The Ashes in Australia are a big deal and every England supporter I know was excited for the series.
The reaction to how it unfolded has been predictably emotional, with blame distributed generously across players, coaches, conditions, pitches, and planets. One thing, however, has been largely absent from the postmortem. Data.
England’s 2005 and 2009 Ashes wins were underpinned by rigorous data and analytical work. It went awol in Australia. A year ago, I had listened to someone in the coaching set up decry ‘the landgrab for sports tech’ and how ‘coaches be confident about their instincts and not rely on data’. It’s not an entirely unreasonable position but somewhere along the way, a baby was very clearly thrown out with the bathwater. Certainly, a couple of key data analysts moved on.
Narrative, bravado, instinct and belief are no substitute for evidence-led decision making. Bazball may well have restored confidence, aggression, and entertainment value, but while aggressive cricket may win sessions and headlines, it’s not a strategy for away victories.
If proof were needed, just look to how Europe won the last Ryder Cup. Whilst some attributed the win to the European players’ familiarity with the same ball brand, the truth is less romantic. There was a vast amount of data-led preparation … which built on the vast amount of data-led preparation in Rome. On both occasions it drove pairings, strategy, recovery, and psychology. And silverware.
Cricket has fewer variables and longer decision cycles than many elite sports, which should make analytics more, not less, valuable.
One lesson – among the many that were doubtless learned Down Under – is that great sport starts with great data. Add the bravado once the basics are in place.
No comment yet, add your voice below!