How will Younis Khan's legacy be remembered?

[Muhammad10]

How will you reflect upon Younis Khan's illustrious cricketing career in the years following his retirement?

 

[Mamoon]

From a Pakistani perspective:

A tremendous Test batsman who played a pivotal role in various memorable wins. For the last half of his career, he was the man who carried the batting lineup. In addition, a World T20 winning captain but a terrible and selfish ODI cricketer.

From a neutral perspective:

A flat track bully who was never good enough to score against lateral movement. However, he had a penchant for huge scores when the conditions favored. Nonetheless, didn't have the aura and the ability to become one of the central figures in world cricket in spite of having ATG stats.

Was below batsmen like Tendulkar, Ponting, Lara, Dravid, Smith, Cook, Hayden, Sangakkara, Kallis, Pietersen, Clarke, Amla and de Villiers in his era, and the younger generation batsmen like Kohli, Smith, Kane and Root surpassed him as well in terms of stature. Ultimately, for the neutral/non-Pakistani fan, he doesn't really have legacy, and hence not an ATG. He is in the same league as someone like Mahela - a great for his nation, but not an ATG.

 

[Zaz]

Probably as pakistans best test batsman and one of the very best of his era

 

[shaz619]

One of The GREATEST of all time. PERIOD.

 

[Hasan123]

Will be remembered as a brilliant player of spin and scoring in pressure situations. Struggled out of his comfort zone which prevents him from being ATG for me. A Pakistani great no doubt.

 

[Napa]

Very good job reaching 10K. Fantastic player.

 

[shaz619]

Very good job reaching 10K. Fantastic player.

Thank you sir

 

[superman]

A atg test bat, selfish and below mediocre odi player, t20 wc winning captain

 

[Bilal7]

One of the greatest test batsmen of all-time and the second ATG batsman from the great cricketing nation of Pakistan. A clean, hard-working, pious, helpful team man who despite his massive ego, never acted arrogantly. Yes, he wanted to be praised for his work but that is understandable given that he saw the likes of Sachin and Dravid getting their feet kissed in the neighboring country.

His legacy as a legendary cricketer cannot be denied by anyone except the most ignorant and hateful. Still remember how the Australian commentator introduced him when he came out to bat for the first time at the Gabba "The legend of Younis Khan walks out to the crease...". Gave me some massive chills.

 

[TalentSpotterPk]

Grratest Pakistan Test batsman.

The only one who developed young batsman, helped and nurtured them.

Partnerships Guru.

Fighter, Hardworker, Honest.

Nightmare for Hamsayaaz in Test Cricket.

 

[Buffet]

A very good longer format batsman and a poor ODI batsman.

Temperament to score big runs, when he got going , is a huge factor with him.

 

[Stewie]

One of the very best. There will always be questions whether he is better than Miandad, Inzi, Yousaf, Anwar, etc but we should not forget above all his extremely important contributions to the team when we were on a significant shortage of batting talent.

 

[New Yorker]

From a Pakistani perspective:

A tremendous Test batsman who played a pivotal role in various memorable wins. For the last half of his career, he was the man who carried the batting lineup. In addition, a World T20 winning captain but a terrible and selfish ODI cricketer.

From a neutral perspective:

A flat track bully who was never good enough to score against lateral movement. However, he had a penchant for huge scores when the conditions favored. Nonetheless, didn't have the aura and the ability to become one of the central figures in world cricket in spite of having ATG stats.

Was below batsmen like Tendulkar, Ponting, Lara, Dravid, Smith, Cook, Hayden, Sangakkara, Kallis, Pietersen, Clarke, Amla and de Villiers in his era, and the younger generation batsmen like Kohli, Smith, Kane and Root surpassed him as well in terms of stature. Ultimately, for the neutral/non-Pakistani fan, he doesn't really have legacy, and hence not an ATG. He is in the same league as someone like Mahela - a great for his nation, but not an ATG.

rarely has disinterest come so burdened with vehemence. i'd imagine this is how lillee might have written the send off for miandad.

hard to know why de villiers and pietersen would be regarded as better *test* players than younis? or why all greats need be equally good, in order to be great? greatness, as opposed to excellence, is not about stacking players up against each other. it is about *incomparability* the feeling that something set a player apart. and younis was nothing if not special.

it was said about steve waugh that he was the batsmen you'd ask to bat for your life, but if your life was on the line in a 4th innings, the smart bet would have been on younis. no one played it late like he did.

some of great south asian innings of his day he accounted for. his 267 and 84* in 2005 against india will always live in the memory of a generation of cricket fans. statesmen leave behind 'legacies,' great players bequeath scars. and how many batsmen have wounded a nation of one billion as did younis in bengaluru?

for grit and ability to perform in big moments, only miandad is his peer in pakistan. but younis outdid even javed in longevity, in sheer staying power, and that counts for something. half of tendulkar's achievement was that he hung around for so long.

younis scored a century in every test country, and a daddy hundred against australia in his last year. which is to say, that what's missing in his resume is not his ability to play any kind bowling better or worse than others. what's missing is the aura that comes with the passing of time. "all-time great" does not describe a player who was the best of his time, but someone who became timeless.

 

[light]

As a neutral fan, I have to admit that I never knew YK had 10K runs under his belt. I am surprised that this man was not talked much about for the amount of runs he piled up. Most neutral fans followed pakistan cricket for players like Afridi, Akram, Imran Khan, Ajmal, etc. I guess YK never had that flare about him to want me to have an interest on him. His number suggests that he was right up there with the big boys but I am not too sure on how much his name will be mentioned outside of Pakistani cricket fans zone.

 

[ExplicitAI]

One of the best Test batsman in the world, you can't call someone with 10K runs average or below par at all. An average-below average ODI batsman but was somewhat decent-pretty good in flat tracks in Asia against teams like Sri Lanka, India, Afghanistan and Bangladesh, he was able to play at a high strike rate and pummel boundaries. However he floundered against big teams in ODI's and has been known to be quite selfish. T20 WC winning captain was his highlight in T20is so you can really just forget about his batting. Nonetheless he's an ATG in Test cricket given his unique profile on his 4th innings record which he's well known for.

 

[Mamoon]

[MENTION=139754]New Yorker[/MENTION]

I don't agree with anything you have said, but instead of asking 'why', we need to look at how he will be and is remembered by the global audience, i.e. his legacy for the cricket universe. I don't say this due to the fact that I don't rate him as highly as some of the others. There are several reasons that has blocked Younis from becoming a central figure and a star in world cricket and getting named among the elite batsmen.

(1) He has played very little overseas cricket (2) He has never been able to dominate any serious team overseas (3) He has had a flop ODI career (4) He doesn't captivate the audience with his playing style (5) Pakistan has not been a prestigious team for the bulk of his career and have been largely isolated.

He made his debut 17 years ago, but he has played only a few more matches in England, Australia, SA and New Zealand than someone like Kohli or Rahane, who made their debuts a decade later. In addition, he played only one tough Test series overseas between 2006 and 2016, and hardly played any cricket against the big teams between 2006 and 2014, except for a few matches vs England and SA. Now these things are not entirely his fault, it has had a significantly negative impact on his stature.

Furthermore, he has been dire in ODIs. Yes, it is important to differentiate between formats, but the legacy of players who deliver in all formats especially in this era are the ones who leave a greater legacy. As de Villiers stated in his interview last month: "I truly believe you can be the best player only if you play all formats in cricket. If you are in the top five in all three formats, that's when you know you can really play the game." That is precisely why someone like Sangakkara surpassed him, even though he plays for a less prestigious cricketing nation. Had Younis been a successful ODI cricketer, he would have achieved the stardom that has eluded him.

His playing style is another reason why he has not been able to play those memorable innings like Pietersen and de Villiers for e.g. I know that you don't care about aesthetics, but the world does. Ultimately, cricket is entertainment and if you do not entertain, you will not stand out. That does not mean that boring players cannot be legends, but they have other things going for them. Lastly, playing for Pakistan does not help. Had Younis produced the same performances for one of the big boys, he would have enjoyed a much higher status. Similarly, had he played for Pakistan in the 80s and 90s, he would have been a bigger star.

Keeping all of these things in mind, it is not a surprise that Younis falls short of the batsmen I mentioned in my previous post, and his stature in world cricket is not much different to the likes of Chanderpaul and Mahela.

 

[Ab Fan]

Great test batsmen. Carried the Pak team with the bat after the retirement of Inzy and Yousuf.

Arguably the second best test bat to have come from Pak.

 

[Usman Chadda]

From a Pakistani perspective:

A tremendous Test batsman who played a pivotal role in various memorable wins. For the last half of his career, he was the man who carried the batting lineup. In addition, a World T20 winning captain but a terrible and selfish ODI cricketer.

From a neutral perspective:

A flat track bully who was never good enough to score against lateral movement. However, he had a penchant for huge scores when the conditions favored. Nonetheless, didn't have the aura and the ability to become one of the central figures in world cricket in spite of having ATG stats.

Was below batsmen like Tendulkar, Ponting, Lara, Dravid, Smith, Cook, Hayden, Sangakkara, Kallis, Pietersen, Clarke, Amla and de Villiers in his era, and the younger generation batsmen like Kohli, Smith, Kane and Root surpassed him as well in terms of stature. Ultimately, for the neutral/non-Pakistani fan, he doesn't really have legacy, and hence not an ATG. He is in the same league as someone like Mahela - a great for his nation, but not an ATG.

The reason YK never gets the same adulation is because he was never considered as an all-round batsman at any point of his career. In an era where LOI cricket is evidently given considerably more importance as compared to test cricket, it is no surprise that hardly anyone mentions Younis Khan when listing their top 10 batsmen. All the names you have mentioned have had some form of success in the LOI format at one point of time in their careers. YK has always been a poor ODI player but a beast in Test cricket. An anomaly of sorts if you will.

Will always be remembered for carrying Pakistan batting since Yousuf retired. The stats and the performances are too great to ever be denied that notion. Was monumental in Pakistan's brief rise to the top in test cricket.

 

[Mamoon]

The reason YK never gets the same adulation is because he was never considered as an all-round batsman at any point of his career. In an era where LOI cricket is evidently given considerably more importance as compared to test cricket, it is no surprise that hardly anyone mentions Younis Khan when listing their top 10 batsmen. All the names you have mentioned have had some form of success in the LOI format at one point of time in their careers. YK has always been a poor ODI player but a beast in Test cricket. An anomaly of sorts if you will.

Will always be remembered for carrying Pakistan batting since Yousuf retired. The stats and the performances are too great to ever be denied that notion. Was monumental in Pakistan's brief rise to the top in test cricket.

Exactly. In addition, he has not played enough cricket in the big non-Asian teams.

 

[GudduBadmash]

from a pakistani perspective:

A tremendous test batsman who played a pivotal role in various memorable wins. For the last half of his career, he was the man who carried the batting lineup. In addition, a world t20 winning captain but a terrible and selfish odi cricketer.

From a neutral perspective:

a flat track bully who was never good enough to score against lateral movement. However, he had a penchant for huge scores when the conditions favored. nonetheless, didn't have the aura and the ability to become one of the central figures in world cricket in spite of having atg stats.

Was below batsmen like tendulkar, ponting, lara, dravid, smith, cook, hayden, sangakkara, kallis, pietersen, clarke, amla and de villiers in his era, and the younger generation batsmen like kohli, smith, kane and root surpassed him as well in terms of stature. Ultimately, for the neutral/non-pakistani fan, he doesn't really have legacy, and hence not an atg. He is in the same league as someone like mahela - a great for his nation, but not an atg.

okay, according to our lord and saviour Mamoon all of his away innings were on flat tracks and it is safe to say we should believe him as he has watched every single one of those matches from day 1 till day 5 while taking notes of the pitch and each bowler with lateral movement

 

[Mamoon]

[MENTION=139754]New Yorker[/MENTION]

Sorry, I forgot to emphasize on the 'He has never been able to dominate any serious team overseas' bit.

He has good knocks in England, Australia and South Africa, but he hasn't really had a dominant series. He couldn't do what Kohli did in Australia in 2014-2015 and What Cook did in Australia in 2010-2011 and in India in 2012 (equivalent to playing in Eng/Aus/SA for an Asian). The major reason has been his inability to handle lateral movement. He has never had the technique and the skill to combat swing and seam, but he has managed to well against bounce at times (Old Trafford 2006, Oval 2016). Throughout his career, he has fished outside the off-stump and chased wide deliveries like an amateur. 2016 was a great opportunity for him to finally enter the elite league. However, 14 failures in 17 innings including the three comical Tests in England did not help his legacy. A dominant series in England or Australia would have finally given him the recognition that Pakistani fans feel that he richly deserves.

 

[Mamoon]

[MENTION=141768]GudduBadmash[/MENTION]


Nice poster, but it doesn't change the fact that he has hardly produced anything substantial against quality swing and seam bowling. He never had the game for it at any point in his career. Good overseas averages don't mask his weakness against quality pace in lively conditions.

 

[Flat_Track_Bully]

ATG test batter.

 

[GudduBadmash]

[MENTION=141768]GudduBadmash[/MENTION]


Nice poster, but it doesn't change the fact that he has hardly produced anything substantial against quality swing and seam bowling. He never had the game for it at any point in his career. Good overseas averages don't mask his weakness against quality pace in lively conditions.

Have you watched all of his 122 away innings then? Ball by ball? over by over? ad by ad? swing by swing?

 

[Usman Chadda]

Exactly. In addition, he has not played enough cricket in the big non-Asian teams.

Through no fault of his own. He has had some tremendous innings overseas aswell. I believe he missed out in that 2009-10 season, where he was quite solid as a Test batsman. At his peak you can say. Shame the next opportunity he had was when he had clearly regressed on his reflexes.

 

[Mamoon]

Have you watched all of his 122 away innings then? Ball by ball? over by over? ad by ad? swing by swing?

I have watched all of his prominent innings where he has scored runs, and none of those innings were against the moving ball. In addition, I can recall many series from the top of my head where he has failed to score when quality pacers got the ball to swing and seam.

 

[Bilal7]

Have you watched all of his 122 away innings then? Ball by ball? over by over? ad by ad? swing by swing?

His hatred does not permit him from having a rational opinion on Younis Khan. No need to waste your time with him on this topic. Younis Khan is a bonafide ATG and better than the likes of Rahul Dravid, Inzamam, Yousuf and Jayawardene.

 

[Bilal7]

I have watched all of his prominent innings where he has scored runs, and none of those innings were against the moving ball. In addition, I can recall many series from the top of my head where he has failed to score when quality pacers got the ball to swing and seam.

You certainly are a great liar. His innings in Cape Town, when Pakistan were four down and did not even have 100 runs in the board was against the moving ball. So are several other innings of his but like I said, debating with you over Younis is wasting one's time.

 

[GudduBadmash]

His hatred does not permit him from having a rational opinion on Younis Khan. No need to waste your time with him on this topic. Younis Khan is a bonafide ATG and better than the likes of Rahul Dravid, Inzamam, Yousuf and Jayawardene.

Bolded is debatable, best batsman to come out of India.

He is better than the other three though by daylight

 

[Mamoon]

You certainly are a great liar. His innings in Cape Town, when Pakistan were four down and did not even have 100 runs in the board was against the moving ball. So are several other innings of his but like I said, debating with you over Younis is wasting one's time.

Nonsense. It was on a slow, dry pitch where the Chucker almost single-handedly won us the match by taking 9 wickets. Had we played two spinners, we would probably have won that match. It was an Asian style pitch.

In the first and the third Tests, where the SA pacers got swing, seam and bounce, he failed in all four innings. Like I said, he has been a big failure against swing and seam. The series in NZ few months back was not down to his old age but his poor technique against lateral movement.

 

[GudduBadmash]

I have watched all of his prominent innings where he has scored runs, and none of those innings were against the moving ball. In addition, I can recall many series from the top of my head where he has failed to score when quality pacers got the ball to swing and seam.

Man stop lying you would have been around 4 or 5 for most of his away matches or not even born.

 

[Mamoon]

You certainly are a great liar. His innings in Cape Town, when Pakistan were four down and did not even have 100 runs in the board was against the moving ball. So are several other innings of his but like I said, debating with you over Younis is wasting one's time.

And he also failed in the UAE vs SA in 2013, when Faf used his zipper to tamper with the ball and Steyn and Philander made it sing.

 

[Mamoon]

Man stop lying you would have been around 4 or 5 for most of his away matches or not even born.

I have watched cricket seriously since 1998. I still remember Younis walking to the crease on debut in Rawalpindi in 2000. Stop embarrassing yourself with your blind infatuation for Younis. We know why you are here in the first place, but I will do better than call you a troll.

 

[pakistanigoneaussie]

For me the World Cup blackmail will always tarnish his legacy

 

[SarfiBabarHaris]

world t20 winning captain
highest test run scorer for Pakistan
world class player of spin
one of the worst odi players and worst to play 250+ matches.

 

[GudduBadmash]

I have watched cricket seriously since 1998. I still remember Younis walking to the crease on debut in Rawalpindi in 2000. Stop embarrassing yourself with your blind infatuation for Younis. We know why you are here in the first place, but I will do better than call you a troll.

If you think anybody believes that 5-14 year old sits down to watch cricket and thinks about lateral movement and pitch status then might as well admit myself to the nearest mental asylum because I missed a serious trick in my childhood.

 

[Bilal7]

Nonsense. It was on a slow, dry pitch where the Chucker almost single-handedly won us the match by taking 9 wickets. Had we played two spinners, we would probably have won that match. It was an Asian style pitch.

In the first and the third Tests, where the SA pacers got swing, seam and bounce, he failed in all four innings. Like I said, he has been a big failure against swing and seam. The series in NZ few months back was not down to his old age but his poor technique against lateral movement.

As always, your lack of knowledge shines through. It was a pitch that had a bit of turn but the pacers still got the ball to move in the air and off the pitch because of the cloud cover that was on offer. Unless Steyn brought out the leggie in him and took out the top four Pakistani batsmen with leg-breaks.

 

[troodon]

A Pakistani great and over all a very good Test batsman.

I would rank YK in the same way as Sehwag in Test Cricket. Both are greats for respective countries, but not ATG.

 

[Bilal7]

And he also failed in the UAE vs SA in 2013, when Faf used his zipper to tamper with the ball and Steyn and Philander made it sing.

Ah yes, his century against them in South Africa was on a flat pitch but his failures against them in the UAE came on a green one. Tahir was the one who ripped through us and why would you even bring this up when its clear that the Saffers cheated?

You've been exposed already. My work here is done. Do watch highlights of that Cape Town match again.

 

[Bilal7]

A Pakistani great and over all a very good Test batsman.

I would rank YK in the same way as Sehwag in Test Cricket. Both are greats for respective countries, but not ATG.

Younis is on a different level to the great FTB of India, who averaged 20 and crapped his pants whenever the ball moved an inch.

 

[Mamoon]

If you think anybody believes that 5-14 year old sits down to watch cricket and thinks about lateral movement and pitch status then might as well admit myself to the nearest mental asylum because I missed a serious trick in my childhood.

I have not claimed that my memory is infallible. Obviously, I don't remember everything from my early years of watching the game, but that does not mean that I don't know what he did and when. You don't even have to watch a player to know these things, which is the greatness of the past players is still recognized even though none of us watched them. However, I have followed Younis' career from the beginning and I don't need anyone else's opinion on this matter. The fact that you have failed to name his prominent innings against quality swing and seam says everything that needs to be said.

 

[Rayyman]

Everyone who says that YK has great temperament is speaking a load of rubbish. I have seen him fishing for sharks countless time outside his off stump.

 

[Mamoon]

Ah yes, his century against them in South Africa was on a flat pitch but his failures against them in the UAE came on a green one. Tahir was the one who ripped through us and why would you even bring this up when its clear that the Saffers cheated?

You've been exposed already. My work here is done. Do watch highlights of that Cape Town match again.

I can't help you if you cannot comprehend simple English. When did I say that he failed against South Africa in the UAE in 2013 on 'green tracks'? They were dead pitches which is why South Africa tampered with the ball after the likes of Manzoor and Masood made them toil hard in the first innings of the first Test.

I don't need to watch the highlights when I watched the match live. However, I admit that I don't have your talent of seeing things that do not happen. Only you are capable of witnessing Junaid swing the ball like Wasim, Ajmal bowling with a legal action and Younis scoring runs against lateral movement. Don't worry about me getting exposed; your status as the most deluded and biased poster is beyond reproach.

 

[Mamoon]

Everyone who says that YK has great temperament is speaking a load of rubbish. I have seen him fishing for sharks countless time outside his off stump.

He does have great temperament. You cannot score 10,000 runs without it.

 

[Rayyman]

Ah yes, his century against them in South Africa was on a flat pitch but his failures against them in the UAE came on a green one. Tahir was the one who ripped through us and why would you even bring this up when its clear that the Saffers cheated?

You've been exposed already. My work here is done. Do watch highlights of that Cape Town match again.

Cape Town was flat. Same place Shafiq scored a 100 too.

 

[Rayyman]

He does have great temperament. You cannot score 10,000 runs without it.

You can by feasting on spinners in UAE. If YK was English, his career would end up like James Vince's.

 

[chacha kashmiri]

Limited player who scored pointless double hundreds in bore draws

A stalwart who epitomised the death of talent in Pakistan which was replaced by younis's grit and determination which made him a great success story but hardly the man to show your grandkids videos of dubbed in old junoon songs

His failure in Odis sums up his generation, boring but hardworking. Lack of innovation and very methodical and risk free which culminated in spinners winning matches for Pakistan and veteran batsmen blocking their way to centuries

 

[Abdullah719]

Limited player who scored pointless double hundreds in bore draws

All five of his double hundreds lead to wins.

Only the 313 on the Karachi road lead to a draw.

 

[The_Odd_One]

Limited player who scored pointless double hundreds in bore draws

A stalwart who epitomised the death of talent in Pakistan which was replaced by younis's grit and determination which made him a great success story but hardly the man to show your grandkids videos of dubbed in old junoon songs

His failure in Odis sums up his generation, boring but hardworking. Lack of innovation and very methodical and risk free which culminated in spinners winning matches for Pakistan and veteran batsmen blocking their way to centuries

What an ignorant post. Younis has 19 100s in matches won and only 8 in draws.

 

[chacha kashmiri]

All five of his double hundreds lead to wins.

Only the 313 on the Karachi road lead to a draw.

I'm sure the winning margin was over 200 runs for most of them

 

[chacha kashmiri]

What an ignorant post. Younis has 19 100s in matches won and only 8 in draws.

Are we talking about Odis or test matches

 

[The_Odd_One]

Are we talking about Odis or test matches

I did not know you could draw ODIs with double hundreds.

 

[chacha kashmiri]

I did not know you could draw ODIs with double hundreds.

Noones talking about his success rates with his hundreds
Not sure why you brought up his 19 100's for

 

[Abdullah719]

I'm sure the winning margin was over 200 runs for most of them

I see we're moving away from the 'bore draws'.

 

[chacha kashmiri]

I see we're moving away from the 'bore draws'.

There isn't one younis khan double hundred or single hundred for that matter that I would watch again and I can't be the only one

 

[shaz619]

Limited player who scored pointless double hundreds in bore draws

All five of his double hundreds lead to wins.

Only the 313 on the Karachi road lead to a draw.

Younis Khan was involved in 7 of Pakistan's 9 away wins since making his debut in the year 2000 and averages 114 across 5 of those wins in countries which include New Zealand, South Africa, West Indies and England. In addition, Khan averages 77 overall in Pakistan wins, has the best conversion rate in the 10K club and the most hundreds/best-batting-average in the 4th innings of a Test.

 

[The_Odd_One]

There isn't one younis khan double hundred or single hundred for that matter that I would watch again and I can't be the only one

Banglore and Oval. I do not have anything else to say.

 

[Abdullah719]

There isn't one younis khan double hundred or single hundred for that matter that I would watch again and I can't be the only one

If I was watching for pure entertainment only, there are lots of batsmen I wouldn't choose to watch.

But that's besides the point.

 

[New Yorker]

[MENTION=139754]New Yorker[/MENTION]

Sorry, I forgot to emphasize on the 'He has never been able to dominate any serious team overseas' bit.

He has good knocks in England, Australia and South Africa, but he hasn't really had a dominant series. He couldn't do what Kohli did in Australia in 2014-2015 and What Cook did in Australia in 2010-2011 and in India in 2012 (equivalent to playing in Eng/Aus/SA for an Asian). The major reason has been his inability to handle lateral movement. He has never had the technique and the skill to combat swing and seam, but he has managed to well against bounce at times (Old Trafford 2006, Oval 2016). Throughout his career, he has fished outside the off-stump and chased wide deliveries like an amateur. 2016 was a great opportunity for him to finally enter the elite league. However, 14 failures in 17 innings including the three comical Tests in England did not help his legacy. A dominant series in England or Australia would have finally given him the recognition that Pakistani fans feel that he richly deserves.

As much as I value your posts we are talking past each other. I don't disagree that in certain respects it is difficult to compare YK with other players who we might consider great. Indeed, it is precisely my point that one critical attribute greatness is that it connotes a sense of incomparability. This is what sets it apart from excellence. But precisely because greatness is of the order of the incomparable, a certain set of players could all be considered great without for that matter being equally good.

As all of this would suggest, I am also skeptical of the idea that a. certain set of criteria can or should define who is a great player , and b. that you get to set those criteria. The ability to play the moving ball is one of these (Ill not weigh on how helpless YK was on this count because it is a distraction I think, much as Murli's failure to perform in Aus does not diminish his status as perhaps the greatest bowler ever) ; the need to have an attractive game another (whoever gets to define that); the need to be a good ODI player in order to be considered a Test one more.

I think that if a player scores in all countries against all kinds of opposition and does so with a sense of occasion, stepping up in pivotal matches etc, the the question of how much the ball was really moving or spinning on that day and whether the bowling averaged 25 or 28 really cease to matter to most people, myself included.

This is not to say that I could not, in retrospect, admire the ability of such and such player to master swing or spin. But they greatness does not stand and or fall on that question. And I think you are straining rather too hard to force this argument in YKs case.

To this I would add: your antipathy towards him is of course legendary and you are entitled to your feelings, but you are veering into tastelessness when you harp on about how comical was his England tour. To most of those who watched that series, he ended it as nothing less than giant, his 200 not merely the signal series turning performance of that tour, but also richly resonant with other similar innings that he has produced in the past.

 

[Bilal7]

I can't help you if you cannot comprehend simple English. When did I say that he failed against South Africa in the UAE in 2013 on 'green tracks'? They were dead pitches which is why South Africa tampered with the ball after the likes of Manzoor and Masood made them toil hard in the first innings of the first Test.

I don't need to watch the highlights when I watched the match live. However, I admit that I don't have your talent of seeing things that do not happen. Only you are capable of witnessing Junaid swing the ball like Wasim, Ajmal bowling with a legal action and Younis scoring runs against lateral movement. Don't worry about me getting exposed; your status as the most deluded and biased poster is beyond reproach.

11.1 137.9 kph, strikes first ball in his second spell! Typical Steyn delivery, lands on the off stump and thereabouts and moves away, has Hafeez prodding forward, doesn't cover the line, thick outside edge low to first slip 21/2

131.0 kph, that drop didn't cost much did it? Jamshed fails to make use of the life, this was pitched up and moving away, he was forward for the drive, thick outside edge to the keeper and Philander gets another batsman with his stock delivery that hones in on the off stump 10/1

93.4 127.1 kph, awesome catch by Alviro! One handed, Philander pitched it on off and got it to move away, Sarfraz pushed at it and the outside edge went low to Petersen's right at third slip, stuck his right hand out and no doubts about the catch, top effort 266/7

91.1 Philander strikes first ball! Typical Philander wicket, that teasing away swinger, lands outside off and has Shafiq pokes his bat out and edges to first slip, Smith takes it neatly falling to his left 259/6

The first innings dismissals. These are just the deliveries which resulted in wickets, I distinctly remember Steyn and Philander moving the ball substantially and Younis and Shafiq doing really well to negate that swing and seam.

I'm not the one who says stupid things like "I don't care about stats" and displays hypocrisy and double standards with every post. That is your domain and as demonstrated from this exchange, you are a pretty good liar as well. Next time, stop being so sure about your failing memory and do as I tell you. It'll save you a lot of embarrassment.

Cape Town was flat. Same place Shafiq scored a 100 too.

You're terribly wrong on this. The pitch certainly wasn't flat, there was a bit of turn on offer. Swing bowling has nothing to do with how flat a pitch is and what does Shafiq getting a hundred there prove? Shafiq's a good player of swing and seam.

 

[TalentSpotterPk]

Best figure for Youngsters of the team.

 

[TalentSpotterPk]

<iframe frameborder="0" width="480" height="270" src="//www.dailymotion.com/embed/video/x5jli6z" allowfullscreen></iframe><br /><a href="http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x5jli6z_what-foreign-players-tried-to-learn-from-younas-khan-and-what-sangakara-and-de-villiers-said-about-y_news" target="_blank">What Foreign Players Tried to Learn from Younas...</a> <i>by <a href="http://www.dailymotion.com/latestnewz" target="_blank">latestnewz</a></i>​

 

[Mamoon]

[MENTION=129948]Bilal7[/MENTION]

Amidst the CT frenzy, I nearly forgot to reply to your post. There is so much wrong with you posted that I don't know where to begin. In addition, you whatever I will say will fall on deaf ears because your bias and delusion is so severe, that you ignore facts even when they scream on your face. Nonetheless, I will play my part and attempt to open your eyes.

Firstly, apart from Junaid, every pacer gets some shape with the new ball regardless of the conditions. However, on a dry surface, the ball loses shine quickly which kills the conventional swing and brings spinners into play. Secondly, as long as you have a slip cordon, you don't need to do much with the ball to dismiss technically and temperamentally challenged batsmen like Hafeez and Jamshed. By the time Younis came to the crease, the ball had already lost most of its shine. Secondly, the other two dismissals you quoted were after the second new ball including that of Sarfraz, who was little better than a tail-ender at that time.

In the conditions Younis walked in, any good batsman with solid temperament would score 7/10 times. The innings was great because of the situation Pakistan was in, but there was nothing special about it from a technical standpoint. The nature of the pitch can be further gauged by the fact that their spinner Peterson bowled 23 overs, more than he bowled in the first and third Test combined. In addition, the Chucker too 9 wickets because he got a lot of assistance. In the first and third Tests, which were on traditional SA pitches, he got 1 wicket in 3 innings while Younis didn't cross 50 in four innings.

The fact that you had to use the Cape Town innings - which was played on an Asian/Caribbean style wicket - to prove your point that he can score against quality swing/seam in conductive conditions was laughable. Younis has never scored runs in such conditions, never.

 

[Mamoon]

As much as I value your posts we are talking past each other. I don't disagree that in certain respects it is difficult to compare YK with other players who we might consider great. Indeed, it is precisely my point that one critical attribute greatness is that it connotes a sense of incomparability. This is what sets it apart from excellence. But precisely because greatness is of the order of the incomparable, a certain set of players could all be considered great without for that matter being equally good.

As all of this would suggest, I am also skeptical of the idea that a. certain set of criteria can or should define who is a great player , and b. that you get to set those criteria. The ability to play the moving ball is one of these (Ill not weigh on how helpless YK was on this count because it is a distraction I think, much as Murli's failure to perform in Aus does not diminish his status as perhaps the greatest bowler ever) ; the need to have an attractive game another (whoever gets to define that); the need to be a good ODI player in order to be considered a Test one more.

I think that if a player scores in all countries against all kinds of opposition and does so with a sense of occasion, stepping up in pivotal matches etc, the the question of how much the ball was really moving or spinning on that day and whether the bowling averaged 25 or 28 really cease to matter to most people, myself included.

This is not to say that I could not, in retrospect, admire the ability of such and such player to master swing or spin. But they greatness does not stand and or fall on that question. And I think you are straining rather too hard to force this argument in YKs case.

To this I would add: your antipathy towards him is of course legendary and you are entitled to your feelings, but you are veering into tastelessness when you harp on about how comical was his England tour. To most of those who watched that series, he ended it as nothing less than giant, his 200 not merely the signal series turning performance of that tour, but also richly resonant with other similar innings that he has produced in the past.

I think you are simply arguing 'why' Younis should be considered an ATG, while I am simply stating why he 'is not' an ATG by the neutral/universal standards. As far as the England series is concerned, he did redeem himself with the double-hundred, but my comical comment was mostly directed at his batting in the first three Tests. It is true that he played a big hand in helping us draw the series, it won't be wrong to suggest that he also played a considerable role in ensuring that Pakistan did not win the series.

When your main batsman goes missing in ugly fashion for 6 straight innings, it does put a lot of strain on the team. All in all, his 14 failures in 17 innings played more than just a considerable role in ensuring that Pakistan lose 7 out of 9 Tests in England, NZ and Australia, which has gone a long way in ensuring that the world doesn't see him as one of the greatest of all time.

 

[Mamoon]

You can by feasting on spinners in UAE. If YK was English, his career would end up like James Vince's.

Vince so far hasn't shown the temperament to score big in Tests, irrespective of the conditions. You are selling Younis very short; shorter than I do. He is a much, much better player than what you are crediting him for.

 

[IMMY69]

If one of the top bowlers, e.g Steyn or Mgrath, are swinging or seeming the ball, I don't think any of the greats would have scored many runs...

Of course YK is a great

 

[Bilal7]

[MENTION=129948]Bilal7[/MENTION]

Amidst the CT frenzy, I nearly forgot to reply to your post. There is so much wrong with you posted that I don't know where to begin. In addition, you whatever I will say will fall on deaf ears because your bias and delusion is so severe, that you ignore facts even when they scream on your face. Nonetheless, I will play my part and attempt to open your eyes.

Firstly, apart from Junaid, every pacer gets some shape with the new ball regardless of the conditions. However, on a dry surface, the ball loses shine quickly which kills the conventional swing and brings spinners into play. Secondly, as long as you have a slip cordon, you don't need to do much with the ball to dismiss technically and temperamentally challenged batsmen like Hafeez and Jamshed. By the time Younis came to the crease, the ball had already lost most of its shine. Secondly, the other two dismissals you quoted were after the second new ball including that of Sarfraz, who was little better than a tail-ender at that time.

In the conditions Younis walked in, any good batsman with solid temperament would score 7/10 times. The innings was great because of the situation Pakistan was in, but there was nothing special about it from a technical standpoint. The nature of the pitch can be further gauged by the fact that their spinner Peterson bowled 23 overs, more than he bowled in the first and third Test combined. In addition, the Chucker too 9 wickets because he got a lot of assistance. In the first and third Tests, which were on traditional SA pitches, he got 1 wicket in 3 innings while Younis didn't cross 50 in four innings.

The fact that you had to use the Cape Town innings - which was played on an Asian/Caribbean style wicket - to prove your point that he can score against quality swing/seam in conductive conditions was laughable. Younis has never scored runs in such conditions, never.

Ah, yes. The classic "It was tough before he came in and it got tough after he got out" move. Nice. Even a blind man knows that Younis Khan can handle swing and seam pretty well. His performances prove it, his numbers prove it and his class proves it. That was one recent innings he played in South Africa which offers considerable help for pace bowlers. Otherwise, I can provide you with several more examples but I would be wasting my time because you just won't admit that you are wrong about the legendary Younis Khan.

 

[Mamoon]

Ah, yes. The classic "It was tough before he came in and it got tough after he got out" move. Nice. Even a blind man knows that Younis Khan can handle swing and seam pretty well. His performances prove it, his numbers prove it and his class proves it. That was one recent innings he played in South Africa which offers considerable help for pace bowlers. Otherwise, I can provide you with several more examples but I would be wasting my time because you just won't admit that you are wrong about the legendary Younis Khan.

Yes because he came to the crease in the after the new ball was not-so-new. Not sure why it is so hard to understand. No his numbers don't prove that. Like I said, he has never scored under such stipulations. You are obviously free to believe otherwise because I like I said, it will fall on deaf ears.

 

[Bilal7]

Yes because he came to the crease in the after the new ball was not-so-new. Not sure why it is so hard to understand. No his numbers don't prove that. Like I said, he has never scored under such stipulations. You are obviously free to believe otherwise because I like I said, it will fall on deaf ears.

Average of 50+ in England, 50+ in Australia, nearly 45 in New Zealand and a superb century in South Africa prove otherwise. Stick to your fantasies of Younis Khan being a bunny against pace though.

 

[ExpressPacer]

[MENTION=129948]Bilal7[/MENTION]

Amidst the CT frenzy, I nearly forgot to reply to your post. There is so much wrong with you posted that I don't know where to begin. In addition, you whatever I will say will fall on deaf ears because your bias and delusion is so severe, that you ignore facts even when they scream on your face. Nonetheless, I will play my part and attempt to open your eyes.

Firstly, apart from Junaid, every pacer gets some shape with the new ball regardless of the conditions. However, on a dry surface, the ball loses shine quickly which kills the conventional swing and brings spinners into play. Secondly, as long as you have a slip cordon, you don't need to do much with the ball to dismiss technically and temperamentally challenged batsmen like Hafeez and Jamshed. By the time Younis came to the crease, the ball had already lost most of its shine. Secondly, the other two dismissals you quoted were after the second new ball including that of Sarfraz, who was little better than a tail-ender at that time.

In the conditions Younis walked in, any good batsman with solid temperament would score 7/10 times. The innings was great because of the situation Pakistan was in, but there was nothing special about it from a technical standpoint. The nature of the pitch can be further gauged by the fact that their spinner Peterson bowled 23 overs, more than he bowled in the first and third Test combined. In addition, the Chucker too 9 wickets because he got a lot of assistance. In the first and third Tests, which were on traditional SA pitches, he got 1 wicket in 3 innings while Younis didn't cross 50 in four innings.

The fact that you had to use the Cape Town innings - which was played on an Asian/Caribbean style wicket - to prove your point that he can score against quality swing/seam in conductive conditions was laughable. Younis has never scored runs in such conditions, never.

The fact that you can use facts to your own desire is so funny, honestly. I'm not calling Younis an ATG but I've noticed a certain pattern in your posts and it makes me think of how you genuinely try to make a player look ordinary despite proof saying otherwise.

If Younis scores a 200 in England, it was a flat road. If Younis scores a 170 in Aus, it was an easy pitch and if he does so in South Africa, you call it an Asian style wicket. God. Your bias against him (or your need to stand out) is on another level. At the end of the day, the fact is, Younis scored all those runs in the countries he scored them. He will always be remembered by everyone for scoring the Cape Town hundred in South Africa, not Jamaica or Abu Dhabi or Multan.

Its very easy to win any argument if we go by your logic. Every time a particular player performed - one can simply say it was because of Asian style pitches or favourable conditions. That's not how it works.

 

[Mamoon]

Average of 50+ in England, 50+ in Australia, nearly 45 in New Zealand and a superb century in South Africa prove otherwise. Stick to your fantasies of Younis Khan being a bunny against pace though.

All of those runs came in conditions when the ball wasn't doing much. However, on every tour, he has encountered some difficult conditions which is why he has never had a dominant series in these places. He almost always fails when there is considerable lateral movement.

Averages only show aggregate performance. Someone looking back at his stats in the 2016 England series and the 2016-2017 Australian series would think that he was brilliant, because overall average will not show how much he struggled for three Tests in England and how he couldn't produce a big score in Australia until the series was done and dusted.

 

[Mamoon]

The fact that you can use facts to your own desire is so funny, honestly. I'm not calling Younis an ATG but I've noticed a certain pattern in your posts and it makes me think of how you genuinely try to make a player look ordinary despite proof saying otherwise.

If Younis scores a 200 in England, it was a flat road. If Younis scores a 170 in Aus, it was an easy pitch and if he does so in South Africa, you call it an Asian style wicket. God. Your bias against him (or your need to stand out) is on another level. At the end of the day, the fact is, Younis scored all those runs in the countries he scored them. He will always be remembered by everyone for scoring the Cape Town hundred in South Africa, not Jamaica or Abu Dhabi or Multan.

Its very easy to win any argument if we go by your logic. Every time a particular player performed - one can simply say it was because of Asian style pitches or favourable conditions. That's not how it works.

Oval was a flat pitch, albeit with a little bounce. For all his problems against lateral movement, he has combated bounce on various occasions. He did that at Old Trafford in 2006 as well, which was more impressive than Oval 2016 because it came against Harmison who bowled some nasty bouncers. His ability to get on top of the bounce is the main reason why he has done far better than Misbah overseas, who is very weak against short-pitched bowling.

The 170 in Sydney was on a proper flat pitch where the greatest Flat Track Bully in the world (Warner) smashed a century in a session, and the best spinner in the world Yasir went at 8 runs an over. In addition, it was a dead rubber. Had Younis produced a big score at Brisbane or Melbourne, Pakistan could have entered the Sydney Test 1-1 or even 1-0 up. However, much like the England series, he saved his best for the very last much. Luckily, we managed to win the Lord's Test otherwise his double-hundred would have proved inconsequential like his 170 in Sydney.

I have explained the Cape Town innings already. Every batsman has his weakness, there is no shame in admitting that Younis does not have the game for swing and seam. Never has and never will, which is precisely why he has never had a dominant series overseas, and which is why he has failed in 9 out of his last 12 Tests in SA, England, Australia and NZ.

I am not trying to win anything here. It is not a match and there is nothing at stake. I'm simply objecting the false narrative that Younis has scored big runs outside Asia in very testing conditions. No he hasn't.

 

[Bilal7]

All of those runs came in conditions when the ball wasn't doing much. However, on every tour, he has encountered some difficult conditions which is why he has never had a dominant series in these places. He almost always fails when there is considerable lateral movement.

Averages only show aggregate performance. Someone looking back at his stats in the 2016 England series and the 2016-2017 Australian series would think that he was brilliant, because overall average will not show how much he struggled for three Tests in England and how he couldn't produce a big score in Australia until the series was done and dusted.

Another classic move "when he scores it is flat, when he doesn't it is not". The pitch that he scored his double on was the quickest and most bowler friendly out of the four he batted on in England. Yes, the pitch he scored his daddy-hundred in Australia was flat but so were the other two.

Younis Khan has never been the most consistent batsman but when he does score, he scores big and that is what his averages should tell you. A batsman can get lucky on a single tour but over the course of multiple series, you cannot keep making the same lame excuses of the pitches being flat.

I'm guessing the South African bowlers were bowling gun-barrel straight to him in this match as well (while bowling rippers to take out everyone else):

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/250666.html

 

[Bilal7]

Oval was a flat pitch, albeit with a little bounce. For all his problems against lateral movement, he has combated bounce on various occasions. He did that at Old Trafford in 2006 as well, which was more impressive than Oval 2016 because it came against Harmison who bowled some nasty bouncers. His ability to get on top of the bounce is the main reason why he has done far better than Misbah overseas, who is very weak against short-pitched bowling.

The 170 in Sydney was on a proper flat pitch where the greatest Flat Track Bully in the world (Warner) smashed a century in a session, and the best spinner in the world Yasir went at 8 runs an over. In addition, it was a dead rubber. Had Younis produced a big score at Brisbane or Melbourne, Pakistan could have entered the Sydney Test 1-1 or even 1-0 up. However, much like the England series, he saved his best for the very last much. Luckily, we managed to win the Lord's Test otherwise his double-hundred would have proved inconsequential like his 170 in Sydney.

I have explained the Cape Town innings already. Every batsman has his weakness, there is no shame in admitting that Younis does not have the game for swing and seam. Never has and never will, which is precisely why he has never had a dominant series overseas, and which is why he has failed in 9 out of his last 12 Tests in SA, England, Australia and NZ.

I am not trying to win anything here. It is not a match and there is nothing at stake. I'm simply objecting the false narrative that Younis has scored big runs outside Asia in very testing conditions. No he hasn't.

This is the same guy who calls Kohli an ATG based on his four centuries on some absolutely disgusting highways in Australia and a couple of hundreds on a pitch where the Saffers almost chased down 450. Good to see more people catching onto your bull.

No one is saying that Younis is an Amla against the moving ball, he isn't. He is however, quite capable against swing and seam and proven it over the course of a 17 year career. You don't get through a 100 tests with the averages and performances he has outside the subcontinent, and still be a poor player of swing and seam.

 

[Mamoon]

Another classic move "when he scores it is flat, when he doesn't it is not". The pitch that he scored his double on was the quickest and most bowler friendly out of the four he batted on in England. Yes, the pitch he scored his daddy-hundred in Australia was flat but so were the other two.

Younis Khan has never been the most consistent batsman but when he does score, he scores big and that is what his averages should tell you. A batsman can get lucky on a single tour but over the course of multiple series, you cannot keep making the same lame excuses of the pitches being flat.

I'm guessing the South African bowlers were bowling gun-barrel straight to him in this match as well (while bowling rippers to take out everyone else):

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/250666.html

It was a flat but bouncy pitch, and he played the third best innings by a Pakistani after Inzamam and Kamran. Not the greatest example to prove that he can combat swing and seam in difficult conditions. Akhtar and Asif bowled due to sheer skill, and Ntini used his awkward angle wide off the crease which was often difficult to negotiate on bouncy pitches, and that is how he got Ntini out in the first place.

I still remember the commentators calling it a 400+ wicket before toss, but some loose dismissals and excellent bowling made it a relatively low-scoring affair. Again, they were not in the testing conditions that I am referring to. You won't find any such examples because there aren't any. Other Pakistani batsmen failing doesn't make the pitch unplayable. Younis has always had the ability to perform when others failed, and I admire that quality of his.

 

[Mamoon]

This is the same guy who calls Kohli an ATG based on his four centuries on some absolutely disgusting highways in Australia and a couple of hundreds on a pitch where the Saffers almost chased down 450. Good to see more people catching onto your bull.

No one is saying that Younis is an Amla against the moving ball, he isn't. He is however, quite capable against swing and seam and proven it over the course of a 17 year career. You don't get through a 100 tests with the averages and performances he has outside the subcontinent, and still be a poor player of swing and seam.

Kohli is not an ATG yet, but he is well on his way. At his age and stage of the career, he is on par and almost ahead of the ATGs of the past. At his age, Younis was still struggling to cement his place in the Pakistan side. His ceiling is far greater than Younis. He has the ability and potential to reach the level of batsmen like Tendulkar and Ponting, who were two levels above Younis.

Younis' career is over and in 17 years, he has failed to have a dominant series outside Asia and he has failed to score substantial runs against swing/seam. Kohli in his short career so far has had a very dominant series in Australia. He did fail in England, but he will get more chances to rectify himself. However, Younis won't get more chances to prove himself against swing and seam. The last time he got green-tracks was in NZ a few months ago, and I don't need to remind you what happened. A cardboard might have scored more runs.

 

[Bilal7]

It was a flat but bouncy pitch, and he played the third best innings by a Pakistani after Inzamam and Kamran. Not the greatest example to prove that he can combat swing and seam in difficult conditions. Akhtar and Asif bowled due to sheer skill, and Ntini used his awkward angle wide off the crease which was often difficult to negotiate on bouncy pitches, and that is how he got Ntini out in the first place.

I still remember the commentators calling it a 400+ wicket before toss, but some loose dismissals and excellent bowling made it a relatively low-scoring affair. Again, they were not in the testing conditions that I am referring to. You won't find any such examples because there aren't any. Other Pakistani batsmen failing doesn't make the pitch unplayable. Younis has always had the ability to perform when others failed, and I admire that quality of his.

)

Trying way too hard, as always. My point was never to make you see the errors of your ways, that will never happen because like Younis, you have the skill to keep your wicket even in difficult conditions. This exchange has made it clear to everyone that your bias against Younis Khan is hilarious and you are incapable of having a rational opinion on the legendary Pakistani batsman.

 

[Bilal7]

Kohli is not an ATG yet, but he is well on his way. At his age and stage of the career, he is on par and almost ahead of the ATGs of the past. At his age, Younis was still struggling to cement his place in the Pakistan side. His ceiling is far greater than Younis. He has the ability and potential to reach the level of batsmen like Tendulkar and Ponting, who were two levels above Younis.

Younis' career is over and in 17 years, he has failed to have a dominant series outside Asia and he has failed to score substantial runs against swing/seam. Kohli in his short career so far has had a very dominant series in Australia. He did fail in England, but he will get more chances to rectify himself. However, Younis won't get more chances to prove himself against swing and seam. The last time he got green-tracks was in NZ a few months ago, and I don't need to remind you what happened. A cardboard might have scored more runs.

Younis in his 17 year career has managed to average 50+ in both England and Australia, score centuries at good averages in New Zealand and to a lesser extent, South Africa, along with being as close to invincible against spin a batsman can be. A double century in England and a 170 in New Zealand. 99.99% of Asian batsman haven't come close to this man's accomplishments and that is why he is an All-Time Great.

Kohli, in comparison, isn't even in the rear-view mirror as of now. Do give me a few examples of when Kohli scored against swing and seam bowling, please.

 

[Hamad_H]

Younis will remembered as a proud patriot who, along with Misbhah, played most of his matches outside of Pakistan. Younis becoming the first Pakistani to reach 10k runs will be why he will be remembered as an ATG (IMO) especially considering the great Pakistani batsmen who came before him.

 

[PakLFC]

I will remember him as a man for a crisis who delivered more often then not. Mostly he came in at three after the loss of an early wicket so was required to stabilise the innings that he did. I remember him being a very slow batsman at the start of his career then later greatly improving in his stroke play. One of our best fielders as well taking some great catches in the slip. He was is/was our Mr Reliable. He plays the game fairly with a smile on his face as should be the case, have never seen him arguing with an opponent on the field of play.