Would BazBall have worked against McWarne in the 2000s?

[subshakerz]

While I doubt it may have succeeded in the nineties, I wonder whether visiting teams failed to try innovative approaches against the mighty Aussies in their zenith.

On fairly flat pitches in Aussie in the 2000s, could this approach have yielded better results and unsettled McGrath and co. from their collective rhythm.

 

[mr_mister]

Abdul Razzaq proved the best way to counter McGrath was just to swing at everything like there's no tommorow

So I say yes.

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

Babar Azam
.
.
.
Babaz
.
.
Baaz
.
.
.
Baz (ball)

 

[Sunil1z]

Abdul Razzaq proved the best way to counter McGrath was just to swing at everything like there's no tommorow

So I say yes.

Considering both Sehwag and Pietersen were successful against McWarne using aggressive batting, I will also say yes.

 

[Chubb]

England batted very aggressively on the first day of the 2005 Edgbaston test. Scored 407 and would have bowled at Aus that evening, but for bad light.

 

[ataraxia]

No; I'd guess that in no country (aside from Australia) would there have been enough batsmen who could be so successful in aggression as to pull this **** off.

 

[subshakerz]

Considering both Sehwag and Pietersen were successful against McWarne using aggressive batting, I will also say yes.

KP is a good shoutout, I think he was capable of taking on McWarne.

I think SA and England around 2005/6 had decent enough batting lineups so they could have decided to use this approach and I think it may have yielded in at least one victory somewhere when they toured.

 

[subshakerz]

No; I'd guess that in no country (aside from Australia) would there have been enough batsmen who could be so successful in aggression as to pull this **** off.

India maybe.

SA had Smith, Gibbs, Prince, Kallis in their tour in 2005.

England had Strauss, KP, Bell, Collingwood, Flintoff in 2006.

 

[Sunil1z]

No; I'd guess that in no country (aside from Australia) would there have been enough batsmen who could be so successful in aggression as to pull this **** off.

Successful in comparison to what ? Noone is calling the current Eng team as ATG . But if current Eng team would have won even 1 test against McWarne in Aus , they would certainly be more successful than SA /ENG of 00 , who couldn’t win even 1 test in Australia against McWarne.

 

[subshakerz]

I would have paid good money just to see an opener try to smack McGrath/Gillespie around in his opening spell. Instead, they just tried to survival approach.

 

[Sunil1z]

India maybe.

SA had Smith, Gibbs, Prince, Kallis in their tour in 2005.

England had Strauss, KP, Bell, Collingwood, Flintoff in 2006.

For Bazball to be successful, there is no place for players like Dravid/Kallis/Bell in the middle order of a Test team . It will work only when you have 4 to 5 aggressive batsman . So either Dravid/Kallis open the batting and neutralize the new ball threat or they should come at 7 in case Bazball falls .

 

[ataraxia]

Successful in comparison to what ? Noone is calling the current Eng team as ATG . But if current Eng team would have won even 1 test against McWarne in Aus , they would certainly be more successful than SA /ENG of 00 , who couldn’t win even 1 test in Australia against McWarne.

current Eng team >> any non-Aus 00s team, in terms of ability (non-era-adjusted) to slog

 

[Sunil1z]

current Eng team >> any non-Aus 00s team, in terms of ability (non-era-adjusted) to slog

Obviously. They have packed their test team with ODI style players and everyone has been asked to play aggressive cricket .
Whereas even players like Symonds/Yuvaraj used to play Test defensively in 00.

 

[TheJediBrah]

England batted very aggressively on the first day of the 2005 Edgbaston test. Scored 407 and would have bowled at Aus that evening, but for bad light.

Tbf that was the game McGrath was injured in the warm ups and didn't play

 

[Shady Slim]

I would have paid good money just to see an opener try to smack McGrath/Gillespie around in his opening spell. Instead, they just tried to survival approach.

mcgrath has the temperance that i think this really wouldn't effect him

 

[TheJediBrah]

Abdul Razzaq proved the best way to counter McGrath was just to swing at everything like there's no tommorow

So I say yes.

Not sure about this. You can't look at one innings (1 over really) in a whole career and decide it's worked.

Razzaq was pretty hopeless in Tests against McGrath and Warne, Warne especially. He was dismissed by Warne most games he played against us and by McGrath at least a couple of times and it was usually playing an overly aggressive shot and getting out looking like a dingus

In fact the only time I recall him ever spending any time at the crease against Aus was doing the opposite of BazBall in a Test at Melbourne in 2004 (I was there.) He made 4* off 76 balls in a bizarre innings that would have a pretty interesting story behind it in and of itself. IIRC the coach had a crack at him for playing a dumb shot the previous game and he protested by doing this next game lol

 

[subshakerz]

Obviously. They have packed their test team with ODI style players and everyone has been asked to play aggressive cricket .
Whereas even players like Symonds/Yuvaraj used to play Test defensively in 00.

England did it in the next test when McGrath was there, tho not fully fit.

 

[Red]

I would have paid good money just to see an opener try to smack McGrath/Gillespie around in his opening spell. Instead, they just tried to survival approach.

McGrath would’ve sorted that **** in about 4 overs

 

[honestbharani]

Cant we have like 1 official Bazball thread?

 

[TheJediBrah]

McGrath would’ve sorted that **** in about 4 overs

Remember when he came back a few years after his retirement in an exhibition game and figured out, and owned, peak David Warner in about 3 balls