How does Mohammad Abbas compare to Glenn McGrath, Vernon Philander and Mohammad Asif?

[Abid Z]

But he did take wickets LOL
Yes longevity was not good enough but 46 games is not a small number. He did well considering he was express pace. He had zero support from pcb who had no idea about work load management and his bowling support cast was mostly useless apart from asif for a few years.

Let’s stay on topic

 

[Farabi]

Abbas’s best spells have been in UAE flat wickets. (Obviously in Pak domestic too) In fact I seem to remember philander doing well against Sri Lanka in Sri Lanka, Asif did some spectacular bowling in Karach and I think from memory Mcgrath had a pretty good record in Subcontinent.

It’s not just height either. If height was so important morne morkel, Mohammed irfan, Steven Finn (and many many English bowlers) would be greats but they had quite short careers.

As you say 5ft 8 minimum is ok. Minimum speed of 125 is ok. The main thing is to stop the batter walking down and imparting the right level of backspin on the ball to get lift while maintains immaculate control over line and length.

The only bowlers who could regularly bowl 145kph plus while maintaining immaculate line and length were Shane Bond, Brett Lee, waqar and steyn. This is truly an elite Category.

But having a decent partner or two at the other end is vital to keep sustained pressure. This is why the Australia attack is so good.

I think Pak will go with Mir hamza to partner Abbas for Capetown.

I am impressed by him

Can he do well on flat wickets though?

@kron @RedwoodOriginal

“That you need pace to be successful on flatter pitches than non-flatter pitches”
is perhaps one of the biggest generalizations/myths in Pakistani cricket.
It feels intuitive but there is literally no data that supports this. The truth is more complex and no one understands it exactly.

Mohd Abbas best performances have come in UAE. He averages 17.5 in UAE with 25% of his ~100 wickets taken there.
He averages 22 in Pakistan (just 3 tests).
Hes one of the top wicket takers in the ongoing domestic QEA played on flat pitches in Pakistan.

He struggled the most in NZ and SA based on his performances, averaging 45 and 31 respectively on his tours there.

This shows that he’s more effective on “flat” pitches than “green mambas”.

I think L&L, control and variation makes you effective no matter the pace or pitch.

Pace probably helps in Aus, SA where pitches are fast and pace itself becomes a better weapon. But even there, pace backfires unless it is controlled and comes with variation.

 

[Xoib]

Abbas was not even 50 percent fit on his last SA tour should not have been rushed from shoulder injury

The only disappointing tour for me was the Nzl tour where he should have done better on those pitches

 

[cricketAXEpert]

If you think Asif was below Philander then I don't know what to say to you.

Maybe he is deducting 2 whole points for spot fixing, than it makes sense. M. Asif 9/10 - 2 pts for spot fixing = 7/10

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

@kron @RedwoodOriginal

“That you need pace to be successful on flatter pitches than non-flatter pitches”
is perhaps one of the biggest generalizations/myths in Pakistani cricket.
It feels intuitive but there is literally no data that supports this. The truth is more complex and no one understands it exactly.

Mohd Abbas best performances have come in UAE. He averages 17.5 in UAE with 25% of his ~100 wickets taken there.
He averages 22 in Pakistan (just 3 tests).
Hes one of the top wicket takers in the ongoing domestic QEA played on flat pitches in Pakistan.

He struggled the most in NZ and SA based on his performances, averaging 45 and 31 respectively on his tours there.

This shows that he’s more effective on “flat” pitches than “green mambas”.

I think L&L, control and variation makes you effective no matter the pace or pitch.

Pace probably helps in Aus, SA where pitches are fast and pace itself becomes a better weapon. But even there, pace backfires unless it is controlled and comes with variation.

I never said that you need pace to be successful on flat pitches, but yes, having pace does give you on an edge on such pitches unless ofcourse you're Glen McGrath which very few bowlers are. My main point about Abbas was that there is a marked difference between bowling at 122 and bowling at 128. You need to go back and look at the highlights of Abbas's 10-fer against Australia in Abu Dhabi. Check his pace. Most of his deliveries are around the 126-128 region. Every bowler is different and in his case, that pace seems to be the sweet spot.

In my opinion, you are generalizing the argument by ignoring the context. For instance, when Abbas last toured South Africa he was coming off an injury that kept him out of the first test and that likely played a big part in his non-performance in that tour because he wasn't at 100%. Similarly, in that New Zealand series as well I remember the pitches were uncharacteristically flat than they generally are in New Zealand and did not offer as much seam movement. Even guys like Southee and Boult struggled in one match. I remember Jamieson being the chief-destroyer in that series.

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

@kron @RedwoodOriginal

“That you need pace to be successful on flatter pitches than non-flatter pitches”
is perhaps one of the biggest generalizations/myths in Pakistani cricket.
It feels intuitive but there is literally no data that supports this. The truth is more complex and no one understands it exactly.

Mohd Abbas best performances have come in UAE. He averages 17.5 in UAE with 25% of his ~100 wickets taken there.
He averages 22 in Pakistan (just 3 tests).
Hes one of the top wicket takers in the ongoing domestic QEA played on flat pitches in Pakistan.

He struggled the most in NZ and SA based on his performances, averaging 45 and 31 respectively on his tours there.

This shows that he’s more effective on “flat” pitches than “green mambas”.

I think L&L, control and variation makes you effective no matter the pace or pitch.

Pace probably helps in Aus, SA where pitches are fast and pace itself becomes a better weapon. But even there, pace backfires unless it is controlled and comes with variation.

There are levels to flat pitches as well. All flat pitches are not the same.

In the UAE, flat pitches tend to be dry and abrasive, with less grass cover due to the arid climate, making them conducive to spin as the ball grips and turns more. They also tend to play slower, offering low bounce, which tends to suit a bowler like Abbas.

In Australia and New Zealand, flat pitches and are built on harder surfaces, creating better carry and bounce. The climate and soil also ensure the ball swings more in the air, especially in New Zealand, where the conditions amplify swing movement. This means pace bowlers can still find assistance, even on seemingly batter-friendly pitches.

 

[Marooned]

Abbas was not even 50 percent fit on his last SA tour should not have been rushed from shoulder injury

The only disappointing tour for me was the Nzl tour where he should have done better on those pitches

Windies too.

He was toothless there.

 

[Farabi]

There are levels to flat pitches as well. All flat pitches are not the same.

In the UAE, flat pitches tend to be dry and abrasive, with less grass cover due to the arid climate, making them conducive to spin as the ball grips and turns more. They also tend to play slower, offering low bounce, which tends to suit a bowler like Abbas.

In Australia and New Zealand, flat pitches and are built on harder surfaces, creating better carry and bounce. The climate and soil also ensure the ball swings more in the air, especially in New Zealand, where the conditions amplify swing movement. This means pace bowlers can still find assistance, even on seemingly batter-friendly pitches.

I don’t disagree, but framing this as “levels to flat pitches” feels unnecessary. Bounce isn’t tied solely to how “flat” a pitch is—you can have bouncy flat tracks, just as you can have bouncy seaming ones.

Now, on to your point: you’re suggesting Abbas’ success might be linked to the (lack of) bounce on offer. That’s an intriguing perspective, but it doesn’t entirely hold up given his success in England, both internationally and in County cricket, where bounce isn’t particularly low.

We could keep debating this, but I don’t think factors like “non-flatness of the pitch” or low bounce alone are sufficient to explain Abbas’ success.

This really calls for a deeper study to triangulate what’s behind his effectiveness.

What’s obvious is that he doesn’t fit the Pakistani mould. He was literally unplayable in the ongoing QEA played on “flat pitches”. His average is 14 with 31 wickets!, and he would be table topping right now with his 125 KPH thunderbolt if he didn’t have to drop off and join the PCT.

 

[Farabi]

I never said that you need pace to be successful on flat pitches, but yes, having pace does give you on an edge on such pitches unless ofcourse you're Glen McGrath which very few bowlers are. My main point about Abbas was that there is a marked difference between bowling at 122 and bowling at 128. You need to go back and look at the highlights of Abbas's 10-fer against Australia in Abu Dhabi. Check his pace. Most of his deliveries are around the 126-128 region. Every bowler is different and in his case, that pace seems to be the sweet spot.

In my opinion, you are generalizing the argument by ignoring the context. For instance, when Abbas last toured South Africa he was coming off an injury that kept him out of the first test and that likely played a big part in his non-performance in that tour because he wasn't at 100%. Similarly, in that New Zealand series as well I remember the pitches were uncharacteristically flat than they generally are in New Zealand and did not offer as much seam movement. Even guys like Southee and Boult struggled in one match. I remember Jamieson being the chief-destroyer in that series.

I think what you’re saying is much more nuanced than most of the others on here.
You’re saying Abbas can still be effective at 126-128 pace. That he doesn’t necessarily need “green mambas” to succeed. We are both in agreement here.

However, I don’t think other people generally agree with us. They think Abbas will not succeed generally at 126-128 pace except rarely on “supportive pitches”.

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

I don’t disagree, but framing this as “levels to flat pitches” feels unnecessary. Bounce isn’t tied solely to how “flat” a pitch is—you can have bouncy flat tracks, just as you can have bouncy seaming ones.

Now, on to your point: you’re suggesting Abbas’ success might be linked to the (lack of) bounce on offer. That’s an intriguing perspective, but it doesn’t entirely hold up given his success in England, both internationally and in County cricket, where bounce isn’t particularly low.

We could keep debating this, but I don’t think factors like “non-flatness of the pitch” or low bounce alone are sufficient to explain Abbas’ success.

This really calls for a deeper study to triangulate what’s behind his effectiveness.

What’s obvious is that he doesn’t fit the Pakistani mould. He was literally unplayable in the ongoing QEA played on “flat pitches”. His average is 14 with 31 wickets!, and he would be table topping right now with his 125 KPH thunderbolt if he didn’t have to drop off and join the PCT.

Again, if you want to look at his success in England you will have to look at the pitches in England back in 2018. Since then they have gotten flatter to suit Bazball. Which is perhaps why even someone like Anderson had struggled in England prior to his retirement.

Back then, the tracks were far more conducive to seam and swing. Coupled with the Dukes ball, which retains its seam longer and swings more in overcast conditions, it offered the perfect conditions for a bowler like Abbas. His accuracy, ability to bowl in that channel, and the subtle seam movement made him very difficult to face in that series. He wasn’t just relying on low bounce but also on his precision, and ability to target the stumps. Again, I will stress on his pace in that series, which was actually even faster and consistently above 130. You can go back and look at his spell at Lord's if you find that hard to believe.

At any rate, it is true that he is not someone who fits into the traditional mold of what a fast-bowler should be. But he very clearly has alot of attributes that indicate he could have been a great test bowler had he not been so badly misunderstood and gotten that opportunity early in his career. The reality is that our people kinda are obsessed with pace. Eventhough we have not produced a single express pacer of note since Shoaib.

 

[Bhaijaan]

Just another day.

This guy is dangerous on such tracks. Very much like Philander.

 

[Abid Z]

Again, if you want to look at his success in England you will have to look at the pitches in England back in 2018. Since then they have gotten flatter to suit Bazball. Which is perhaps why even someone like Anderson had struggled in England prior to his retirement.

Back then, the tracks were far more conducive to seam and swing. Coupled with the Dukes ball, which retains its seam longer and swings more in overcast conditions, it offered the perfect conditions for a bowler like Abbas. His accuracy, ability to bowl in that channel, and the subtle seam movement made him very difficult to face in that series. He wasn’t just relying on low bounce but also on his precision, and ability to target the stumps. Again, I will stress on his pace in that series, which was actually even faster and consistently above 130. You can go back and look at his spell at Lord's if you find that hard to believe.

At any rate, it is true that he is not someone who fits into the traditional mold of what a fast-bowler should be. But he very clearly has alot of attributes that indicate he could have been a great test bowler had he not been so badly misunderstood and gotten that opportunity early in his career. The reality is that our people kinda are obsessed with pace. Eventhough we have not produced a single express pacer of note since Shoaib.

He’s not forgotten. He was awful in New Zealand series a couple of years ago as he was returning from injury. Rightly dropped.

The only thing PCB Did wrong is not wait for him to be fully fit before returning for test cricket. But they have a history of messing up bowlers.

You say mould of what a bowler is. I guess Pakistan like to think they have fast bowlers but they don’t particularly. For shohaib, Sami and wahab there are many bowlers from other countries that can hit 90-92mph. Even Shohaib’s average speed would drop considerably after a couple of overs. He couldn’t sustain 92-93mph for long. Hitting 92-93 mph is not unusual. Maintaining line and length at such speeds is.

But for Pakistan there have been a number of bowlers who had amazing domestic records but not given the credit they deserved just because the speed gun said so. Tanvir Ahmed and Samiullahkhan Niazi were two carbon copies of Abbas. Introduced too late, discarded too early often for young prodigy that would sell his country for a few dollars.

 

[LordJames]

It was predicted that Abbas will be successful in SA and he is but he cannot single handedly take 20 tickets and needs support.

As far as pace is concerned, yes it would definitely help if he was a few clicks quicker and that's for sure but he has found his niche and is sticking to it.

Pakistan has lost out due people's unhealthy obsession with pace, Abbas would have been fine on many tracks around the world bowling long spells from one end sticking to 5th stump line and taking wickets, what have others pacers done for Pakistan over the years whom selectors preferred over Abbas?

Where are Pakistan pace demons which kept Abbas out of selection all thes years? Would you take Hasnain or Harris or Naseem Shah or even Shaheen over Abbas in a test match to get you 20 wickets?

You need 20 tickets in a Test Match and Abbas can bowl long spells from one end

 

[Abid Z]

I think what you’re saying is much more nuanced than most of the others on here.
You’re saying Abbas can still be effective at 126-128 pace. That he doesn’t necessarily need “green mambas” to succeed. We are both in agreement here.

However, I don’t think other people generally agree with us. They think Abbas will not succeed generally at 126-128 pace except rarely on “supportive pitches”.

I think to say Abbas will succeed on some Asian pitches you have to consider his stellar record in Pakistan. And also think how a similar bowler, Philander did on the subcontinent/uae. Has a couple of 5 for in UAE in 2013. Just like Abbas. If there is a coach who can appreciate abbas it’s got to be Aqib. They are very similar bowlers. Often in 1992 in England it was Aqib who would come in first change and get the breakthrough.

 

[Hawkeye]

I think Aqib sees a version of himself in Abbas.

Slow, trundling pace but can move the ball.

That’s why he brought him back and a good decision for a place like SA.

It’s often a recipe for disaster on lifeless flat pitches but can be very helpful under true bowling conditions. SA and England to be specific.

Anyway our other “fast” bowlers are truly toothless like Naseem Shah.

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

He’s not forgotten. He was awful in New Zealand series a couple of years ago as he was returning from injury. Rightly dropped.

The only thing PCB Did wrong is not wait for him to be fully fit before returning for test cricket. But they have a history of messing up bowlers.

You say mould of what a bowler is. I guess Pakistan like to think they have fast bowlers but they don’t particularly. For shohaib, Sami and wahab there are many bowlers from other countries that can hit 90-92mph. Even Shohaib’s average speed would drop considerably after a couple of overs. He couldn’t sustain 92-93mph for long. Hitting 92-93 mph is not unusual. Maintaining line and length at such speeds is.

But for Pakistan there have been a number of bowlers who had amazing domestic records but not given the credit they deserved just because the speed gun said so. Tanvir Ahmed and Samiullahkhan Niazi were two carbon copies of Abbas. Introduced too late, discarded too early often for young prodigy that would sell his country for a few dollars.

You don't drop someone after a couple of bad series when they have performed the way Abbas did. It was their infatuation with pace yet again. With Naseem and Shaheen coming in, and Hasan Ali being there they just decided to move on from him. My guess is that they thought that Hasan is also seam bowler with more pace.

Absolutely. That is evident by the fact that not a single Pakistani fast-bowler since Wasim and Waqar has even picked up 200 test wickets. The issue of speeds dropping has also been a recurring one for Pakistani fast-bowlers. Wahab is only one that comes to mind from recent memory that could maintain his pace across spells and really bent his back on those placid UAE surfaces. But in general, he was a mediocre bowler, and towards the end he wasn't interested in playing test cricket either.

Yeah, I remember people going on about Samiullah Niazi back in the late 2000s. I believe he did play in ODIs but was dropped after a few matches. Tanvir Ahmed did well in UAE initially but age was definitely an issue with him when he was brought in. Also, back then Pakistan still had more bowlers to choose from: Gul, Junaid, Wahab, Cheema. Later, Imran Khan Jr., Rahat Ali were playing a similar role to Abbas as well in UAE.

 

[Abid Z]

You don't drop someone after a couple of bad series when they have performed the way Abbas did. It was their infatuation with pace yet again. With Naseem and Shaheen coming in, and Hasan Ali being there they just decided to move on from him. My guess is that they thought that Hasan is also seam bowler with more pace.

Absolutely. That is evident by the fact that not a single Pakistani fast-bowler since Wasim and Waqar has even picked up 200 test wickets. The issue of speeds dropping has also been a recurring one for Pakistani fast-bowlers. Wahab is only one that comes to mind from recent memory that could maintain his pace across spells and really bent his back on those placid UAE surfaces. But in general, he was a mediocre bowler, and towards the end he wasn't interested in playing test cricket either.

Yeah, I remember people going on about Samiullah Niazi back in the late 2000s. I believe he did play in ODIs but was dropped after a few matches. Tanvir Ahmed did well in UAE initially but age was definitely an issue with him when he was brought in. Also, back then Pakistan still had more bowlers to choose from: Gul, Junaid, Wahab, Cheema. Later, Imran Khan Jr., Rahat Ali were playing a similar role to Abbas as well in UAE.

You absolutely drop somebody after a couple of bad series. 2 bad series are about 4-6 tests. That’s too long to be rubbish.

A case in point you mention is Gul. He was rightly dropped in 2010 in favour of wahab as the 3rd seamer because he offered something penetrative alongside amir and Asif in 2010. And then ajmal in favour of Danish. So it’s about the composition of the whole attack. You need it tight at both ends all the time for sustained pressure. If you have a third seamer bowling 90mph or a good spinner that also works. It’s about utilising the old ball with a flat seam.

Yes wahab was ultimately rubbish too but that’s because the attack had to be rebuilt after 2010 spot fixing.

So they went for Cheema tanvir junaid 2010-2014. Then junaid was ground down and they started looking elsewhere. Rahat, wahab Imran khan etc. In that context it was thé worst attack. Though they had speed and swing they were all wayward or just ground down bowling on dustbowls. No control.

I guess the point is if you pick a tight line and length seamer yes you have to back him but also support him with the right kind of partners at the other end.

Samiullah/tanvir partnership for Karachi alongside Sami was awesome for many years but I couldn’t see as not televised in England. (Cricinfo tells me)

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

You absolutely drop somebody after a couple of bad series. 2 bad series are about 4-6 tests. That’s too long to be rubbish.

This type of thinking is one of the prime reasons why we haven't been able to find reliable fast-bowlers. What's worse is that someone like Hasan Ali can be given the lope rope despite being rubbish for a number of years, while Abbas gets dropped after a couple of bad series.

A case in point you mention is Gul. He was rightly dropped in 2010 in favour of wahab as the 3rd seamer because he offered something penetrative alongside amir and Asif in 2010. And then ajmal in favour of Danish. So it’s about the composition of the whole attack. You need it tight at both ends all the time for sustained pressure. If you have a third seamer bowling 90mph or a good spinner that also works. It’s about utilising the old ball with a flat seam.

Yes wahab was ultimately rubbish too but that’s because the attack had to be rebuilt after 2010 spot fixing.

So they went for Cheema tanvir junaid 2010-2014. Then junaid was ground down and they started looking elsewhere. Rahat, wahab Imran khan etc. In that context it was thé worst attack. Though they had speed and swing they were all wayward or just ground down bowling on dustbowls. No control.

I guess the point is if you pick a tight line and length seamer yes you have to back him but also support him with the right kind of partners at the other end.
Samiullah/tanvir partnership for Karachi alongside Sami was awesome for many years but I couldn’t see as not televised in England. (Cricinfo tells me)

They had a role to play on those UAE pitches which was a holding/supporting job. In that area they were okay, but guys like Imran Khan, Rahat Ali were never going to be successful outside UAE...as they found on subsequent tours to Australia, South Africa, England. Among these Junaid was probably the best prospect but like numerous Pakistani fast-bowlers before and after him, he was never the same after his injury.

 

[Bewal Express]

I think we have short memories. Abbas was dropped because he was very average( to put it mildly). He needs grass on the wicket and a bit of uneven bounce. When he doesn't have that he is pretty useiess

 

[Abid Z]

This type of thinking is one of the prime reasons why we haven't been able to find reliable fast-bowlers. What's worse is that someone like Hasan Ali can be given the lope rope despite being rubbish for a number of years, while Abbas gets dropped after a couple of bad series.


They had a role to play on those UAE pitches which was a holding/supporting job. In that area they were okay, but guys like Imran Khan, Rahat Ali were never going to be successful outside UAE...as they found on subsequent tours to Australia, South Africa, England. Among these Junaid was probably the best prospect but like numerous Pakistani fast-bowlers before and after him, he was never the same after his injury.

A couple of series are enough to drop a bowler (not batsman). This I absolutely stand by. There are many reasons why we don’t have a squad of good bowlers, dropping them too soon isn’t one of them.

Let me just explain something as I’ve been watching this circus since the early 80’s. The point is Pakistan never have a squad of bowlers to rotate and you often get the same bowlers in all formats run into the ground and only then do management bother to develop a half baked rookie who doesn’t know anything about bowling but might have a bit of speed then they run him into the ground. SSA and Naseem being a case in point.

But we are discussing line and length bowlers. So here goes.

In 2004 we had the fastest bowlers in cricket in Shohaib and Sami plus a good spinner in Danish and some newbies emerging like gul and rana. We went to Australia and very quickly our speedsters reduced one of the best batting lineups in the history of the game to 4 or 5 down. Then they got injured and the Aussies feasted on one of our line and length bowlers. The remaining matches were lost heavily and this poor bowler had figures of something like a solitary wicket for a million runs.

But by 2005/6 on the dust bowls of Pakistan this bowler remerged as a guy who made the ball talk and people stood up and noticed Mohammed Asif as he ran through an ashes winning England. Gul got injured , rana suffered oathgate banishment but by 2008 we had Asif Gul an emerging amir and ajmal. Rao, shahid nazir, Sami shohaib. So you could say it was the last time there was a squad of bowlers to choose from. Some better than others naturally.

Of course we know what happened in 2010 I won’t go into that but we were essentially reduced to only junaid, cheema, tanvir and the like. But because we mostly played in UAE we were able to paper over the cracks with a spin heavy attack.

Since that time up to now we have never had any 6-7 bowlers who could compete for 2-3 spots (the others rightly taken by a spinner or all rounder)

So when we have line and length bowlers we have to consider all the backups and the whole composition of the squad. It’s folly to think that one bowler can just rip through a lineup and win a test. Just look at Australia. Hazlewood is injured and Boland has taken his spot and arguably is one of the best bowlers in the world. He’s match ready and hungry. Look at South Africa. Their two best players picking up 4 and 5 wickets respectively have been rested as they want depth in their squad. Broad and Anderson retired and England have match ready bowlers taking their place.

Yet we grind down the same bowlers again and again mistakenly thinking that success in limited overs equates to the same discipline in tests. It absolutely doesn’t. This is why none of our bowlers who were great in t20’s or limited overs can transition to tests. They just don’t have experience of bowling and the minute we see their limitations we should drop them so they come back hungry like Asif did. But give them a taste of the standard required and let them develop at their own pace rather than rushing them.

Hasan Ali, wahab, rahat, amir (?) shohail tanvir etc all come from limited overs and were always bound to fail yet were preferred over line and length bowlers like abbas and Mir Hamza.

For once though I’m seeing real thought put into development of a squad. It would have been so tempting to play SSA but I’m glad he’s rested. The next test series will be really interesting.

I still think Pak will win this test.

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

A couple of series are enough to drop a bowler (not batsman). This I absolutely stand by. There are many reasons why we don’t have a squad of good bowlers, dropping them too soon isn’t one of them.

Let me just explain something as I’ve been watching this circus since the early 80’s. The point is Pakistan never have a squad of bowlers to rotate and you often get the same bowlers in all formats run into the ground and only then do management bother to develop a half baked rookie who doesn’t know anything about bowling but might have a bit of speed then they run him into the ground. SSA and Naseem being a case in point.

But we are discussing line and length bowlers. So here goes.

In 2004 we had the fastest bowlers in cricket in Shohaib and Sami plus a good spinner in Danish and some newbies emerging like gul and rana. We went to Australia and very quickly our speedsters reduced one of the best batting lineups in the history of the game to 4 or 5 down. Then they got injured and the Aussies feasted on one of our line and length bowlers. The remaining matches were lost heavily and this poor bowler had figures of something like a solitary wicket for a million runs.

But by 2005/6 on the dust bowls of Pakistan this bowler remerged as a guy who made the ball talk and people stood up and noticed Mohammed Asif as he ran through an ashes winning England. Gul got injured , rana suffered oathgate banishment but by 2008 we had Asif Gul an emerging amir and ajmal. Rao, shahid nazir, Sami shohaib. So you could say it was the last time there was a squad of bowlers to choose from. Some better than others naturally.

Of course we know what happened in 2010 I won’t go into that but we were essentially reduced to only junaid, cheema, tanvir and the like. But because we mostly played in UAE we were able to paper over the cracks with a spin heavy attack.

Since that time up to now we have never had any 6-7 bowlers who could compete for 2-3 spots (the others rightly taken by a spinner or all rounder)

So when we have line and length bowlers we have to consider all the backups and the whole composition of the squad. It’s folly to think that one bowler can just rip through a lineup and win a test. Just look at Australia. Hazlewood is injured and Boland has taken his spot and arguably is one of the best bowlers in the world. He’s match ready and hungry. Look at South Africa. Their two best players picking up 4 and 5 wickets respectively have been rested as they want depth in their squad. Broad and Anderson retired and England have match ready bowlers taking their place.

Yet we grind down the same bowlers again and again mistakenly thinking that success in limited overs equates to the same discipline in tests. It absolutely doesn’t. This is why none of our bowlers who were great in t20’s or limited overs can transition to tests. They just don’t have experience of bowling and the minute we see their limitations we should drop them so they come back hungry like Asif did. But give them a taste of the standard required and let them develop at their own pace rather than rushing them.

Hasan Ali, wahab, rahat, amir (?) shohail tanvir etc all come from limited overs and were always bound to fail yet were preferred over line and length bowlers like abbas and Mir Hamza.

For once though I’m seeing real thought put into development of a squad. It would have been so tempting to play SSA but I’m glad he’s rested. The next test series will be really interesting.

I still think Pak will win this test.

Great post. Greatly appreciate your opinion, which is clearly based on seeing this s**tshow firsthand. I agree with just about everything you said here and can relate to most of this because I saw most of it firsthand too. The quality of a side is evident by its bench strength, of which Pakistan has none. And rarely in recent history have the stocks been so bare. For a country, with such a proud fast-bowling history, this should worry us. But I don't see any attempts being made to even examine the root cause of the problem, let alone to go about fixing it. So I don't really see things changing. We will always be hoping that some great fast-bowler comes around who is so naturally gifted that he succeeds in spite of the system, rather than because of it. Only for us to ruin him by running him into the ground and mismanaging him when he gets injured. Question, is how many fast-bowlers will be waste before we finally open our eyes? I keep reminding everyone of this fact that no Pakistani fast-bowler since Waqar and Wasim has even taken 200 test wickets. That is a seriously embarrassing stat for a country that has produced so many gifted fast-bowlers over the years. Even Ishant Sharma has nearly 250 test wickets!

The rest of the world are so diligent when it comes to managing the workload of their fast-bowlers that every bowl that they may potentially bowl in any given year or season is counted to ensure that they are able to perform optimally and are not wasting their energy playing T20Is against a New Zealand side made up of guys who couldn't get an IPL contract.

That said, I don't think Pakistan will win this test. And I don't think the next series will be that interesting either. Because it will be another case of us tapering over our fast-bowling gap. Noman and Sajid will run through West Indies and you will probably have a single seamer playing. Then we will have to wait a year to play tests again and the problem will stay the same.

 

[Farabi]

A couple of series are enough to drop a bowler (not batsman). This I absolutely stand by. There are many reasons why we don’t have a squad of good bowlers, dropping them too soon isn’t one of them.

Let me just explain something as I’ve been watching this circus since the early 80’s. The point is Pakistan never have a squad of bowlers to rotate and you often get the same bowlers in all formats run into the ground and only then do management bother to develop a half baked rookie who doesn’t know anything about bowling but might have a bit of speed then they run him into the ground. SSA and Naseem being a case in point.

But we are discussing line and length bowlers. So here goes.

In 2004 we had the fastest bowlers in cricket in Shohaib and Sami plus a good spinner in Danish and some newbies emerging like gul and rana. We went to Australia and very quickly our speedsters reduced one of the best batting lineups in the history of the game to 4 or 5 down. Then they got injured and the Aussies feasted on one of our line and length bowlers. The remaining matches were lost heavily and this poor bowler had figures of something like a solitary wicket for a million runs.

But by 2005/6 on the dust bowls of Pakistan this bowler remerged as a guy who made the ball talk and people stood up and noticed Mohammed Asif as he ran through an ashes winning England. Gul got injured , rana suffered oathgate banishment but by 2008 we had Asif Gul an emerging amir and ajmal. Rao, shahid nazir, Sami shohaib. So you could say it was the last time there was a squad of bowlers to choose from. Some better than others naturally.

Of course we know what happened in 2010 I won’t go into that but we were essentially reduced to only junaid, cheema, tanvir and the like. But because we mostly played in UAE we were able to paper over the cracks with a spin heavy attack.

Since that time up to now we have never had any 6-7 bowlers who could compete for 2-3 spots (the others rightly taken by a spinner or all rounder)

So when we have line and length bowlers we have to consider all the backups and the whole composition of the squad. It’s folly to think that one bowler can just rip through a lineup and win a test. Just look at Australia. Hazlewood is injured and Boland has taken his spot and arguably is one of the best bowlers in the world. He’s match ready and hungry. Look at South Africa. Their two best players picking up 4 and 5 wickets respectively have been rested as they want depth in their squad. Broad and Anderson retired and England have match ready bowlers taking their place.

Yet we grind down the same bowlers again and again mistakenly thinking that success in limited overs equates to the same discipline in tests. It absolutely doesn’t. This is why none of our bowlers who were great in t20’s or limited overs can transition to tests. They just don’t have experience of bowling and the minute we see their limitations we should drop them so they come back hungry like Asif did. But give them a taste of the standard required and let them develop at their own pace rather than rushing them.

Hasan Ali, wahab, rahat, amir (?) shohail tanvir etc all come from limited overs and were always bound to fail yet were preferred over line and length bowlers like abbas and Mir Hamza.

For once though I’m seeing real thought put into development of a squad. It would have been so tempting to play SSA but I’m glad he’s rested. The next test series will be really interesting.

I still think Pak will win this test.

**I’d like to nominate this post for POTW—fantastic insights!**

It’s clear you’ve been following cricket since the early ’80s, and you’ve seen these patterns play out repeatedly. I’ve been watching since the mid-’90s, and I completely share your thesis.

It’s refreshing to see Aqib Javed’s approach, seemingly prioritizing a balanced squad of bowlers rather than exhausting the same 2-3. That’s a much-needed change.

What should be non-negotiable for bowlers are control, variation, and match fitness—with pace as a bonus. Unfortunately, we’ve flipped this, making pace essential and treating the rest as optional. This mindset affects team management and fans alike.

Test bowling thrives on pressure. Mir Hamza, Abbas, and Agha Salman built that pressure well, but others let it slip. If all bowlers focus on maintaining pressure, wickets will naturally follow. But to do that, you need control, variation and fitness.

I also think we could’ve won both Tests with Nauman Ali in the squad. Centurion’s up-and-down pitch was perfect for his skills, especially against the tail. Without him, and after losing Saim Ayub, winning this Test feels like a long shot.

 

[Farabi]

Great post. Greatly appreciate your opinion, which is clearly based on seeing this s**tshow firsthand. I agree with just about everything you said here and can relate to most of this because I saw most of it firsthand too. The quality of a side is evident by its bench strength, of which Pakistan has none. And rarely in recent history have the stocks been so bare. For a country, with such a proud fast-bowling history, this should worry us. But I don't see any attempts being made to even examine the root cause of the problem, let alone to go about fixing it. So I don't really see things changing. We will always be hoping that some great fast-bowler comes around who is so naturally gifted that he succeeds in spite of the system, rather than because of it. Only for us to ruin him by running him into the ground and mismanaging him when he gets injured. Question, is how many fast-bowlers will be waste before we finally open our eyes? I keep reminding everyone of this fact that no Pakistani fast-bowler since Waqar and Wasim has even taken 200 test wickets. That is a seriously embarrassing stat for a country that has produced so many gifted fast-bowlers over the years. Even Ishant Sharma has nearly 250 test wickets!

The rest of the world are so diligent when it comes to managing the workload of their fast-bowlers that every bowl that they may potentially bowl in any given year or season is counted to ensure that they are able to perform optimally and are not wasting their energy playing T20Is against a New Zealand side made up of guys who couldn't get an IPL contract.

That said, I don't think Pakistan will win this test. And I don't think the next series will be that interesting either. Because it will be another case of us tapering over our fast-bowling gap. Noman and Sajid will run through West Indies and you will probably have a single seamer playing.

It seems like you, me, and @Abid Z are on the same page here.

The only real solution is to strengthen the domestic system and reward consistent performers. Anything else is just noise and destined to fail.

The raw talent pipeline exists, but the real challenges lie in test match bowler identification, injury management, and workload management. A key piece of the puzzle is also better compensation for fast bowlers through targeted contracts.

As you put it so well: “We’re banking on naturally gifted bowlers to succeed in spite of the system rather than because o it.” That mindset has to change.

Right now, Akif Javed and Arshad Iqbal are the new shiny toys everyone’s talking about. But without systemic change, it feels like we’re heading for yet another rinse-and-repeat cycle.

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

It seems like you, me, and @Abid Z are on the same page here.

The only real solution is to strengthen the domestic system and reward consistent performers. Anything else is just noise and destined to fail.

The raw talent pipeline exists, but the real challenges lie in test match bowler identification, injury management, and workload management. A key piece of the puzzle is also better compensation for fast bowlers through targeted contracts.

As you put it so well: “We’re banking on naturally gifted bowlers to succeed in spite of the system rather than because o it.” That mindset has to change.

Right now, Akif Javed and Arshad Iqbal are the new shiny toys everyone’s talking about. But without systemic change, it feels like we’re heading for yet another rinse-and-repeat cycle.

That's the thing though, how do you strengthen the domestic system when just the bloody format changes every season? Some season there are regions, some season there are departments and regions...someone comes in trying to replicate the Australian system, while someone else comes in trying to satisfy the vested interests. It's an absolute clusterf**k and this has been going on for decades now. There are so many problems emanating from just the internal structure of the PCB and the BoG, of which alot of these vested interests are a part of. And then on top of that you have T20 cricket and our complete failure to understand how badly it is damaging the temperament of our cricketers, and serving as a barrier for them to be proper fast-bowlers.

T20 cricket in itself is not the problem. It is a natural phenomenon that is happening all over the world. How we interact with it/approach it matters though. And how can you expect anything when you have braindead ideas like the Pakistan Junior League coming out of the PCB because well, its just that easy for a clown like Ramiz Raja to become PCB chairman and institute these kind of nonsensical initiatives with the drop of a hat. But anyways, this is a long discussion probably for another thread.

 

[Farabi]

That's the thing though, how do you strengthen the domestic system when just the bloody format changes every season? Some season there are regions, some season there are departments and regions...someone comes in trying to replicate the Australian system, while someone else comes in trying to satisfy the vested interests. It's an absolute clusterf**k and this has been going on for decades now. There are so many problems emanating from just the internal structure of the PCB and the BoG, of which alot of these vested interests are a part of. And then on top of that you have T20 cricket and our complete failure to understand how badly it is damaging the temperament of our cricketers, and serving as a barrier for them to be proper fast-bowlers.

T20 cricket in itself is not the problem. It is a natural phenomenon that is happening all over the world. How we interact with it/approach it matters though. And how can you expect anything when you have braindead ideas like the Pakistan Junior League coming out of the PCB because well, its just that easy for a clown like Ramiz Raja to become PCB chairman and institute these kind of nonsensical initiatives with the drop of a hat. But anyways, this is a long discussion probably for another thread.

I agree with everything you’ve said here.

My view is that despite all the changes at the domestic level, Pakistan can still field a competitive test team in the near future. The idea that domestic churn is holding us back is exaggerated—it does have a big impact, but with some strategic tweaks, we can still achieve a lot in spite of this churn.

As a nation, we often focus too much on criticizing “the system,” which, yes, is problematic, but there's still plenty we can accomplish by being just 10% smarter and more disciplined.

The biggest change that needs to happen is shifting from “make-believe” thinking to evidence and data-driven decisions. This means rewarding domestic performers, regardless of where they come from or how they look. The shortcuts need to be blocked immediately. Our “awaam” is full of myths and clichés, and they’re too easily swayed by the next 18- or 20-year-old. This needs to end—if they want to make it, they need to prove themselves in domestic cricket just like everyone else. This itself is a strong signal.

I know I might get flak for this, but I honestly believe that with players like Mir Hamza, Abbas, KS, and Nauman Ali, Pakistan can still make it to the next WTC final. These guys are domestic veterans, and I trust them more than I trust any “make-believe” pace sensation. We need to stick with them and protect them from a pace-obsessed nation that doesn't understand the basics of test cricket. What we need to do is get rid of any bowler who continuously releases pressure, and I think Amir Jamal and Naseem Shah are in that bucket.

Nauman Ali should also be playing overseas. SENA teams struggle against spin, and even Agha was effective. Nauman Ali would’ve been a handful in this test.

At the same time, we should look at Mohammad Musa. He’s got pace and has dominated the domestic circuit recently.

With just these small tweaks, we can be a competitive team. That should be our goal right now.

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

I agree with everything you’ve said here.

My view is that despite all the changes at the domestic level, Pakistan can still field a competitive test team in the near future. The idea that domestic churn is holding us back is exaggerated—it does have a big impact, but with some strategic tweaks, we can still achieve a lot in spite of this churn.

As a nation, we often focus too much on criticizing “the system,” which, yes, is problematic, but there's still plenty we can accomplish by being just 10% smarter and more disciplined.

The biggest change that needs to happen is shifting from “make-believe” thinking to evidence and data-driven decisions. This means rewarding domestic performers, regardless of where they come from or how they look. The shortcuts need to be blocked immediately. Our “awaam” is full of myths and clichés, and they’re too easily swayed by the next 18- or 20-year-old. This needs to end—if they want to make it, they need to prove themselves in domestic cricket just like everyone else. This itself is a strong signal.

I know I might get flak for this, but I honestly believe that with players like Mir Hamza, Abbas, KS, and Nauman Ali, Pakistan can still make it to the next WTC final. These guys are domestic veterans, and I trust them more than I trust any “make-believe” pace sensation. We need to stick with them and protect them from a pace-obsessed nation that doesn't understand the basics of test cricket. What we need to do is get rid of any bowler who continuously releases pressure, and I think Amir Jamal and Naseem Shah are in that bucket.

Nauman Ali should also be playing overseas. SENA teams struggle against spin, and even Agha was effective. Nauman Ali would’ve been a handful in this test.

At the same time, we should look at Mohammad Musa. He’s got pace and has dominated the domestic circuit recently.

With just these small tweaks, we can be a competitive team. That should be our goal right now.

I think you are looking at the problem all wrong. The focus shouldn't be on whether we have just enough to potentially be successful provided our WTC cycle fixtures are favorable (we blew that opportunity too btw in 2021-23). It should be about cultivating a team of players that have a high-level skill-set and possess the ability to succeed in multiple different foreign conditions. The simple reality is that we do not have a team like that right now. While fans are a bit over obsessed with pace, that doesn't change the fact that you need atleast one out-and-out fast-bowler in your team that bowls close 140 (or close to it) and can reliably deliver for you in pace-friendly conditions. It's about having batsmen that can score in these types of conditions, where the ball moves around far more unpredictably than it does at home. Pakistan have good players but they are either not there yet, struggling for form, or struggling with fitness. The consistency in performances is simply not there. They have ways to go before they can even call themselves a good test team.

 

[Abid Z]

Thank you. Really appreciate your comments. I would say that I’m an eternal optimist and I do see some important developments with regards to separate roles in the squad and competition for the last 4 slots.

One of them of course is that there is no denying we are going down a spin heavy route. Full time spin we have is good. Part time spin we have is excellent. (Agha, Saim, KG)

Secondly there are a few bowlers like Mohammed Ali, Mir hamza and abbas who will have to compete with each other as the line and length bowlers. This grouping has become clear.

Then there are the swing bowlers Khurram and Naseem possibly SSA (who can be in both categories). They are quite identical only 1 ks or NS can play otherwise the attack becomes one dimensional. (They are both injury prone but they can compete with each other.

Then there are speedsters like Husnain and Rauf who look like strictly short format bowlers. (They are not as good as they think but that’s another point)

Then there are a few knocking on the door of selection and going through some form of skill development. Abbas Afridi and Wasim Jr. a little raw of course but will need a season or two.

There are others from under 19 but I haven’t seen them. What it’s beginning to show is that naqvi was right to get Aqib involved and get rid of the foreign coaches as the foundations of a squad were not there and we have to get that right first before anything else. So although I think highly of GK and Gillespie I think Aqib is showing real courage and vision and it’s right that selectors understand the players at regional level and their development. This actually hasn’t happened before. Regions almost seemed separate to the national set up.

We will see. I think first there is a test to get through. We just pushed the table toppers very close on a very tough wicket. Mir Hamza needs to tighten up though.

 

[Farabi]

I think you are looking at the problem all wrong. The focus shouldn't be on whether we have just enough to potentially be successful provided our WTC cycle fixtures are favorable (we blew that opportunity too btw in 2021-23). It should be about cultivating a team of players that have a high-level skill-set and possess the ability to succeed in multiple different foreign conditions. The simple reality is that we do not have a team like that right now. While fans are a bit over obsessed with pace, that doesn't change the fact that you need atleast one out-and-out fast-bowler in your team that bowls close 140 (or close to it) and can reliably deliver for you in pace-friendly conditions. It's about having batsmen that can score in these types of conditions, where the ball moves around far more unpredictably than it does at home. Pakistan have good players but they are either not there yet, struggling for form, or struggling with fitness. The consistency in performances is simply not there. They have ways to go before they can even call themselves a good test team.

I completely agree with you. But there is a caveat.

What I’m saying is that nothing is stopping us from making the most of what we have right now.

The focus should be on moving from being irrelevant in the WTC final to actually winning it. That alone would be progress and a real achievement.

Does that make us the best Test team in the world? No. Does it paper over some cracks? Absolutely.

If the goal is to become a top 3 team like Australia, England or India, then yes, systemic change is a must.

But in the meantime, we shouldn’t use the lack of systemic change as an excuse to avoid making the smaller tweaks that can elevate us from a D team to a B team.

As they say, you have to crawl before you can walk. In Pakistani context, it’s victories that will buy you the time to make those systemic changes anyway.

 

[Farabi]

Thank you. Really appreciate your comments. I would say that I’m an eternal optimist and I do see some important developments with regards to separate roles in the squad and competition for the last 4 slots.

One of them of course is that there is no denying we are going down a spin heavy route. Full time spin we have is good. Part time spin we have is excellent. (Agha, Saim, KG)

Secondly there are a few bowlers like Mohammed Ali, Mir hamza and abbas who will have to compete with each other as the line and length bowlers. This grouping has become clear.

Then there are the swing bowlers Khurram and Naseem possibly SSA (who can be in both categories). They are quite identical only 1 ks or NS can play otherwise the attack becomes one dimensional. (They are both injury prone but they can compete with each other.

Then there are speedsters like Husnain and Rauf who look like strictly short format bowlers. (They are not as good as they think but that’s another point)

Then there are a few knocking on the door of selection and going through some form of skill development. Abbas Afridi and Wasim Jr. a little raw of course but will need a season or two.

There are others from under 19 but I haven’t seen them. What it’s beginning to show is that naqvi was right to get Aqib involved and get rid of the foreign coaches as the foundations of a squad were not there and we have to get that right first before anything else. So although I think highly of GK and Gillespie I think Aqib is showing real courage and vision and it’s right that selectors understand the players at regional level and their development. This actually hasn’t happened before. Regions almost seemed separate to the national set up.

We will see. I think first there is a test to get through. We just pushed the table toppers very close on a very tough wicket. Mir Hamza needs to tighten up though.

I agree with everything you’ve said, but I want to emphasize one point: “line and length” isn’t a separate skillset for pacers—it’s the *foundation*. It’s the bare minimum requirement for a Test bowler. If you’re not consistently tight and don’t have variations, pace alone won’t save you.

Think about it: there are countless bowlers in world cricket who can hit 135-140 kph, the same speed as Dale Steyn. But what separates Steyn is his accuracy, ability to swing the ball, and tactical brilliance. Without those, raw speed is meaningless.

The “speedster” category only works if a bowler is also disciplined, like Mark Wood or Mitchell Starc. Starc can bowl 90 mph, but he combines that with accuracy and sharp variations. Even he gets punished when he’s off his line. We’ve seen this repeatedly with Wahab Riaz and Mohammad Sami—both had express pace but were often expensive and ineffective.

If Hasnain, Rauf, or Akif want to succeed in Test cricket, they need to prove they can handle the format. Like Musa, they should commit to a season of first-class cricket to refine their skills, show control, and learn how to adapt to different situations. Otherwise, they risk being another name in the long list of "fast but forgettable" pacers.

 

[sweep_shot]

There is no active pacer right now who can be compared to great Glenn McGrath.

Abbas was never at the same level as McGrath and Asif. Perhaps Vernon only.

 

[kron]

There is no active pacer right now who can be compared to great Glenn McGrath.

Abbas was never at the same level as McGrath and Asif. Perhaps Vernon only.

Lol tulla bowler philander is no where near any pace of modern era let alone mcgrath.

 

[Bhaijaan]

Mohammad McGrath Abbas needs to help bowl Southern Afrikaan out before they get to 500

 

[Ab Fan]

Mohammad Abbas is a Shardul Thakur level bowler.

Mohammad Asif is Bhuvi Kumar level bowler.

 

[atreus]

McGrath being here is an insult to McGrath's name

 

[Abid Z]

I agree with everything you’ve said, but I want to emphasize one point: “line and length” isn’t a separate skillset for pacers—it’s the *foundation*. It’s the bare minimum requirement for a Test bowler. If you’re not consistently tight and don’t have variations, pace alone won’t save you.

Think about it: there are countless bowlers in world cricket who can hit 135-140 kph, the same speed as Dale Steyn. But what separates Steyn is his accuracy, ability to swing the ball, and tactical brilliance. Without those, raw speed is meaningless.

The “speedster” category only works if a bowler is also disciplined, like Mark Wood or Mitchell Starc. Starc can bowl 90 mph, but he combines that with accuracy and sharp variations. Even he gets punished when he’s off his line. We’ve seen this repeatedly with Wahab Riaz and Mohammad Sami—both had express pace but were often expensive and ineffective.

If Hasnain, Rauf, or Akif want to succeed in Test cricket, they need to prove they can handle the format. Like Musa, they should commit to a season of first-class cricket to refine their skills, show control, and learn how to adapt to different situations. Otherwise, they risk being another name in the long list of "fast but forgettable" pacers.

I agree with you line and length is a prerequisite for any bowler regardless of the category I put them in. But I was thinking how to develop an all rounded attack and who should compete with who in what particular spot given that we have two world class spinners.

There are genuine medium line and length bowlers that should compete with each other. Abbas is exactly this. Mir hamza needs to step up. History tells us that however good Aaqib was the minute azhar mehmood and Razzaq turned up Aqib was rightly discarded. They just offered everything Aqib did but so much more.

Then there are swing bowlers who should compete with each other. KS AND Naseem for instance. You can’t compare Naseem with abbas but you can say KS offers better control to partner Abbas. Naseem needs to step up.

When looking at the composition of the attack these two categories should be assessed as such but they are not mutually exclusive. As amir and SSA prove and you mention STARC. That’s a good example. A cricket coach is constantly looking for the STARC type bowler but they are the product of real graft. Steyn was awful in his initial outings. GUL Is an example where playing all formats can quickly mess up your line and length.

The kind of bowler you mention STARC and steyn are elite level indeed. They have speed, swing, line and length and consistency, everything. Very few bowlers in the history of the game have that. They were also years in the making with good captains.

Then you have bowlers like Anderson and Asif. Which is what this thread is about. Asif had swing and seam control and a brain but low speed like Anderson. These are truly once in a generation bowlers but they are also developed slowly. Anderson from 2003-2006 was dropped only to re emerge later as undroppable.

Asif and abbas are completely different categories of bowler. Immaculate Line and length is the only thing they have in common. Asif had control over swing. SAMI for instance had no control over swing and often appeared more wayward than he actually was. Asif was always irreplaceable. Abbas will always be vulnerable.

I have never seen a bowler in Pakistan like Asif. What really sets him apart is he was constantly chatting to his partners and setting up batters even when he wasn’t getting wickets. ABBAS just goes through the motions. I see SSA having a chat in LO with RAUF but nothing in tests. He just doesn’t have the experience. Shan can’t read the match. He should get support from a bowler who is a captain in his own right. ASIF, Anderson , steyn , Cummins they all have this swagger from years of graft. Naseem and SSA have false confidence.

None of the Pakistani bowlers nowadays look like they are setting their own fields or thinking how to set up batters. This is truly tragic. Too much emphasis is placed on a weak captain or coach who are constantly worried about their own spots. This short termism is really hurting Pak cricket.

But I’m an optimist and I see Mohammed Ali as somebody who will truly put pressure on abbas. Healthy competition amongst the best bowlers is really what Pak cricket needs. And different squads for different formats. I think we have pretty much got the spots from 1-7 plugged though weak at the top.

Once we get the right bowlers then you can truly make them compete against international stars. Eg is SSA really as good as STARC? It’s a laughable proposition but one day it ought to have merit.

 

[Saurav]

What happened to desi Philander?