I don't think Pakistan underperformed in South Africa at all. I think they performed precisely to their potential and ability, and in line with their lack of preparation.
A) Batting
Asad Shafiq, Younis Khan, Azhar Ali and Misbah-ul-Haq ended up scoring similar numbers of runs at similar averages to Graeme Smith, Alviro Peterson, Jacques Kallis, FAF du Plessis and Dean Elgar.
The only problems were that Hafeez and Jamshed were obliterated completely while Amla and de Villiers scored hundreds of runs.
But four of the six batsmen in the two sides were evenly matched in terms of performance.
B) Wicketkeeping
Here is a major gulf in class. Sarfraz and de Villiers were well-matched behind the stumps, but de Villiers scored 352 runs and Sarfraz scored just 83.
C) Bowling
This is the area where I blame the selectors.
Every fool knows that in South Africa you require 3-4 fast bowlers per match, including 1-2 who can bat proficiently.
Pakistan was always going to struggle without Amir and Asif, especially as it's becoming clearer that Umar Gul is a useful third seamer and that Junaid Khan cannot be relied upon when the going gets tough.
But the selectors didn't trust Irfan and their only back-up seamer was Ehsan Adil, which meant that Rahat and Tanvir had to be called up as reinforcements.
Quite why Wahab Riaz didn't get called up is a mystery. South Africa is the one place on earth where a 145K bowler who gets bounce but has dodgy direction is actually a huge asset and not a liability.
D) PCB failures
I have three questions for the PCB.
1) Why did they accept an itinerary with two tests in totally alien conditions at Johannesburg and Centurion when minimal research would show that Asian sides do best at Port Elizabeth and Durban?
2) Why did they send the team so late, with so little acclimatisation, and accept a single warm-up match on the slow, flat wicket by the seaside at East London immediately before a Test at high altitude at Johannesburg on the world's fastest, bounciest wicket? 49 all out was a totally predictable consequence.
3) Everyone knows that from overs 20-80 in South Africa batsmen can safely counter-attack against the old ball - even Saeed Ajmal, Tanvir Ahmed and Sarfraz Ahmed did so. So why wasn't Umar Akmal selected at number 6 and Kamran Akmal at number 7 to cash in?
All in all, terrible planning, terrible preparation, inappropriate selection.
Those are the causes of failure on this tour.
And if you want to know my "horses for courses" team that should have played right from the First Test in Johannesburg, well this is what I have learned after 4 First Class matches. If we'd arrived before the New Year and played 4 First Class games before the First Test, of course such wisdom after the fact would have been gleaned in enough time, and Hafeez, Umar Gul, Jamshed, Tanvir, Sarfraz and Junaid wouldn't have made fools of themselves on the big stage:
1. Azhar Ali
2. Imran Farhat
3. Younis Khan
4. Misbah-ul-Haq
5. Asad Shafiq
6. Umar Akmal
7. Kamran Akmal
8. Azhar Mahmood
9. Wahab Riaz
10. Saeed Ajmal
11. Junaid Khan or Mohammed Irfan
I would expect this side to be at least as good with the ball as the one which played, but I would expect a lot more runs from the openers and especially from numbers 7,8 and 9 in the batting order.
Kamran Akmal's inferior keeping wouldn't have been a problem, as Umar Gul, Junaid Khan, Tanvir Ahmed and Mohammad Irfan didn't get any edges anyway.
A) Batting
Asad Shafiq, Younis Khan, Azhar Ali and Misbah-ul-Haq ended up scoring similar numbers of runs at similar averages to Graeme Smith, Alviro Peterson, Jacques Kallis, FAF du Plessis and Dean Elgar.
The only problems were that Hafeez and Jamshed were obliterated completely while Amla and de Villiers scored hundreds of runs.
But four of the six batsmen in the two sides were evenly matched in terms of performance.
B) Wicketkeeping
Here is a major gulf in class. Sarfraz and de Villiers were well-matched behind the stumps, but de Villiers scored 352 runs and Sarfraz scored just 83.
C) Bowling
This is the area where I blame the selectors.
Every fool knows that in South Africa you require 3-4 fast bowlers per match, including 1-2 who can bat proficiently.
Pakistan was always going to struggle without Amir and Asif, especially as it's becoming clearer that Umar Gul is a useful third seamer and that Junaid Khan cannot be relied upon when the going gets tough.
But the selectors didn't trust Irfan and their only back-up seamer was Ehsan Adil, which meant that Rahat and Tanvir had to be called up as reinforcements.
Quite why Wahab Riaz didn't get called up is a mystery. South Africa is the one place on earth where a 145K bowler who gets bounce but has dodgy direction is actually a huge asset and not a liability.
D) PCB failures
I have three questions for the PCB.
1) Why did they accept an itinerary with two tests in totally alien conditions at Johannesburg and Centurion when minimal research would show that Asian sides do best at Port Elizabeth and Durban?
2) Why did they send the team so late, with so little acclimatisation, and accept a single warm-up match on the slow, flat wicket by the seaside at East London immediately before a Test at high altitude at Johannesburg on the world's fastest, bounciest wicket? 49 all out was a totally predictable consequence.
3) Everyone knows that from overs 20-80 in South Africa batsmen can safely counter-attack against the old ball - even Saeed Ajmal, Tanvir Ahmed and Sarfraz Ahmed did so. So why wasn't Umar Akmal selected at number 6 and Kamran Akmal at number 7 to cash in?
All in all, terrible planning, terrible preparation, inappropriate selection.
Those are the causes of failure on this tour.
And if you want to know my "horses for courses" team that should have played right from the First Test in Johannesburg, well this is what I have learned after 4 First Class matches. If we'd arrived before the New Year and played 4 First Class games before the First Test, of course such wisdom after the fact would have been gleaned in enough time, and Hafeez, Umar Gul, Jamshed, Tanvir, Sarfraz and Junaid wouldn't have made fools of themselves on the big stage:
1. Azhar Ali
2. Imran Farhat
3. Younis Khan
4. Misbah-ul-Haq
5. Asad Shafiq
6. Umar Akmal
7. Kamran Akmal
8. Azhar Mahmood
9. Wahab Riaz
10. Saeed Ajmal
11. Junaid Khan or Mohammed Irfan
I would expect this side to be at least as good with the ball as the one which played, but I would expect a lot more runs from the openers and especially from numbers 7,8 and 9 in the batting order.
Kamran Akmal's inferior keeping wouldn't have been a problem, as Umar Gul, Junaid Khan, Tanvir Ahmed and Mohammad Irfan didn't get any edges anyway.
Last edited: