This is all very interesting.
The recieved wisdom coming out of the english sports media and quite a lot of english cricket fans seems to be that the Stokes/Bazball revolution is now the high watermark of the game.
That the Aussies were lucky and really ought to be going into the Oval on the verge of being whitewashed but for bad luck, rain and dubious antipodean gamesmanship.

That may or may not be the case but imo Bazball is nothing more than giving the England batting line up, all of whom are more or less T20 and one day sloggers, the licence to do what they want.
For about a decade now the England batting has been decried for an inability to survive for any length of time in test cricket.
Batting collapses happened with enormous regularity.
Seems to me Brendon Baz McCullum has just come in and told them to forget about it, score what they can when they can and beggar the consequences.

Thing is, as I said previous, test cricket is not the pinnacle of the game anymore. Most of the cricket playing nations pay lip service to it. The players have little interest in it, especially Batsmen. Who can blame them when you can earn an exponential amount of dosh playing T20.
So Bazball works against most teams. You go out slog your heart out against a bunch of disinterested West INdians, Sri Lankans etc whose best players will probably be off earning thousands of bucks in the IPL.

Now the problem will come when ENgland play against India and AUstralia. Two teams with a playing pool able to compete, like England, in tests and one days.
This summer has seen England batsmen all contribute more or less under Bazball. But they have lurched from poor decision to poor decision without seemingly a thought for the intricacies of the test match form.
That might be ok at home, against an Aussie side playing under testing circumstances.
But doing it on the road in India this winter will be the true examination of where this England side are going.
And for me I have to say if they play in the subcontinent like they have done this summer, England will be on the end of another defeat. sorry.

agree thelatarps, yes the english batsmen more or less the same which continously failed with the bat and relied solely on their bowlers for ages , showing their weakness in technique etc etc , have been told to gamble, yes it is working but its 20/20 cricket , and remember the 10 or so tests before the ashes  England     in nearly all of  those  were in positions of losing them at certain stages.

thats what i thought FO,B , all about bairstow/stokes sticking 2 fingers up to critrics ,against beaten bowlers who were just waiting for a decl,
as for playing on till 9 o clock it changes whole dynamics of test cricket
new ball
wear and tear on pitch
heavy roller etc
ENG might want test cricket turned in to glorified 5 one day matches in 5 days ,those who love test cricket for the tactics/variables etc,
test cricket already took on board covered pitches, minimum overs in a day,floodlights etc,etc,
conditons,when to to take new ball,pace of game etc all part of test cricket, turning it in to next goal the winner might as well scrap test cricket

yes the english batsmen more or less the same which continously failed with the bat and relied solely on their bowlers for ages , showing their weakness in technique etc etc , have been told to gamble, yes it is working but its 20/20 cricket , and remember the 10 or so tests before the ashes  England     in nearly all of  those  were in positions of losing them at certain stages.

in any competitive series you'd expect to be in the position of losing at times in games...doesn't really matter what the style is if you end up with averages like these against the World Test Champions..

Crawley 55
Root 52
Stokes 51
Bairstow 40
Brooke 38
Duckett 34

in comparison...Australia playing proper cricket (no such thing incidentally)

Kawaja 47
Head 39
Smith 31
Warner 25
Carey 23
Green 20
*Marsh 76 (2 matches)

the suggestion it might struggle away to India or Australia is hardly reason to bin it...the conventional approaches have rarely worked there either...

I have some sympathy with thelartarps position

Some fans want Old Trafford dropped because the weather cost us potential wins in 2013 and last week! I want them dropped because it was a sheite show and there were 30 minutes queues for food and the khazi!

absolutely mafe'

usually if you outbat and outbowl a team you win the series...and all stats point to them having done so...

though one observation that I do think is fair is that England have enjoyed the slightly better of conditions...nobody ever seems that interested in that aspect when we lose of course...

before old trafford ozzies had won about 70% of the 45 sessions in 1st 3 tests

I'm in Dulwich Village, about 3 miles South of the Oval so can provide some fairly accurate weather reports for the last test.
Current forecast is a bit in and out, could be showers Thursday morning and intermittent rain over the weekend is a possibility.

brentford, going back to the conditions and the 4 won tosses in particular would say lords was by far the most important and what has been glossed over there amid the controversy and england's batting mistakes was the bowling on day 1. 340/5 i think represents a truly horrible performance in favourable conditions. shouldn't have sniffed 300 if we'd bowled anything like