‘It’s fine to ban ruthless talk, but England should never be careless’

Hamilton once had a statue of Richard O’Brien.

The former Crystal Maze host is immortalized in his role as Riff Raff in Rocky Horror Picture Show. The statue is now in storage, so in its absence, England put on its own horror show.

The second day of the third Test against New Zealand was by far the worst of the tour. Late to deal with a last-wicket partnership, he ran away for 143, finishing 340 runs behind and the chance of a clean sweep all but gone.

The watching through the fingers began before the match began. To follow England regularly is to know that captain Ben Stokes disdains the idea of ​​being “ruthless”. A local journalist was unaware of this Stokes trope and quite reasonably asked if England were going to be ruthless in their pursuit of a 3-0 series win.

“I hate the word ruthless,” Stokes said. “It’s a word that is said when finishing something. We go out to win every game.

“You have good days, you have bad days, but on the bad days that doesn’t mean you’re not being ruthless. If we win, it doesn’t mean we’re more ruthless than when we lose.”

For those paying close attention, you may have noticed when Harry Brook said something similar after the second Test win in Wellington.

“We don’t like that word, ruthless,” Brook said. “We just do it like we usually do and hopefully we can get another win.”

One wonders if “ruthless” has been included on a list of words banned within the English dressing room, alongside Bazball, bogey and Ollie Robinson (the old man).

There is some logic to it. Victories and defeats cannot simply be attributed to different levels of cruelty. Winning = ruthless and losing = not ruthless is unfair.

If being ruthless is showing a lack of compassion or pity, then you can understand why Stokes is not a fan, given that the caring and caring side of his character is a super strength of his captaincy.

Perhaps the display in Hamilton should be chalked up to an oversight.

Stokes said the selection of Matthew Potts was a result of winning the series. That’s not a slight on Potts, who has been the pick of the bowlers, just the hint that England might not have made the change had the series still been live. They did the same with Josh Hull against Sri Lanka at The Oval.

The captain admitted that his decision to play first after winning the toss was made on the spur of the moment. It was a missed opportunity for New Zealand to bowl first, not the hosts’ preference given an attack of two spinners and only three seamers.

England’s passive tactics on the second morning, which allowed Mitchell Santner to protect last man Will O’Rourke, were far from their “take the positive option” mantra. It added an extra 32 runs, an hour in the field and a perfect recipe for the batting implosion that followed.

In a pitch that turned towards Santner, Shoaib Bashir was ignored until the 157th over of the match. Before that, Bashir had failed to support Jacob Bethell’s release. He could have been forgiven for forgetting that he was actually playing.

Hamilton continues a trend. While England under Stokes and Brendon McCullum generally start series well, they finish them poorly, usually due to batting collapses.

Before this, they lost three final tests in their four series this year. This will mark the third defeat in four dead games.

Against India in Dharamsala in March, England scored 195 in their second innings in 48.1 overs, including a collapse of 5-49 after another of 7-83 in the first innings.

At The Oval against Sri Lanka, he was 156 in 34 overs in the second innings, including a collapse of 7-62 after 7-64 in the first innings.

In October against Pakistan he was 112 for 37.2 in the second innings, a complete fall of 10-97 after 6-62 in the first innings.

On Sunday it was 143 in 35.4 overs, this time the slide read 6-88.

Whichever way you cut it, it’s a pattern.

There will undoubtedly be a suggestion that England are calling this one, perhaps understandably in the 17th Test of a grueling year. It seems like a vague accusation, and almost every professional would bristle at the suggestion that they aren’t giving their all every time they step onto the field.

But there is also no denying that New Zealand has more to gain than England in Hamilton. The tourists’ job of winning the series is now done, the Black Caps desperate to avoid just a third 3-0 defeat at home. There is the additional motivation of Tim Southee’s final test.

At the highest level, that extra 1% can make a big difference. If the series had still been on the line, would England have skipped their training session two days before this match? Probably not.

None of this is intended to give England an excuse. If, for example, we criticize them for not being anywhere in the World Test Championship, they cannot be given a pass for losing their charm at the end of a series, whether they are dead or not.

As mentioned at the beginning of this tour.The spirit of England may be its greatest strength and its greatest weakness. A relaxed environment can bring out the best in players, not sweating the small stuff can give them the freedom to find peak performance. But overlooking the little things can result in carelessness—there’s that word again.

For better or worse, it is a prevalent attitude in English cricket. McCullum is about to take over the white ball team. The culture he and Stokes have created is being replicated across the Lions and across all age groups.

The England men’s withdrawal from two World Cups in the last year was due to a lack of attention to detail. The women’s failure at the T20 World Cup included not fielding on a Dubai pitch with unique lights and spending days off at boat parties.

Stokes’ Test team has a chance to build a legacy over the next year with historic wins over India and Australia. None of this will happen without due care and attention.

It’s fine that England wants to ban talk of being ruthless, but they should never be careless.