Blaming Bazball for losses ignores excellence of India

England's macho approach can occasionally prove self-defeating but opponents are allowed to be superior

- Ali Martin

In the binary world of the 21st century, nothing in cricket quite matches the catnip qualities of so-called Bazball. England win? Vive la révolution. England lose? See, this is a flawed concept, a naked emperor moonwalking down the street all pleased with itself.

All of which does a disservice to opponents, who in the case of India and the record 434-run shellacking they dished out in Rajkot could be forgiven for wondering why they are the canvas on which various broad brush strokes about England are painted. Test matches require two teams and Rohit Sharma's side are a mighty fine one.

Joe Root gets out to the reverse scoop off the seamer? Bazball, you are ruining England's best player.

But what about the fact that Jasprit Bumrah, the No 1 fast bowler on the circuit, had previously penned in Root over the course of four innings, that whiplashed angle and late movement sowing far more doubt than any positive buzzwords? England surrender on the fourth evening? Bazball you numpty. But then isn't Ravindra Jadeja on a wearing home pitch a living nightmare for visiting batters? Australia, world Test champions no less, were turned into sashimi by the man they call Jaddu [Magic] last year, rolled for 113 in Delhi with five of them bowled in a seven-wicket slice-and-dice.

That England's batters find themselves taking huge risks in this series is not solely down to their attacking mantra or occurring in a vacuum. India's bowlers are forcing it with relentless accuracy, their spinners extracting greater drift and turn with it, while their batters are afforded at least one release shot per over by a spin attack still in short pants.