Mitchell Johnson: England’s call to stick with Brendon McCullum, Ben Stokes and Rob Key lacks accountability

England have made their decision.

After what can only be described as an ordinary Ashes campaign in Australia, especially after so much hype, talk and promises about how good they were going to be, the England and Wales Cricket Board has backed in coach Brendon McCullum, captain Ben Stokes and managing director Rob Key to remain in their roles.

That, in itself, is a decision worth scrutiny. Not because change is always the answer, but because accountability matters.

The Ashes is the benchmark. It’s the series that defines teams, coaches and leadership groups, and more importantly, it exposes weaknesses. When you fall short in Australia, and do so convincingly, the response should carry weight.

Instead, England’s review has landed softly. There’s been no real shift in direction. No clear acknowledgment that something needs to change. Just a reaffirmation that this group of leaders is the right one to take England forward.

And that tells you something. This decision doesn’t just reflect what England think about the past, it shows their hand on what they believe the future looks like. They’re all in on this approach.

And while that style may work at times, particularly on flatter tracks or in familiar conditions, against the best teams in the world it will continue to be tested. Often, it will get found out. That’s the risk of committing fully to one way of playing without building in the flexibility to adjust.

But it’s not just what happens on the field that’s raising questions. There’s also been growing noise around England’s relationship with its past players. Former greats speaking out, feeling pushed away or not aligned with the current direction. At times, it has even come across as dismissive.

Every successful team understands the value of those who came before them. You don’t have to agree on everything, but there must be respect. There must be a connection to the history of the team and what the Ashes represents. Because that history carries lessons.

And right now, it feels like England are so locked into their own way of doing things that they’re not always open to hearing anything outside of that. That doesn’t make you strong. It can make you insular and that same mindset can show up in how you play.

Then came the line that raised a few eyebrows. The Poms’ talk of “putting things right” and “looking forward to seeking revenge” heading into the next Ashes in England.

It gives off the same feeling as the build-up to the last series - plenty of talk, plenty of belief, but not enough evidence when it mattered.

It sounds strong. It reads well. But it doesn’t quite sit right. Because if you’ve played the game at the highest level, you understand that revenge isn’t something you target at home.

Of course you want to beat your opposition. Of course, you remember what happened. That competitive edge never leaves you. But if you’re honest about it, if you’re driven by proving you’re the best, you want to do it where it’s hardest. You want to do it on their turf.

You want to walk into their conditions, their crowds, their rhythm, and take it off them there. That’s where it means the most. That’s where it holds weight. Winning at home is expected. Winning away defines you.

That’s why the language coming out of England feels slightly misplaced. Before you talk about revenge, you have to be clear on what went wrong.

Australia didn’t just win that series 4-1, they controlled it. They handled the key moments better. They were more disciplined, more patient and more adaptable. If anything, they probably still had another gear to go to. They understood when to apply pressure and when to absorb it.

England, on the other hand, stuck firm to their style.

There’s nothing wrong with having an identity. In fact, it’s important. The way McCullum and Stokes have reshaped this side has been well documented. They’ve brought clarity and belief within the group.

But belief without flexibility becomes predictable. And in Australia, England were predictable.

They pushed when the game called for patience. They chased momentum when the situation demanded control. They played the same way regardless of conditions, scoreboard or pressure.

And against a side like Australia, that gets exposed. That’s the part that should have been front and centre in this review.

Backing your coach, your captain and your director of cricket can be the right call. Stability has its place. But it only works if it’s backed by honest reflection and genuine adjustment.

The Ashes isn’t just another series you move on from. It’s not something you park and circle back to in four years’ time.

It should stay with you. It should challenge you. It should force you to look at your game and ask hard questions, not just about how you play, but when you play that way.

Have England done that? Or have they simply doubled down on what they already believe?

The next Ashes in England next year will tell part of the story. Conditions will suit them more. The tempo might shift back in their favour.

But if this group truly wants to prove they’re a better side, it will be decided the next time they step back onto Australian soil. That’s where revenge, if you want to call it that, actually means something.