Forget 2019 and all that... This is TEST cricket

Remember how England's rugby team plummeted after winning the 2003 Rugby World Cup in Sydney. World Champions to chumps in a matter of months. Or even further back when Scotland beat England 3-2 at Wembley in 1967, less than a year after Bobby Moore lifted the Jules Rimet trophy at the same ground. Or, sticking to cricket, England's rapid demise after regaining the Ashes in 2005 (Australia whitewash 2006-07).

The tendency for English sportsmen to see reaching the top as the sole limit of their ambition is a something of a rather depressing national trait. Unlike previous Australia or West Indies dynasties, there is an inbuilt relax button that our team seem only too ready to press. But surely nothing can demonstrate this better than England's shabby performance in the first Test match of this summer against Ireland.

The fact that this is only Ireland's* third test match ever was not an excuse to pick a hotchpotch of a side. Sure, rest injured players but do not waltz into this game without a serious game plan and a serious desire to win.

A lot has been made of England's desire to play an exciting brand of cricket, something that Eoin Morgan's ODI side managed to do consistently (clear plans + clear roles = clear expectations). However, England's test team do not have such a steely eyed Captain and more importantly, they don't seem to have a plan/clue.

The inclusion of 50-over top gun Jason Roy makes a lot of sense, given his obvious attributes. There is no doubt he could become a very important top order batsmen and a calculated risk worth taking. However, his technique is not robust enough to consistently score big over the 5 day format. But that is fine, just as long as the rest of the team don't believe they should bat like the Surrey man too. Current Test Skipper Root had a good World Cup, he made runs when he batted like a test cricketer. As soon as he tries to reinvent himself as a 20/20 dasher the problems arise. (His stint in the Big Bash in Australia demonstrated his flaws all too frequently).

And there are plenty more examples of very talented cricketers over stretching themselves all the way down the batting order. Bairstow's pair highlights his early innings frailties. Moeen hardly warrants a slot above No.9 and Woakes is a bowler who can bat but he is palpably not a natural test all-rounder.

Cricket in general is over-burdoned with ghastly proto-management speak: 'Executing our plans', 'Playing our brand of cricket' (even I fell into the trap in the 4th paragraph of this piece), blah-di-blah-di.... And somehow now the idea of playing an 'exciting brand of cricket' has usurped playing 'winning cricket'. I'm not sure that this new approach is legitimately increasing people's enjoyment. Yes, it is far more refreshing to see Jos Buttler cart Pat Cummins into Row Z of the Tavern Stand than to see him playing and missing. But, it is even more exciting to see him construct a century mixing power, finesse and intelligence - as opposed to an agricultural smear strewn 24 off 6 balls.

England have got huge talent in their test ranks but and it is a massive but, they will tarnish their legacy if they continue to throw their wickets away with such alarming frequency. They are better than this! However, unless the coach and captain swiftly remedy their 'plans', they will spend the summer dodging press conferences and clutching at straws.

And finally, just in case anyone is in any doubt. Winning cricket does not mean winning at all costs (that has been rightly condemned - Smith/Warner/Bancroft will always be known as cheats). But winning cricket (especially in the Ashes) is what England expects. If an exciting "brand" of cricket earns you victory then fantastic, if over-reliance upon it brings you defeat, then perhaps you are missing the point of 5 day TEST match cricket...

*A more detailed look at Ireland's performance will appear later.