes and McCullum to satisfy their critics, for all of the entertainment they have given.
In Perth, a collapse of 5-23 in the second innings - following a collapse of 5-12 in the first - gifted Australia the first Test on a plate.
All is not lost given the hosts’ vulnerability, exposed at times, regardless of the outcome, but you sense that England’s fans are starting to turn as did those at the clubs once managed by Beck - not least those who have forked out a princely sum on the trip of a lifetime only to be left with holes in their itinerary.
By turning down the chance of match practice ahead of the second Test in Brisbane on December 4, still well over a week away, following the premature conclusion to the contest in Perth, Stokes and McCullum have once more shown what might be described as “Beckian” strong-mindedness.
Michael Vaughan, one of the “has-beens” who can boast something that neither Stokes nor McCullum can yet claim, an Ashes series win, perhaps the best ever, is far from alone in believing the stance to be “amateurish”.
“What harm is it playing two days of cricket with the pink ball under lights?” said Vaughan of England’s decision to skip sending any of their beaten team to play in the England Lions match against a Prime Minister’s XI in Canberra on Saturday, a match that will be played - as with the day/night second Test - with the pink-ball.
“I can’t be so old-school to suggest that by playing cricket they might get a little bit better. My method would be, you’ve got a pink-ball two-day game, you go and grab it, go and take it, play those two days and give yourself the best chance.”
Still, what would Vaughan know? Or Graham Gooch? Or Lord Botham? Or all those concerned about England’s lack of preparation going into the series?
Perhaps the “has-beens” are not so out of touch after all.
What England have done, of course, by sticking rigidly to their method, by satisfying themselves with just one warm-up game - against their own second string - and by shunning the chance to send the likes of Zak Crawley (a pair in Perth) for extra match practice is leave themselves open to yet more criticism.
On the one hand, the mark of good management, of strong management, must be that you are prepared to follow your own star, Beck-like, and to hell with the critics. On the other, adaptability and flexibility is not a weakness, but a strength.
Only time will tell whether England’s single-minded approach is right or pig-headed.
After Perth, McCullum said this: “We’ve got to work out whether that extra cricket is the key, or making sure that camaraderie is tight and morale doesn’t drop. For us, that connectivity and camaraderie is something we pride ourselves on.”
Some supporters might wish that the batsmen built some connectivity and camaraderie instead with the actual cricket ball. It is, to put it mildly, the bravest of tactics.
One goes back to Beck… Steve Claridge, the striker who was part of that Cambridge United team, along with Dion Dublin, felt it would have reached the Premier League if only Beck had been more flexible.
“I firmly believe that the team would have made the Premier League if only Beck had compromised a little,” Claridge wrote in his autobiography.
“It was just so talented… Some of us pleaded with Beck to change things, to show some flexibility, but he stubbornly refused.”
There are echoes, for sure, in the certainty of Bazball, in the unwavering strategy of Stokes and McCullum.