England’s cricketers lack X-factor if ‘Bazball’ falls short

England’s cricketers will not have spent long pondering their shortcomings in the first Test – that is not in Ben Stokes’ nor Brendon McCullum’s nature. In their testosterone-heavy world, introspection and doubt are best cast out quickly along with any hint of compromise, lest they take hold.

Their vision of attacking cricket – or Bazball as it has become known – requires steel, nerve and utmost belief from those implementing its headlong hurtle.

It is also high risk which means failure, especially against a fast, well-drilled bowling attack like South Africa’s, is just as likely as success.

It is this uneasy pact of crushing defeats like Lord’s along with the thrilling wins of early summer, which many of us are still getting used to. Judging from comments I have heard from seasoned supporters this summer, Bazball is both loved and loathed depending on the result. As for the entertainment it has been fabulous except for those with a fourth-day ticket for Lord’s (the match was over before tea on day three).

Apart from being reductive, the term Bazball is also misleading.

In the four successive and thrilling victories managed by England against New Zealand and India, it was Jonny Bairstow and Joe Root who dominated the run-chases. Ben Stokes made one decent contribution as did Alex Lees, but it was Bairstow and Root, one of them having never batted better, who made those unlikely victories possible.

Both failed at Lord’s and with them, or so it seemed, did Bazball, though it must be recognised that England batted first, something they had not done in any of their four victories. This might be its flaw, especially for this England side which has been over-reliant on Root’s runs for a while.

This approach is not just about the