Matthew Hoggard dissects England’s Ashes collapse and the cracks in Bazball

England’s Ashes campaign has unravelled in a truly brutal fashion. Speaking exclusively to AceOdds former England seamer Matthew Hoggard delivered a forensic breakdown of where things went wrong. From preparation and bowling execution to messaging, mentality and selection confusion.

Preparation, planning and early warning signs

Asked about the major causes of England’s failure in this Ashes series, Hoggard believes the problems began well before the first ball was bowled.

"I think executions of plans, or the plans themselves. I know they went over there with a lot of belief and confidence, shutting out the outside noise - 'We're not gonna listen to anybody else, this is how we have prepared for the Ashes. If you think we don't have a plan, you're stupid. Of course we have a plan, this is the biggest series and this is what we do, how we play and this is going to be successful."

“Noise coming from the old has-beens has been countered by 'you don't know what you're talking about' and 'cricket's moved on'.”

“Going into the first Test without much preparation, in my opinion. There was a warm-up game between yourselves. That's not competitive cricket. It's glorified net practice on an open pitch. It was a slow benign pitch."

“In my opinion, no way to prepare for the slaughter that was about to come."

Bazball belief and where it unravelled

On whether England became too absorbed in the Bazball philosophy, Hoggard believes confidence crossed into stubbornness.

"The word arrogant was put about for England. I think they were too absorbed in their own beliefs. You have to have belief in yourself, in your plans. You have to believe that you are doing the right thing and have total commitment. And I'm sure there was a hundred percent commitment in that team and a hundred percent buy-in into the way they prepared and the way they thought they should play cricket in Australia."

But, there were early moments of promise.

"After the first game there was hope. I know we lost it within two days but there was hope. We hadn't batted really well, and then to bowl them out, to see the pace, the hostility. The way that we stuck to plans and took wickets very quickly in the first innings to get a lead and to be a 100 up front at lunch time on Day 2, with nine wickets, you went, 'they might have a point here, it could be the way forward'.

“And then to play the rash shots, the stupid shots that let Australia back into that Test match, you can't do that in Australia and to good teams, to give them a little sniff when you've got your foot on their throat. Australia then came out and played attacking cricket and beat us at our own game, so to speak, in the first Test."

Bowling concerns emerged almost immediately.

"There were signs of positivity, in that we could win the Test match, but there were also questions about what happened to that potent England attack in the first innings. Why are we so incapable of taking wickets, so incapable of holding our lengths, so incapable of challenging the batsmen again in the second innings. Was it because we haven't got the miles underneath our bowlers' legs? As a bowler you have to have the miles under your legs to be able to go out and back your performances up."

"England's bowlers haven't played First Class cricket, they haven't played Test cricket, they've had a warmup game and bowled the nets. There's a difference between bowling in the nets and getting food and changing, rather than standing on the ground for six hours, having four spells. The intensity of what you bowl in a warmup game against your mates is different from what you bowl against the opposition."

The warning signs were unmistakable.

"There were warning signs and good signs in the first Test. With this team, as they showed in the first Test, you'll see remarkable bits of cricket but you'll also see naivety and 'how on earth have you thrown that away'."

"We've won games of cricket that we should have lost and we've lost games of cricket that we should've won in the last two years under this regime. We've seen amazing cricket and schoolboy cricket at the same time. So the warning signs were there."

Is this the end of Bazball?

Hoggard does not believe Bazball is finished, but he does believe it needs evolution.

"You hit the nail in the head. Bazball was created by the press, but McCullum didn't like it. But. there's not a ‘one glove fits all’ situation. It's called Test cricket for a reason. There are different periods in a Test match. There are different passages of play. There's battles within battles. You have to have a thinking brain, you have to play the occasion. There isn't just a this is the way we play and this is what we're doing because sometimes you'll come unstuck and sometimes you'll bury the opposition. You have to have a brain on you and figure out the best way to make runs, take wickets and how you can help the team."

"If you've only got one arrow in your quiver and you've only got one string on your bow then you can only play one way. That isn't going to be successful for a long period of time."

"When we saw Bazball first come in, we saw Ben Stokes say in an interview with Stuart Broad that he's going to try and hit every ball for four or six. We saw Joe Root trying to reverse sweep a seamer in the first ball of a day in Test. And you're thinking, this isn't the way you play Test cricket. This is ODI, 10-over, T20 cricket. This is not a Test match."

Hoggard insists positivity doesn’t mean recklessness.

"I like positivity, I like aggressiveness. But there's ways to be positive that isn't wham-bam, we have to score 15 an over. You can be positive in your leaves. You can be positive by trying to bat the entire day and tire out the opposition, and then capitalize on that."

If you feel Bazball still has some life left in it, you could capitalize on some long odds as England are currently priced at 9/4 to win the next Test in Melbourne. You can take a punt as a qualifying bet by using the bet365 bonus code and bag yourself £30 in free bets even if the Aussies win again.

Bowling execution and tactical clarity

Australia’s discipline contrasted sharply with England’s approach.

"With our bowling, you saw Australia over the 11 days and three Test matches, hit top of off and challenge the batsman's techniques, over and over, and get results. We pitched a bit of a challenge to the Australian batsmen in the last Test but so often we were bowling halfway down the wicket and going for the short ball. The Australians were ducking and leaving it, getting our bowlers tired. How are you going to get them out? Because the only way they can get out is to get caught or run out. And if we're bowling for run outs in a Test, we're in trouble. You end up wasting your energy and not getting wickets."

"When you're pitching it up, challenging LBWs, caught behinds, the batsmen have to make decisions. They're going to get tired, make mistakes and you'll pick up wickets. Whereas if you're just whacking it halfway down the wicket, the batsman is gonna say, 'you'll get bored before me'."

Leadership, experience and selection confusion

On England’s bowling inexperience, Hoggard was clear where responsibility lies.

"Ben Stokes was setting up the field and the strategy."

"Back then we were lucky to have Broad and Anderson who would stand at mid-off, mid-on and chat to each other on how to get wickets, what's the best field setting. Having discussions with bowlers on how to get wickets."

"Whereas the current bowlers are looking to the captain to set the field, to set the example and how to get wickets. They're looking to Ben to do that."

Experience, he argues, should not excuse basics.

"Cricket is a very simple game. The pitch is 22 yards long. A good ball, top of off, in that corridor of uncertainty, is a good ball. It doesn't change."

"When you get to Test cricket, lack of experience, I'm not buying it. A good ball is a good ball. Line and length is line and length. You saw Ben Stokes lose his rag a little bit with Jofra about field settings in the last Test and saying, 'I'm not setting fields for shit balls'. He's got a point. You're a Test cricketer. You can't set a field for bad bowling. I'm going to set you the field that you should be bowling to, and if you can't bowl to that field, why are you playing?"

Selection pressure was also lacking.

"The lack of challenge, maybe for places in that Test side, especially with the top six-seven. We didn't have any replacements. So every batsman isn't saying, 'if I don't perform, X is coming in or Y is coming in' because we didn't have X or Y. We had one change and the guy we got in hasn't scored a First Class century let alone a Test century. And he was our only option."

"I know Crawley has had a fairly good series, but Ollie Pope not so much. There's been no challenge from the captain, coach or from county players, saying these are the next cubs in the rank, these are the people coming through."

Conflicting spin selections summed up England’s muddled messaging.

"We pitched Shoaib Bashir for two years, saying he's our best spinner, he's the spinner for Australia. We are playing him in view of taking wickets in Australia because he's got a high release point, he's a wicket taker. He's the second choice at Somerset but you're the guy and you're going to play."

"Shit hits the shovel and we play Will Jacks for his batting instead. He's a part time bowler. You can't bowl part time finger spin in Australia, a very difficult place to bowl spin and try to stop the runs being scored."

"Why did we not pick Bashir after two years of hyping him up? We panicked and picked Will Jacks because we couldn't score runs. Mixed messages."

Messaging inconsistencies extended to the captain himself.

"We had Ben Stokes trying to smack it all over the park, saying that we're training for dominance. And then in the last Test, blocked the crap out of it like Geoffrey Boycott."

"He's changing the message. When plans don't come to fruition, you see the cracks, you see the problems within the camp. He then went out and scored probably his slowest Test fifty."

"They've gone over there saying we need to dominate Australia, we need to put the pressure on them. After the second Test, we need to show some dog, we need to fight. You're changing your messages."

"Harry Brook coming out and saying, 'I don't regret my shots but I won't play them again'. Well, if you didn't regret them, why wouldn't you play them again and then you've just played a reverse sweep."

Eventually, even internal confidence began to erode.

"The wheels have come off and when that happens you see the cracks in the plans. You see Brendon McCullum say we overtrained, there's no problem with our preparation. After the third Test, he concedes that critics might have had a point about the preparation."

"Hindsight is a wonderful thing but it wasn't as if people were questioning England's preparation. Because the people that have gone, the people that have played there know how tough it is, how hard it is and said, ‘we don't think you're doing the right thing’."

"The England squad had complete belief in their plans and responded by terming criticism as gibberish and then turned around and said, well you might have had a point."

Looking ahead to Boxing Day and beyond

Despite the disappointment, Hoggard insists there is still pride at stake.

"You don't want to lose 5-0. I've been there and done that. It's not nice."

"I think it's now putting into practice what they need to do to be better. You look at the team, you look at the talent that they have in their batting and you go, 'why aren't we scoring more runs?'"

Bazball, he believes, must find balance.

"We need to alter Bazball a bit. You don't have to defend. Ben Stokes, at times, got stuck in the last innings and didn't know how to score runs. There's a happy medium and it's finding that Test match tempo, how do I get through the difficult periods to then put pressure back on when it gets easier. To get our batsmen into a mentality where they wait for a bad ball or for the pace and bounce to be friendlier for scoring runs, without just going out and trying to whack it."

Bowling discipline remains key.

"As a bowling unit, how do we put pressure on the Australians? Surely that is not by banging it halfway down the wicket. When you grow up on fast bouncy wickets, guess what, you know how to play the short ball. It's not unusual. So finding that fuller length, the challenge of beating the outside edge, hitting the top of off-stump, challenging the front pad and not let Australia off with easy runs."

And finally, a note of realism.

"So yes there's a lot to play for but I think the honest conversation has already started. The fact that Ben came out and played Geoffrey Boycott-esque has sent a message. So I think there's a change in mentality a little bit there."

"Now that they've played 11 days of cricket, maybe they're just about ready to start the series."

Read more as Stephen Warnock reflects on some of Liverpool's defensive problems this season