Bazball: The Inside Story of a Cricket Revolution

Peter Kettle | 9:37am GMT 08 February 2026

Published: 2024
Pages: 368
Author: Booth, Lawrence and Hoult, Nick
Publisher: Bloomsbury
Rating: 3.5 stars

In his review of the 2023 edition of this lengthy book, Martin Chandler justifiably discussed it largely from the perspective of a rare occurrence of a modern day tour book, whose virtual passing he much laments. Here, I assess the book – with its added chapter on the series in India during early-2024 – from the viewpoint of its title: Bazball: The Inside Story….

This is, indeed, a book with a split personality, (end note 1) and the Tour book side of it really does go into detail on the matches. In parts, it comes close to being a ball-by-ball description with accompanying observations! For instance, the material on the final series of Joe Root’s unhappy tenure as Captain and the first Test of the 2023 Ashes series (pages 41-72), and on the third Test of that series (pages171-81).

I’m going to use the term New Philosophy (abbreviated to NewPhilo) as nobody central to this book likes the term Bazball – including Brendon McCullum (BMC) himself and seemingly the authors as well. It is fit, we’re told, only for engaging with the cricket following populace.

I imagine that Hoult, a capable journalist, is responsible for the Tour parts while Booth lent his leverage to extract the views of some of the England camp about what the NewPhilo means for them (end note 2). Before dealing with the parts on the antecedents to NewPhilo, its meaning and application, I found there are a number of specific shortcomings of the Tour material. Taking two relating to the India series of 2023/24:

(A) The authors painting the outcome of this series as a lot closer than it actually was (making for a more racy tale and helping boost sales?). This failed to acknowledge the predominant role played by the Indian spinners in the context of India forcing England to play the “long game” after the first Test had gone against them, then preparing good pitches that wore naturally as the matches progressed.

After England scraped in by 28 runs in the first Test on a pitch turning from the outset, India’s winning margins were emphatic: 106 runs, 434 runs, 5 wickets, and an innings and 64 runs. We are told, comically: “The fifth Test was the only walk-over for India.” So what do the authors call an Indian win by 434 runs in the third Test at Rajkot? England falling behind by 126 runs on first innings, with one batsman getting half of the 319 total; followed by a second innings capitulation – 122 run total – Mark Wood top scoring with 33, the next highest score being 16. Who are the authors trying to kid…eight to twelve year olds?

India’s four spinners took 69 of England’s 98 wickets to fall (excluding two run-outs); whilst England’s highly inexperienced specialist spin group were able to take 50 of India’s 75 wickets (excluding four run-outs) – with a further 2 wickets captured by Jack Leach in his one Test, before incurring a knee injury, and 8 wickets captured by Joe Root in his five matches. Rehan Ahmed (end note 3), Shoaib Bashir and Tom Hartley initially entered the fray with precisely one prior Test match between them!

(B) The authors claiming that Jasprit Bumrah was a major force behind India’s 4-1 triumph. He was in fact instrumental in only one of India’s wins: taking 9 for 91 in the 2^nd Test, followed by 2 for 72 next match, absent for the 4^th Test, and then 2 for 89.

Despite my reservations and certain criticisms of the material surrounding the New Philo itself and its application, the authors are to be congratulated in venturing into this thorny territory and endeavouring to make sense of it all. And it is certainly good to get distillations of its key features, early on – as perceived by the likes of Stuart Broad, Jimmy Anderson, Chris Woakes and Harry Brook (on pages 8-10). If strung together, these would amount to a pithy two-thirds of a page. BMC himself is quoted on pages 21, 38-9, 84 and 138-40.

The authors do, though, miss a trick by not cottoning on to the point that the NewPhilo is well suited to an underdog side, one with very little – if anything – to lose from a risky strategy that might come off for a while, though not as a long-term proposition. Dean Elgar (South Africa’s captain for the 2022 series in England) recognised this: “I don’t see that there’s longevity in brave cricket, because I see things evening out in Test cricket over time…and it can go south very quickly” (page 278).

When the England ship had, with some good fortune, been righted, then in my view the NewPhilo required some reconfiguring. The authors get warm when noting that, in taking up the Test coaching job, BMC “felt he was better at turning a struggling team into a good team, rather than a good team into a great team…by his own admission, not a technical coach, but a student of people” (page 139). But they leave it at that.

In the wake of the 2023/24 India series, BMC is quoted saying: “…we have to keep growing {implying evolving}, because there are many very skilled cricketers around the world and many very good cricket teams. If we stay where we are, we’re not going to be good enough to go toe-to-toe with them” (page 323). Yet not much of note has happened subsequently to reflect this view, as far as England’s batting goes.

There have been seven “attritional” innings – ie made at under 3 runs per six ball over – for scores in the 40 to 69 range (given below in chronological order):

• Root: 62 runs at 48 per 100 deliveries faced (at home vs Sri Lanka)
• Stokes: 44 runs at 40 (at home vs India)
• Pope: 44 at 42 (at home vs India)
• Root: 40 runs at 42 (at home vs India)
• Stokes: 50 runs at 33 (away vs Australia)
• Jacks: 41 runs at 45 (away vs Australia)
• Jacks: 47 runs at 34 (away vs Australia)

Plus six (plus one) “attritional” innings – made at under 3.6 runs per six ball over – for scores of at least 70 (chronologically ordered):

• Smith: 70 runs at 59 (at home vs West Indies)
• Stokes: 80 runs at 55 (away vs New Zealand)
• Root: 104 runs at 52 (at home vs India)
• Pope: 71 runs at 55 (at home vs India)
• Stokes: 83 runs at 42 (away vs Australia)
• Crawley: 85 runs at 56 (away vs Australia)

Special mention should be made of young Bethell’s second innings century at Sydney, for its calm authority: 154 runs from 265 deliveries, averaging 3.5 per six ball over.

That makes a total of no more than 14 such innings in 23 consecutive Test matches – 41 team innings – spanning eighteen months from 10 July 2024 through to 8 January 2026. In tis, Stokes seemed especially keen to set a good example when the situation required, appearing in my list four times, more than anyone else.

Turning to the question of responding to pressure, which inevitably arises with discussion of the NewPhilo experience: we are told that Rob Key felt the batting line-up he and BMC were working with was capable of soaking up pressure, and that it was the bowling rather than the batting that had to be improved. And BMC, when interviewed before the 2023 Ashes series, reminding people of his philosophy: “…with the bat absorb pressure, identify when the time has come to put pressure back on the opposition, be brave enough to pull the trigger…” Unfortunately, whilst the “soaking up pressure” capability with the bat may have existed it didn’t show in application. Up until the end of 2024, at least, my examination of the stats shows that England confronted high pressure situations when starting their team innings by falling more frequently to inherently high risk shots than they did under normal circumstances.

A significant misinterpretation arises when the authors assert that, on being appointed in mid-May 2022, BMC’s ambition was to revivify the game of Test cricket, a format under assault from the T20 franchises (page 4) The misinterpretation arises from a subtlety that doesn’t register with them. At page 86, BMC is quoted saying: “Test cricket needs England more than anyone else, and if we get this right it will keep Test cricket on the map.”

The context being that most of the leading nine Test countries’ teams were in poor shape by early-2022, due to the ravages and confines of the Covid epidemic (ranging, at the extremes, from early-2020 to late-2022). Only Australia, India and South Africa were emerging in reasonable condition. BMC was saying that, as one of the big three, England needed to perform to a satisfactory standard if international Test match competition was to continue to flourish, and the doomsters be proved wrong about the popularity of Test cricket shrinking and be faced with an existential threat. Indeed, Rob Key responded with: “…it’s not that we’re so pretentious that we think we can save Test cricket, but it {getting this right, in BMC’s words} “will help take the pressure off…” (page 87).

There is also a paradox lurking that needs to be recognised, which I believe Mike Brearley has alluded to. It is this: if all (or nearly all) of the other WTC participants were to see merit in England’s NewPhilo and be able to imitate it, England’s first mover advantages would be fairly short-lived and a neutralising influence would prevail. Hence, under this scenario, the crucial benefit sought from re-invigorating England players’ mindsets around – producing favourable results again – would recede. The aim of resuscitating England’s Test fortunes would be jeopardised, perhaps fatally – though admittedly with a welcome uplift in the appeal of Test cricket in general. Fortunately for England, it seems that very few other countries, up until now, have been attracted to the NewPhilo: India’s environment seems unconducive; Australia, South Africa and Sri Lanka are wary of it, or at least sceptical about its merits. So far, only Pakistan seems to have been keen to try it out. (end note 4)

Immediately following on from the authors’ posited revivification of Test cricket ambition, comes their picking-up on BMC encouraging his players “to think of themselves as entertainers, even as rock stars – not as cricketers.” And later: “…the pursuit of entertainment {it was realised} would produce positive cricket. And with the players at England’s disposal, this meant a greater chance of victory…they knew entertainment gave them the best chance of victory” (page 21). Further on, we have reference to BMC’s initial team talk at Lord’s ahead of the first Test against New Zealand in early-June 2022, which includes: “…I really want to entertain people. Test cricket is on the edge {with Covid taking its toll} and we need people to have fun. If we have a goal of entertaining {the people who watch us}, the results will look after themselves” (page 104).

The authors reveal themselves to be gullible here. BMC was not actually wanting to put “entertainment” at the forefront of his players’ minds. The statement was created to ease the tension, to put them in a suitably relaxed frame of mind. On becoming captain, Stokes intimated this to Nasser Hussain: “Understanding we are in the entertainment business has really freed everyone up” (page 102). The point about easing the tension is echoed in quotes from BMC on pages 139 and 141: mentioning taking a lot of pressure off people; playing the game for the game’s sake, because you enjoy it; aiming to free up the talent that lay close to the surface in the English game.

Instead of entertainment, the immediate and foremost aim of BMC was to fundamentally alter the mindset of the players: shedding the dread of failure and embracing individual self-determination. Any spin-off for Test cricket as a whole and entertaining the spectating public, whilst needing to get favourable match results, was viewed as a bonus. The authors seem to have been carried away and misled themselves by their own exuberance for the NewPhilo.

The reassurance about not fearing failure if playing in the accepted manner is illustrated by Ben Duckett’s experience. Recalled after a six year absence from Test cricket, as a consequence of Bairstow freakishly breaking a leg, BMC told Duckett before the first Test in Pakistan in December 2022: “Don’t worry too much about this game – you’re going to get a good run (of matches).” Whilst comforting and beneficial to the player concerned, it does have an opportunity cost – that is, if a patch of persistent low form sets in when others are pressing their case. It might be best for the team’s sake to put a limit on the promised “good run”: perhaps specify, say, 5 Tests before an appraisal and, if omitted then given an assurance about likely reconsideration if he makes plenty of runs in subsequent county matches.

The antecedents to the NewPhilo are spread around in the book when better, in my view, to have been treated in a sequential historical manner. After giving the essence of NewPhilo, to have then harked back to BMC’s days as a kid with an aggressive batting streak (which comes at pages 26-34); and followed this with the crucial experience as New Zealand’s captain, transforming a struggling side into a moderately successful one through changes in attitude, resulting in 11 wins and 10 losses from 31 matches (which comes on pages 134-36).

When I had reached the end of the final chapter, the frequently mentioned nicknames of a good number of England’s leading players under BMC reverberated in my head: Stokesy, Rooty, Broady, Popey – plus Keysy…and, within the team’s chat, I gather there is Leachy, Ducky, Woody and Brooky. Certainly not very imaginative, whist smacking of how English “public schoolboys” address each other.(end note 5) Presumably, this is the influence of a considerable number of the squad who have attended such a school:

• Ollie Pope at Cranleigh School in Surrey
• Jonny Bairstow at St Peter’s School in York
• Stuart Broad at Oakham School in Rutland
• Zak Crawley at Tonbridge School in Kent
• Ben Duckett at Stowe School in Buckinghamshire
• Gus Atkinson at Bradfield College in Berkshire
• Josh Tongue at The King’s School at Worcester
• Tom Hartley at Merchant Taylors’ Boys’ School at Crosby

(a northern suburb of Liverpool)

• Jacob Bethell at Rugby School in Warwickshire

It is also found that Harry Brook attended Sedbergh School in Cumbria on a sports

scholarship, from age 14; and Joe Root spent a couple of years at Worksop College in

Nottinghamshire on a cricket scholarship, from age 15 to 16. And that Robert Key had a spell at Colfe’s School in London’s Borough of Greenwich.

Among the other players: Jamie Smith takes on the traditional nickname of Smudge, after the associated occupation of a blacksmith, while Jonny Bairstow is known as Bluey (inherited from his father), Zak Crawley sometimes being referred to as Creepy, Jimmy Anderson is known as The Burnley Express (after his home town), Chris Woakes as The Wizard (following his deeds during an Under 19 tour), Jofra Archer as Jofradamus (for his eerie predictions of events early on in his cricket career), Josh Tongue as The Mop (for so often mopping-up the tail) and Jacob Bethell as Cool Cat.

At the end of my read, I also sensed something of a void in the material on the various matches under BMC. After being treated to all the accounts of individual matches, there wasn’t a summation – an overview that weighed up in what respects the application of the underlying principles of the NewPhilo had succeeded and where it needed fine-tuning, or something more, to propel the team to a more successful level. A year later, I endeavoured to provide this for the batting side of things in a short book (63 pages) titled, England’s Test batting in the New Regime: A Critique for Continuous Improvement (published in May 2025). Judging from the favourable reviews received in The Cricketer magazine and The Cricket Statistician journal, it has put forward a set of sound recommendations and thinking on how best to implement them.

To round-off the cricketing matters, following the 4-1 defeat Down Under in the 2025/26 series and with the trio of Ben Stokes, BMC and Rob Key seemingly set to continue whatever the contents will be of the (usual) ensuing “thorough review”, announced by the ECB’s Chief Executive (Richard Gould):

• Stokes thinks it is a case of “back to the drawing board” now that opposition teams are figuring out how to counter England’s aggressive approach to playing the game; while, in more restrained terms, BMC has confirmed that he welcomes evolution, admitting there are “areas to improve” and said that some “tweaks” are needed to adapt to changing circumstances – whilst continuing with a firm belief in how to get the best out of the players.
• Amid all this, Boycs opines: “I think Brendon has taken us as far as he can and we need someone else to take England to the next level.”

A cosmetic point to finish on: better to have the various photos located close to the relevant passages than being squeezed into eight consecutive pages in the middle of the text (reflecting a highly cost-conscious publisher, presumably); and it would have been good to have some of them in black and white, often a more powerful medium than multi-colour for conveying events.

End Notes:

¹ Denoting a multiple personality disorder.

² Booth would have had plenty of time for this task as his prestige job of providing an Editor’s commentary on the past season’s events in the annual Wisden Almanack involves writing no more than around ten to twelve pages, plus a one page lordly Preface (dated February), before Wisden is released around mid-to late-April.

³ There is a comical slip-up in the Scorecards section at the back of the book relating to the 3^rd Test, with Bashir credited for claiming Jadeja’s wicket in the second innings, when Bashir wasn’t even playing in the match and Jadeja was next in when India declared at 430 for 4. (Cited here as I nearly relied on it.)

⁴ The moderate rise in country scoring rates for the other Big Seven (ie excluding England) in post-Covid times (2023-25), of 7.3% in overall terms, is considered to be due to the continued influence of T20 Leagues and ODI cricket.

⁵ A pity they don’t have more interesting tags – as do many of those Forum participants on this site, such as Martin Chandler as fred fertang and Martin Williamson as mogodonman.