Bazball backlash as England erupts over India’s handshake refusal
The fourth Test between India and England at Old Trafford ended in a gritty draw, but the post-match narrative was anything but subdued. England captain Ben Stokes’ failed attempt to end the game early with a handshake — refused by Indian batters Ravindra Jadeja and Washington Sundar as they neared centuries — ignited a wave of criticism, mockery, and debate. Leading the charge was the Australian media, which spared no punches in calling out what they saw as England’s theatrical hypocrisy.
Fox Cricket set the tone with the stinging headline: “Spirit… of what? How pompous England exposed Bazball’s great double standard.” In a biting commentary, they added, “England bang on about the Laws of the Game, as written by the MCC at Lord’s. But when opposition teams follow those laws to England’s disadvantage? Time to awaken the ‘Spirit’ again. Give it a prod. Shake some sense into them. Play fair, old boy!”
Brisbane Times echoed the sentiment: “Spare us the whining, England. The only thing embarrassing about Old Trafford was your tantrum.” They further pointed to the irony in England’s attitude: “The contradictions are piling up.”
The Herald Sun criticized England’s late-match antics as an unnecessary blemish on a brilliant contest, writing: “England’s appalling display mars absolute Test classic.”
‘Moral hypocrites’: Aussie media slams England’s double standards
The reaction from Code Sports was among the harshest, mocking their emotional breakdown: “The new tough-talking, pot-stirring English cricket team is suffering from a baffling identity crisis on the eve of the Ashes tour, going into meltdown after two Indian batters had the audacity to tell them ‘no’.” They concluded with a savage dig: “Moral hypocrites England decide tons are anti-cricket.”
Cricket journalist Daniel Brettig, writing for The Age, echoed the theme: “Spare us the whinging.” He further added, “The only thing embarrassing about Old Trafford was your tantrum.” In a throwback to England’s infamous Ashes rhetoric, Brettig quipped: “Another comprehensive moral victory for England, then.”
Courtney Walsh of Fox Sports also weighed in, criticizing England’s pattern of melodrama: “The ‘Spirit of Cricket’ is sleeping restlessly once again, tormented by an insufferable lot,” while saying “[England is] claiming the moral high ground” every time there was a contentious decision.
What actually happened at Old Trafford?
With a draw all but certain and India leading by 71 runs, Ben Stokes approached the Indian batters and proposed ending the match with a handshake. Jadeja and Sundar — in the 80s and 90s respectively — refused. This incensed the English captain and his teammates, leading to sarcastic barbs and what many saw as petulant behavior.
Stokes directed at Jadeja: “You want to get a Test hundred against Harry Brook?” and “If you wanted to score a century, you should have batted like you wanted to get it.”
Zak Crawley chimed in: “Just shake your hand. It’s embarrassing.”
Brook, now bowling in protest, taunted Sundar with: “F***ing hell Washy, get on with it. Get on with it mate.” England’s fielders continued: “Just hit a boundary” and “How long do you need, an hour?”
Within 15 minutes, both Indians reached their centuries. Only then did they agree to the draw, but the damage to England’s image — especially in the eyes of critics — had already been done.
Gavaskar slams England: ‘Whining after the shenanigans’
Legendary Indian batter Sunil Gavaskar, writing for Sportstar, didn’t hold back:
“Towards the end of the Test, a few grumpy English players were unhappy that the batters at the crease, Ravindra Jadeja and Washington Sundar, declined the offer to end the day’s play when England captain Ben Stokes proposed it at the start of the final hour. Instead, they opted to bat on and complete their hundreds. The England players felt that, since there was no chance of a result, the Indians should have accepted the offer to conclude proceedings. They seemed to forget that two teams are playing out there, and if one decides to continue, the other simply has to accept it.”
“They made sarcastic remarks about the batters, who were in their 80s, getting to their centuries off the bowling of a batter. What they overlooked was the hard work and resilience the batters had shown against frontline bowlers for over four hours to reach the 80s. If they wanted a hundred for their efforts, England should have denied them with proper bowlers rather than whining about them getting there against Harry Brook.”
“A Test century isn’t easy and doesn’t come every match, so the batters were fully entitled to bat on and reach their personal landmarks — which they eventually did. If I were the captain, I’d have told them to keep batting and play out the remaining overs, tiring out the fielders even more — especially after the shenanigans by the English players once their offer was declined.”
On Sony Sports Network, he expressed pride in the Indian team: “I’m enormously proud of this team for what they’ve done. Just four wickets down. Yes, whatever the pitch might have been — good pitch, flat pitch, whatever it is — to stick around there under pressure.”
And with characteristic bluntness, he questioned England’s own tactics: “The question can be asked — did England bat too long before they declared? When India gave them 600-plus to chase in Birmingham, some England players said they were scared. But in India, they said ‘Give us 600, we’ll chase.’ So what happened now? India gave you 600, and you fell 336 short. That was just bravado. Just loud talk.”
He added: “So now, Shubman Gill — if he’s at the media conference — I’d like him to ask: Why did you take a lead of 311? Why not declare at 240 or 250 after Stokes got his hundred? Give your bowlers an extra hour to take wickets. I hope he asks that. I know he won’t. He’s too nice a guy. He’s not like this SG (Sunil Gavaskar). That SG (Shubman Gill) is different. But this SG 100% would have asked at a media conference. And I’m asking now.”
Dale Steyn: ‘Not the time for free milestones’
Former South Africa pacer Dale Steyn sided with Stokes, calling India’s approach odd despite being within the rules. The exchange began when Proteas spinner Tabraiz Shamsi posted on X:
“Why is there such a big deal being made about the Indians choosing not to accept the offer to end the game in a draw immediately? The offer was made. The offer was rejected, and they were fully entitled to make their choice. They got their 100s, which they worked hard for. Game over.”
To this, Steyn responded:
“Shamo this onion has many layers to it, and each one will make someone cry. The only issue I see here is the one thing people aren’t realizing, the batters weren’t playing for 100s, they were batting for a DRAW. That was the goal. Draw the game. Once that was accomplished, and a result was out of the question a handshake was offered, that’s the gentlemanly thing to do right? It’s not then the time to realize they safe and now say no we’d prefer some free milestones… although within the rules, just seems a little, well, odd. That said, they did bat well, and maybe with the last hour approaching they should have been more aggressive in reaching those milestones, at least then, we could all agree, no team tried to out do the other in this weird situation.”
Shamo this onion has many layers to it, and each one will make someone cry. The only issue I see here is the one thing people aren’t realizing, the batters weren’t playing for 100s, they were batting for a DRAW. That was the goal. Draw the game. Once that was accomplished, and a…
— Dale Steyn (@DaleSteyn62) July 28, 2025
Shamsi replied:
“Thats true ledge but I just think both sides have a right to make their own decision. Just because the option for the draw was given it doesn’t mean the other team has to take it. If you wana call the shots about how long I can bat …get me out! Atleast that’s how I see it.”
Steyn followed up with a longer clarification:
“Well I don’t think any one individual calls the shots for how long someone can bat, it’s just the rule that teams can shake with a hour left.
The game was Eng going for a win, India going for a draw, time says it’s pointless to play on, neither TEAM will win/lose so handshakes and walk off. That final hour isn’t reserved for personal goals. As they say, there’s no I in team…
That said, if it were you and me batting on 90 each, it would take a tank to pull us off that field! Haha.”
Well I don’t think any one individual calls the shots for how long someone can bat, it’s just the rule that teams can shake with a hour left.
The game was Eng going for a win, India going for a draw, time says it’s pointless to play on, neither TEAM will win/lose so handshakes…— Dale Steyn (@DaleSteyn62) July 28, 2025
Kevin Pietersen backs Stokes amid Test draw handshake controversy
Kevin Pietersen jumped to Stokes’ defense on social media, writing on X, “2 days fielding and no result on the cards – you WANT to get off the field! 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.”
2 days fielding and no result on the cards – you WANT to get off the field!
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.— Kevin Pietersen🦏 (@KP24) July 28, 2025
He later added, “And the Stokes issue should NOT distract from the batters who batted to save the Test Match! Outstanding effort and one which makes The Oval a v v important Test.”
And the Stokes issue should NOT distract from the batters who batted to save the Test Match! Outstanding effort and one which makes The Oval a v v important Test.
— Kevin Pietersen🦏 (@KP24) July 28, 2025
Jonathan Trott offers perspective: ‘Equal respect for each other’
Former England batter Jonathan Trott offered a more measured response, suggesting Stokes would have behaved differently in India’s shoes:
“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.”
“That’s what Test cricket’s about. It’s played hard, it’s played fair, but there’s also a code and a sort of ethos that the game is played with equal respect for each other.”
Final Test set to be a fiery decider
With England leading 2-1, all eyes now turn to The Oval, where the final Test begins July 31. If the Manchester drama is any indication, the spirit of cricket — and its many interpretations — will be very much alive, and under scrutiny.
