Michael Vaughan England must face problem of chasing games
Even the great Australian side I faced would show patience when required – but it is proving beyond our gung-ho batsmen
England have to decide very quickly what type of Test-match team they want to be. They also have to be honest with themselves and admit they have a problem chasing games. As soon as the opposition bats and makes more than 350, England consistently go out and play in one-day mode trying to attack and put pressure back on the bowlers by hitting the ball to the boundary. Since Trevor Bayliss became coach England have defended 28 per cent of deliveries against pace, the lowest of any team in the world.
Only a couple of them have the mindset to see off a bowler and then earn the right to capitalise when the ball is a bit softer and the conditions improve for batting.
For too long, as soon as the ball swings, or they face quick bowling, this Test team plays a huge amount of shots because they do not trust their techniques to survive for long. Or they think attack is the best policy. I am afraid they are not good enough to do that.
I never played against a Test team, including that great Australian side, who attacked all the time. Instead, they picked their moments to go on the offensive and waited if the time was not right.
It is not always the mode of dismissals you have to look at. It is the mindset of the batting. In the first innings at Trent Bridge, they batted as if it was a Twenty20 game. They did get a few good balls, but we are giving them a huge excuse if we think the way they played meant they were unlucky to be bowled out. There was not enough skill, or strength of mind, to defend for a period of time. For that reason, partnerships did not develop and England collapsed.
Twenty20 and 50-over cricket have changed or evolved but Test cricket has remained the same. It is a five-day game, 90 overs per day and it is about having the skill to wear down the opposition.
Can you outdo your opponent over five days? Can you sleep after a bad day? It is not like one-day cricket when, if you play poorly, you are off playing a different game the next day.
Test cricket challenges the mind, more so than any other game, because you are out there day after day with the public questioning you. That is what this England side has to expect. If they want the excuse they got some good balls in the first innings then, OK, take it, but that papers over the cracks.
The way they played was not how you approach Test match cricket against quality bowling on a pitch offering some help to the bowlers. You do not go out with the mindset of hitting the ball to the boundary every time.
The other thing I worry about is, because there are so many firecrackers in the team, they all look at how Joe Root is playing and think they can copy him.
He is on a different plane to the rest of them. Jonny Bairstow came out and played shots all over the place. Why did he not bat for Joe, sitting in and supporting him?
We have a team that does not read situations well when under pressure. They are fine when on top but as soon as their opponent makes a par score – which is all South Africa managed – making England challenge themselves and chase the game, they lack the mindset to say “our goal in the first innings is to bat 120 overs”.
If they bat 120 overs, they will make a score. It might be the case that for the first 40 overs they cannot score at four and five an over because the ball is moving around but they might be able to accelerate from overs 60-80. Then the new ball comes and you sit in again. The goal of batting 120 overs in an innings gives the bowlers more rest. If the bowling attack is getting only four hours of rest because the team are being dismissed cheaply, it will lead to injuries and a division between batters and bowlers.
The gung-ho approach works against mediocre teams on flat wickets when you on top. But when you are chasing the game, it rarely gets you out of trouble. Seven out of England’s past eight losses have happened with the team chasing the game batting second. That tells you they are not very good at looking at a scoreboard when an opponent has put up a big number.
Selection has also been a mystery to me. I do not know why Moeen Ali is the second spinner. He should be the No1 spinner. He is the best Test spinner in the country so stop this kidding around that he is No 2 behind Liam Dawson.
England have so many talented all-rounders that it allows them to pick a luxury player. That role has been given to Dawson but surely in English conditions you pick an extra batsman and pack the batting.
I remember playing against South Africa years ago and seeing Lance Klusener and Shaun Pollock coming in at eight and nine wondering how do you take 20 wickets to beat this lot? England can bat just as deep, too, with an extra specialist batsman in the team.
They also need to put Gary Ballance in his best position at five. If you are going to play Ballance put him in the middle order among the firecrackers, you have a ‘Steady Eddie’ in amongst them.
It is hard to copy a player like Hashim Amla but I would just advise England to spend the next few days looking at how he plays. He still scores but he knows his limitations. On Sunday he decided to dig in and left the ball until England bowled straight, when he would flick it on the onside. That is why Test-match cricket has not changed. The way to be successful is make the bowlers bowl to you.