The recent trend, driven by the T20 and 50 over formats, is towards scoring as many runs as possible. This is reflected in the "success" of England's "Bazball" style, which has boosted England's test match run rate to 4.65 per over, the highest run rate in test match history.
Sadly for England, test cricket is not, and never was, much about run scoring; And is certainly not about run rate. Test cricket is about wickets. To win a five day test, you must bowl your opponent out twice.
Australia has won both of the first two tests by eight wickets. They will continue to win by large numbers of wickets, unless and until the English batsmen wake up to the fact that their wickets are valuable, and that boundaries (and even to an extent, runs) really are not.
Settling in to the crease for 75 overs at two runs per over is a far better test match performance for an opening batsman than batting for 10 overs at five runs per over, and then getting caught at slip trying to chase a four that should have been a dot ball.
Of course, the less informed members of the audience find over rates of one or two "boring", because they have been trained by T20 to expect a six every over or two. That's sad, but not as sad as seeing a (nominally) test team whose opening batsmen share this flawed opinion.
Runs, in test cricket, are what happens almost as a byproduct, when a batsman has the skill to face over after over of bowling without losing his wicket. Stay in long enough, and your team can't lose. Once you are in a position where you can't lose, it's up to your bowlers to ensure that your opponent does lose. And if they are facing batsmen who are seeking to score runs, rather than seeking to defend wickets, they should have little problem doing so.
