The British media has had its say on England’s “sullen and ungracious” cricketers after Ben Stokes’ men behaved “like sore losers” on day five of the Manchester Test against India.
Courtesy of a defiant century from captain Shubman Gill and an unbeaten 203-run partnership between all-rounders Ravindra Jadeja and Washington Sundar, India kept the series alive by stealing a draw from the jaws of defeat at Old Trafford.
The tourists only lost four wickets across 143 overs in the second innings, with England left to rue costly missed chances in the field, including a dropped catch from Joe Root with Jadeja yet to score.
With the contest heading towards an inevitable stalemate, England captain Stokes indicated he wanted to shake hands for a draw, but India desired to continue playing until Jadeja and Sundar, who were unbeaten on 89 and 80 respectively, reached triple figures.
For the next 15 minutes, England’s repeatedly taunted Jadeja and Sundar, who had denied them what at one stage seemed like an inevitable victory, while part-timer Harry Brook intentionally produced an assortment of comically poor deliveries, an act of protest to end the match quickly.
READ MORE
SPIRIT OF… WHAT?: How pompous England’s petty act exposed Bazball farce
Former England captain Kevin Pietersen defended Stokes’ frustration, acknowledging he didn’t want to put more overs into his fatigued bowlers considering the three-day turnaround before the series finale in London.
“Two days fielding and no result on the cards – you WANT to get off the field,” Pietersen tweeted.
“You cannot have a pop at Ben Stokes for his frustration. Very easy to have a pop at him when you’re sitting in your lounge watching. You’re NOT in the battle. Leave the men in the ring to be emotional.”
Speaking on Jio Hotstar, former England batter Jonathan Trott claimed that Stokes would have accepted the draw if the roles were reversed, pointing out he has prioritised the result over “personal milestones” during the Bazball era.
“In his mind, the game’s done,” Trott said of Stokes.
“I don’t think England would have had the personal milestones on their mind personally, that’s just my view. Maybe if somebody was close to getting it, their maiden century, it would have been a little bit different.
“You could tell by the way that Ben Stokes has reacted that if they were in the same seat, they probably would have shook the Indian captain’s hand if it was offered – if Shubman Gill went up to the English batsman and they were in the same position, they would have walked off.”
However, former English captain Nasser Hussain confessed he “didn’t have a problem” with Jadeja and Sundar continuing to bat until they achieved their individual milestones.
“England seemed to have a problem with it,” Hussain said on Sky Sports.
“They were a little bit tired, tired bowlers, tired legs, they wanted to get off,” he said.
“The two lads have worked hard to get into the eighties and nineties — they wanted Test match hundreds.
“Stokes didn’t have to bowl Brook and it looked a bit silly at the end there but we make far too much of these things.
“They played well, they deserved the draw, they deserved to be there at the end.”
Former England batting coach Mark Ramprakash agreed that Jadeja and Sundar “earned the right” to fight for their centuries.
“England had thrown everything they had at India and pretty much outplayed them for the five days,” Ramprakash told Sky Sports News.
“But India had not bowed. I think England were tired, frustrated, and convention in this country is that once you cannot achieve a win, you agree to a draw.
“Stokes was possibly a bit premature going up, and in the way that he did, it has to be agreed by the opposition captain.
“India had one player, Sundar, who hadn’t got a Test ton before, and I know the England side do not really think about milestones, but for that player, he may never get there again. It was quite a big moment for him.
“They had earned the right to stay on from their point of view.
“Each team knows if they can gain some sort of psychological edge going into this last Test, it’s really important.”
Former England captain Alastair Cook also thought it was “the right decision” to continue playing.
“Five years down the line you look at the scorecard you see two brilliant hundreds to save the game, plus obviously Gill’s as well,” Cook said on BBC’s Test Match Special.
“This shouldn’t become the story of the day. It should be about India’s rearguard action.”
Elsewhere, English cricket journalist Cameron Ponsonby penned a scathing of England’s moral hypocrisies in a column for Cricket Et Al.
“The whole point of this England team is they don’t do draws. And yet here they were, mocking the bloke who had outplayed them, because India hadn’t shaken hands when they wanted to,” Ponsonby wrote.
“England started this year conceding that they needed to be more ‘humble’. They then decided before the Lord’s Test that they’d actually spent all this time being too nice. They’ve also been working with Gilbert Enoka, who is credited with the All Blacks ‘no d***heads policy’.
“So in short, when giving (Sundar) a spray, do so humbly, while not being a d***head, but also not being nice. Righto.”
The Telegraph’s Nick Hoult predicted that England’s handshake antics would fuel the fire ahead of next summer’s Ashes series, acknowledging the incident received widespread coverage in Australian media.
“England’s sullen and ungracious conduct at the end of an Old Trafford Test match they dominated served up easy half volleys for their critics, quick to leap on their perception of double standards,” Hoult penned.
“A familiar storm is gathering and England gave it plenty of energy. A barrage of this stuff awaits in November.
“It is one thing to try to unsettle opponents by playing hard, another to be boorish and look like sore losers.
“Currently, the verbals do not quite align with this team. It appears somewhat performative rather than natural.”
The Guardian’s Ali Martin labelled England’s behaviour as “objectively poor”, criticising the unnecessary chirping from openers Ben Duckett and Zak Crawley.
“Gilbert Enoka, the All Blacks adviser who made famous their ‘no d***heads’ policy, did some work with England on the training days, only for them to act briefly like … well, let’s just say their adoption of something similar remains a work in progress,” Martin wrote.
“Brook sending down some of his right‑arm filth to spare the frontliners and hasten matters was fine, but it was the sarcastic chirping that was objectively poor.”
ESPNcricinfo’s Vithushan Ehantharajah argued England’s players had been “rattled” by India’s fifth-day rearguard, putting Stokes’ men at risk of sacrificing their series lead at The Oval next week.
“They fought hard and ended up rattling an opponent that had hitherto dominated this Test match,” Ehantharajah said.
“As understandably frustrated the hosts were at being kept on the field for – eventually – 143 overs, India may well view the frayed tempers, which exacerbate the tired bodies, as an extra advantage going into the final Test. Getting out of the series with a 2-2 scoreline would make this a successful tour.”
The fifth Test between England and India gets underway at The Oval on Thursday.
