England’s devil-may-care attitude is dangerously close to delusion – it’s time for a new approach… especially with results this dire, writes LAWRENCE BOOTH

Non-English cricket fans have rarely needed an excuse to poke fun at England. So it’s a pity they’re being given such rich material to work with.

The latest exhibit for the prosecution was an interview with the BBC by Liam Livingstone after Australia had scored 356 for five in Lahore – the highest score made batting second to beat England. It wasn’t close, either: thanks to Josh Inglis’s unbeaten 120 from 86 balls, the chase was complete with five wickets and 15 balls to spare.

Even when you factor in the dew that can help the team batting second in floodlit one-day internationals in Asia, this was a humiliation. And it was made worse by the absence of Australia’s big three seamers – Pat Cummins, Mitchell Starc and Josh Hazlewood. This was a golden chance for a high-profile win, and England blew it.

They have now lost their last five one-day internationals, 10 of their last 13, and 16 of their last 22. Whichever way you slice it, they are having a stinker. By the start of 2027, only the top eight in the rankings (excluding the hosts) will qualify for that year’s World Cup in southern Africa, and Jos Buttler’s team are currently seventh. Stranger things have happened.

You might think now was the time for some frank self-assessment – not just behind closed doors but in public too, so that England’s fans can be reassured their team are not losing touch with reality.

Instead, Livingstone sounded almost aggrieved at Australia’s refusal to collapse in a heap after they slipped to 136 for four – a position from which this England side would probably have subsided to 228 all out.

‘We did a hell of a lot really well,’ he said. ‘I don’t personally think that performance deserved to lose. There were a couple of moments in the game that we probably lost. But I felt like we were ahead of the game.’

Livingstone’s next sentence suggested the penny was about to drop, but it never quite happened: ‘At the end of the day, if you come out on the wrong side of the result…’

Now, the psychology of international athletes can be a fragile thing: above all, the confidence must remain intact, the internal dialogue kept in check. But there is a fine line between telling yourself the odd white lie here and there, and outright delusion.

Because if your opponents knock off more than 350 with room to spare, it’s not much use suggesting you didn’t deserve defeat. And while being ahead of the game is handy, it is generally meaningless if you are not ahead of the game at its conclusion.

Livingstone’s comments follow Ben Duckett’s suggestion, during England’s dispiriting white-ball tour of India, that he wasn’t fussed if they lost the ODI series 3-0, ‘as long as we beat them in the final of the Champions Trophy’.

England duly accomplished the first part of that equation, and now need to win four games out of four in Pakistan and the UAE to tick off the second – despite Duckett’s brilliant 165 against the Australians.

On current form, that seems unlikely. Beating Afghanistan in Lahore tomorrow will be hard enough: the Afghans hammered them less than 18 months ago in the 50-over World Cup in Delhi, and possess the kind of spin-heavy attack that flummoxes England on a regular basis.

Clearly, the tone of English pronouncements has changed ever since Brendon McCullum took charge in the spring of 2022. And while the Test team were regularly chasing down big targets that year, their apparently devil-may-care approach seemed part of the fun.

Even when McCullum himself suggested that ‘3-2 has a nice ring to it’ after England had gone 2-0 down in the Ashes at Lord’s, it was still possible to enjoy the audacity, gasp at the chutzpah.

But critics were waiting to pounce, and they were not all from abroad. When Harry Brook responded to questions about England’s dismissals during the home ODI series against Australia in September by suggesting he didn’t care whether they were caught in the outfield, there was discomfort on social media among home fans.

It’s only fair to point out that Brook wasn’t saying England didn’t care: he was saying it was no worse being caught in the deep than being caught anywhere else. And he was right.

Part of the Bazball schtick is that the players are already under enough pressure. If they want to express themselves freely both on and off the pitch, so be it – as long as they always play to their strengths.

Yet it is a persona that can begin to grate, especially if results head south. Fans want humility amid the self-aggrandisement, and hard-nosed pragmatism to dilute the dreamy ideals. They want proof their favourite players know how to solve a problem, not evidence they are putting their fingers in their ears. They want a team, not a clique. And they certainly don’t want a cult.

England haven’t plumbed those depths yet, despite what some say. But it should unnerve them how easily mud has begun to stick. When Ravi Shastri suggested live on TV that they had undergone a single training session during their tour of India, he stole the headlines. The truth – that their six sessions were only one fewer than India – barely got a look-in.

England have always been held to higher standards – partly for historical reasons, partly because they often seem to get involved in the spirit of cricket debates that irritate the rest of the world.

But that’s all the more reason why their public statements need to be a bit more worldly-wise. Because if they convey the impression that they’re out of touch, they can expect little sympathy even from their well-wishers.

The Greatest Rivalry? Not even close… 

Netflix recently released The Greatest Rivalry: India vs Pakistan, in which ex-pros from both sides lined up to repeat the message of the film’s title.

It was enjoyable stuff – compelling, colourful, and occasionally random, mainly when Shoaib Akhtar was on screen.

But India’s facile defeat of Pakistan in Sunday’s Champions Trophy match in Dubai was a reminder that the title doesn’t feel quite right.

For one thing, the teams have not played a Test since December 2007, a year before the terrorist attacks on Mumbai all but ended bilateral relations. For another, the rivalry now exists in a mainly theoretical sense.

Since that most recent Test, Pakistan have won just 10 of the 33 (white-ball) matches between the sides. Sunday’s game was as predictable as it was one-sided, unsalvageable even by a Virat Kohli hundred.

As for cricket’s true ‘Greatest Rivalry’, we witnessed it earlier in the winter. The Ashes may have the history, but Australia v India is now the pinnacle.

The Hundred’s two-tier fears 

If the seven host counties (plus MCC) in the Hundred are likely to gain more in the long run than the 11 non-host counties, is there also a risk of a two-tier system within the tournament itself?

Following the eye-popping auction that valued the teams at not far off £1billion, four of the eight franchises now boast investors connected to the IPL.

Expect players to be signed accordingly, potentially leaving teams such as Birmingham Phoenix (where Knighthead Capital, owners of Birmingham City FC, have a 49% share) and Trent Rockets (Todd Boehly’s Cain International, 49%) to fight for whatever is left.

India enjoy lucky run – again 

Woe betide anyone who dares suggest that India, yet again, have been gifted a competitive advantage by being allowed to play all their Champions Trophy games in Dubai. You’ll just get shouted down by their army of Twitter trolls. But it doesn’t make it any less true.