Is England actually honest with itself? If so, they know they have to change | Mark Ramprakash

IIt’s not over yet. There is still hope. Before the Ashes started, I had had enough, because of England’s fantastic array of fast bowlers and because I felt they had improved their crash-bang-wallop, one-size-fits-all approach to batting. Then the series started, and while the bowlers did their bit, the batters failed badly. After the two-day humiliation in Perth they will inevitably come under scrutiny – but while everyone is questioning the English approach, how far are they challenging themselves?

I based my optimism on some of what I had seen this past summer. In the first innings against India at Lord’s, Joe Root and Ollie Pope scored 109 runs at almost exactly three per over, keeping their composure and building a foundation that ultimately won their side the match. I watched them and admired the way they had refined their attitude, allowing them to better adapt to the match situation, the surface they were playing on and the challenges of the opposition – in that case, especially the need to nullify the brilliant Jasprit Bumrah.

I thought the India series, five tough games against excellent opponents, would have really helped prepare the side for the Ashes. This England team has absolutely battered a number of teams who were unable to cope with their quality and approach, but in their most recent Test series they faced a group who had the resilience and skill to cope – ideal preparation for what they would face in Australia.

Then they won the toss in Perth, elected to bat, came out and were absolutely mauled by Mitchell Starc.

The emotional intelligence, the situational awareness, that sometimes impressed me during the summer was nowhere to be found. Instead, England, pumped by adrenaline and a desire to “put pressure on the bowlers”, surrendered to their attacking instincts. To some extent I can understand it: on a pitch with speed, bounce and movement, many players will feel the need to be proactive because they feel that sooner or later they will get a ball with their name on it. But in that second innings none of Pope, Root or Harry Brook had to deal with that great delivery: they all drove away from their bodies, with balls of good length. Australia can’t believe how easy it was.

After the match, Ben Stokes said he thought the players who scored runs on that wicket had been very proactive, and to an extent he was right: Travis Head had certainly been in his match-winning knock. But sometimes you’re faced with good bowling on a helpful pitch and you just have to get through it. A team that never wants to back down, that just keeps throwing the bat, will find that their approach pays off some days, and leads to complete collapse on others. Sometimes it feels like their approach is a total lottery, and not one you’d expect from an elite, winning side.

England were very vocal about getting games for players before this series, and I thought their chances of winning the Ashes were really boosted by the fact that they look like a very settled unit – nine or ten players in that team are pretty much pick and choose. They have the experience, the continuity of the selection and they have a lot of quality. How could it all go so wrong?

When it came down to it, they seemed to get sucked into this gladiatorial thing, where they walked into the arena, with all this noise and hype, and felt like they had to go out from the start and show Australia that they had no fear, that they were going to play their own game, and that it was going to be better than anyone else’s. Every hitter on that team is selected because they are very aggressive. No one using any other method – and there are some brilliant hitters who have had great success in the County Championship and been completely ignored – has a chance of getting in. So what happens when aggression isn’t the best approach?

In my experience, the best teams have a mix of hitters. It’s great to have someone who can take over the game from the opponent very quickly, but you also need people who are able to play an innings for many hours or even many sessions. Stokes and Root have both played this type of innings in the past but now seem to prefer a different approach.

The point is that from 105 ahead and one wicket down, the position they found themselves in just after lunch on the second day, the aggressive option is to be completely ruthless. One way to do that is to attack, and there are times when that is the right approach. Another way, which has been accepted for about 150 years, is to give nothing away, offer no encouragement, be ruthless and put yourself into complete dominance. They are both ways to put pressure on the bowlers. The pitch was improving, the ball was getting older, several opponents appeared to be injured – what an opportunity to make a statement in the first Test of the series.

But the cricket world has seen how England play, and Australia knew there was no need to panic; they would probably just figure it out. At Lord’s in the 2023 Ashes, they bowled only briefly and batsman after batsman fell to their trap. In Perth they went next to the stump and it happened again. The English batters wanted to continue with five over and within half an hour they had lost the match.

Now they must use this extended break before the second test. They may not use it for competition practice, but they should take this opportunity for reflection. They have to be completely honest with themselves. It’s hard to know how much of this is actually happening within that batting unit because when he speaks publicly, Stokes always talks about blocking out outside noise, doubling it down, getting it out of the way and being proactive. The thing is, that’s damn hard sometimes.

Something has to change in the next ten days, because when the pink ball moves around at the Gabba in the second Test, they will be faced with the same situation, and the same answers will likely yield the same outcome. And then it’s definitely over.