What's new

It's time for Pakistan (and other teams) to learn modern T20 batting from England

J

Joseph Gomes

First Class Star
Joined
Jan 18, 2017
Runs
4,075
Ever since Eoin Morgan became captain, England has transformed their team and entered a new era of LOI batting. But England hasn't just transformed themselves, they have also transformed cricket.

England's new approach of playing aggressive from beginning to end doesn't always bring result, but it does work most of the time. The old method of anchoring then exploding at death doesn't work anymore. The intent should be to assert dominance from ball 1 and continue. This has resulted in England winning 2 LOI world cups since 2019. And many more will follow.

Pakistan (and most other teams, including India), are stuck in a shell. A T20I doesn't last more than 120 balls, there's no need to get set and accelerate. Batters shouldn't expect bowlers to bail out, no matter however good the bowling is.

Congrats to England, they are far more deserving to win the cup than any other country. They have cracked the code, it's about time other teams learn to copy, or stay behind.
 
KL should be dropped.

Rope in Samson/ Shaw/ Ishan/ Gill and DD, let's see who grabs more opportunities!!!

Also please ... add more bowlers who can hit a boundary, out batting currently ends at no 6 which is criminal
 
Of course.

But we never learn.

Same mistakes will cost us WCs in the next decade mark my words.
 
POTW. The seeds were planted for this triumph a long time ago, back when Morgan was a fledgling. Great to see fearless cricket winning the day.
 
Joseph Gomes said:
Ever since Eoin Morgan became captain, England has transformed their team and entered a new era of LOI batting. But England hasn't just transformed themselves, they have also transformed cricket.

England's new approach of playing aggressive from beginning to end doesn't always bring result, but it does work most of the time. The old method of anchoring then exploding at death doesn't work anymore. The intent should be to assert dominance from ball 1 and continue. This has resulted in England winning 2 LOI world cups since 2019. And many more will follow.

Pakistan (and most other teams, including India), are stuck in a shell. A T20I doesn't last more than 120 balls, there's no need to get set and accelerate. Batters shouldn't expect bowlers to bail out, no matter however good the bowling is.

Congrats to England, they are far more deserving to win the cup than any other country. They have cracked the code, it's about time other teams learn to copy, or stay behind.
Click to expand...

But you need to have the ability to play that way.

Can't expect the likes of Babar, Rizwan, Williamson or Kohli to bat like Butler or Hales.

It will need a wholesome change in attitude right from the junior cricket level to top-tier domestic cricket to unearth a few guys who can bat like Eng.

But it will also hamper the chances of producing proper Test batters as we saw with England....so it's not that straight-forward.
 
Pakistan had the chance to form one of the most dangerous and electrifying opening combo in T20 history, but they chickened out and went for softies like India (KL Rahul).

Sharjeel Khan
Fakhar Zaman
Babar Azam
Mohammad Haris (wk)
Umar Akmal (for those who have a problem with Umar Akmal, GIVE ME ONE PLAYER THAT HAS DONE WHAT HE HAS DONE FOR PAKISTAN IN THE MIDDLE ORDER SINCE HIS LAST GAME FOR PAKISTAN)
 
Hang on, what does the OP mean by learn modern T20 batting from England? Aggressive mindset? Capitalizing in the PP phase? Neither are a new concept nor lost upon other teams.

The challenge is to find batsmen that have an aggressive mindset, fearless, and 360/Power hitting capabilities!

Nothing to learn, but rather to seek!
 
This "Modern" england is good only on flat tracks. lol If ball does slightly something they become 1970s England
 
In India's case, I would say that it's only the openers holding team back. Kohli, SKY, Pandaya, Jadeja and Pant are all more than capable of being explosive.

Pakistan on the other hand has much bigger problem even lower down the order, while Bangladesh sadly are most hopeless of the bunch.
 
I guess it was the mindset that England played with throughout the tournament. Aggression doesn't mean slogging. It most often means intent and street smartness to assess the condition, match awareness, and team composition.
Today, Pakistan's middle order tried to play aggressively and lost 20 runs in the end. If Masood or Babar held one end, it could have been a different story.
It would be best if you capitalize the power play(bowling or batting). It sometimes means that if the pitch offers assistance to the bowlers, the batters need to be innovative and willing to take calculated risk as opposed to anchoring and protecting wickets.
You need a wicket taking bowlers as opposed to safe bowlers(safe bowlers need only at the death overs).
You need 3-4 allrounders who can hit big at the backend. It gives the top order to play with freedom.
England throughout the tournament was able assess the condition better than their opposition barring the Ireland game.

Also, England players were professional and stick to their process without any hoopla. In subcontinent, teams lose their way for non cricketing reasons due to superstar culture, arrogant media and fans and also inefficient management.
 
I don't want to sound like an excuse-monger but I made this point in the other thread.

The last four t20 finals were won by chasing teams. The last eight t20 semifinals were won by chasing teams.

As t20 has evolved, teams have perfected the art of chasing in knockouts. Pakistan could have won if they were chasing.
 
One aspect you want to copy from England is loading the side with batsmen and all rounders. There is no concept of "specialst bowlers" "specialist batsmen" in England. Most of them can bowl, Most of them can bat. Depth in both areas. So they can always recover from any losing position. It is the team combination you want to copy not the "aggression". It is a foolproof strategy especially when you chase totals on reasonably good batting surfaces.
 
Weird thread.

Pakistan didnt even lose the game because it doesnt play modern day cricket. It lost because the batters try to play modern day cricket failed.

You dont play aggressive cricket just for the sake of it.

Cricket should be played according to the situation. Match was in MCG, and from the first india vs pakistan match we knew that at MCG you cant hit boundaries and need to rotate strike. It is easier to score twos and threes at mcg rather than getting boundaries.

When babar and rizwan were rotating strike everything was well. Rizwan got out and in came Garris. Harris is a modern day cricketer isnt he? He ended up play 5 dot balls. Why? Because he was playing at MCG not SCG ot even perth. All his shots went straight to the fielder because you cant hit on this ground. You need a delivery in am area where you can hit in the empty space.

Harris played 5 dot balls that created score card pressure. He could had score singles and doubles, but no he did not. Reason being we think modern day cricket is all sixes and fours when in fact its about playing according to the situation and conditions. Harris played a terrible innings and threw his wicket and created pressure.

Shan masood came in and because shan rotated strike at mcg against india, he knew what mcg warranted. Shan batted beutifully by rotating the strike

At the end when shan, shadab, and nawaz got out, it was because they were thinking about scoring 10+ runs an over through boundaries, when the same goal could had been achieved by singles, doubles amd tripples.

Waseem jr, the so called all rounder, again wasted 7 deliveries because instead of rotating strike he was trying to strike the ball at MCG. Doesnt happen.

Now you will comment, but buttler did it on the same ground. Buttler was facing Pakistani pacers bowling full length delivery at 140kph+. Why was shaheen bowling full, because although bowling at that length is dangerou due to the flick of a wrost can cause an easy 4, but its that area where you can generate movement and get the ball to swing where the batsman can miss and you get wicket lbw or bowled. It worked.

Harris rauf bowled well, but his pace does meam that a tap of the bat leads to a boundary. Naseem shah aswell.

England was not hitting sixes, they were just utilizing pakistans pace agains them because we were forced to bowl attacking deliveries due to the low score and england had advantage.

Pakistan does not need an overhaul just for the sake of things. We played good cricketz we just didnt play according to MCG.

I dont know how much more could had pakistan attacked at mcg, this was not a ground where you needed to attack. You play Asif Ali here and he would had failed aswell.

Thus, the whole theory of this thread is flawd and misses the point completely with regards to why we lost.
 
Major said:
Weird thread.

Pakistan didnt even lose the game because it doesnt play modern day cricket. It lost because the batters try to play modern day cricket failed.

You dont play aggressive cricket just for the sake of it.

Cricket should be played according to the situation. Match was in MCG, and from the first india vs pakistan match we knew that at MCG you cant hit boundaries and need to rotate strike. It is easier to score twos and threes at mcg rather than getting boundaries.

When babar and rizwan were rotating strike everything was well. Rizwan got out and in came Garris. Harris is a modern day cricketer isnt he? He ended up play 5 dot balls. Why? Because he was playing at MCG not SCG ot even perth. All his shots went straight to the fielder because you cant hit on this ground. You need a delivery in am area where you can hit in the empty space.

Harris played 5 dot balls that created score card pressure. He could had score singles and doubles, but no he did not. Reason being we think modern day cricket is all sixes and fours when in fact its about playing according to the situation and conditions. Harris played a terrible innings and threw his wicket and created pressure.

Shan masood came in and because shan rotated strike at mcg against india, he knew what mcg warranted. Shan batted beutifully by rotating the strike

At the end when shan, shadab, and nawaz got out, it was because they were thinking about scoring 10+ runs an over through boundaries, when the same goal could had been achieved by singles, doubles amd tripples.

Waseem jr, the so called all rounder, again wasted 7 deliveries because instead of rotating strike he was trying to strike the ball at MCG. Doesnt happen.

Now you will comment, but buttler did it on the same ground. Buttler was facing Pakistani pacers bowling full length delivery at 140kph+. Why was shaheen bowling full, because although bowling at that length is dangerou due to the flick of a wrost can cause an easy 4, but its that area where you can generate movement and get the ball to swing where the batsman can miss and you get wicket lbw or bowled. It worked.

Harris rauf bowled well, but his pace does meam that a tap of the bat leads to a boundary. Naseem shah aswell.

England was not hitting sixes, they were just utilizing pakistans pace agains them because we were forced to bowl attacking deliveries due to the low score and england had advantage.

Pakistan does not need an overhaul just for the sake of things. We played good cricketz we just didnt play according to MCG.

I dont know how much more could had pakistan attacked at mcg, this was not a ground where you needed to attack. You play Asif Ali here and he would had failed aswell.

Thus, the whole theory of this thread is flawd and misses the point completely with regards to why we lost.
Click to expand...

Modern day cricket isn't all about hitting 6s and 4s it's also about rotating strike and keeping the scoreboard ticking even when wickets fall.
The problem with Babar and Rizwan is that they consume far too many dot balls, barely rotate strike unless playing on a massive ground like MCG and barely hit boundaries in the powerplay.
A typical powerplay even without the loss of wicket would be like 40-0 which is far too low.
Haris is just a hack at the moment needs to develop into a proper batsman. Nothing 'modern' about him we've had plenty of players like him in the past.
Our middle order deserves the bulk of blame for today's defeat but that doesn't take away the fact that Babar and Rizwan need to stop opening together. Babar should either go down to 3 or 4 or quit playing t20s altogether.
 
Get a baseball coach to learn proper hitting,
Ability to handle pressure and when to release
T20 is game of hybrid players ala all rounders

Buttler Hales Salt Brook Stokes Mo Livgst Curran Woakes Dily Jordan

There is no no.11 in this side in fact you can shuffle it as you like
 
We don't have the batsmen that England have it will take years and the improvement should start from domestic
 
Good

Major said:
Weird thread.

Pakistan didnt even lose the game because it doesnt play modern day cricket. It lost because the batters try to play modern day cricket failed.

You dont play aggressive cricket just for the sake of it.

Cricket should be played according to the situation. Match was in MCG, and from the first india vs pakistan match we knew that at MCG you cant hit boundaries and need to rotate strike. It is easier to score twos and threes at mcg rather than getting boundaries.

When babar and rizwan were rotating strike everything was well. Rizwan got out and in came Garris. Harris is a modern day cricketer isnt he? He ended up play 5 dot balls. Why? Because he was playing at MCG not SCG ot even perth. All his shots went straight to the fielder because you cant hit on this ground. You need a delivery in am area where you can hit in the empty space.

Harris played 5 dot balls that created score card pressure. He could had score singles and doubles, but no he did not. Reason being we think modern day cricket is all sixes and fours when in fact its about playing according to the situation and conditions. Harris played a terrible innings and threw his wicket and created pressure.

Shan masood came in and because shan rotated strike at mcg against india, he knew what mcg warranted. Shan batted beutifully by rotating the strike

At the end when shan, shadab, and nawaz got out, it was because they were thinking about scoring 10+ runs an over through boundaries, when the same goal could had been achieved by singles, doubles amd tripples.

Waseem jr, the so called all rounder, again wasted 7 deliveries because instead of rotating strike he was trying to strike the ball at MCG. Doesnt happen.

Now you will comment, but buttler did it on the same ground. Buttler was facing Pakistani pacers bowling full length delivery at 140kph+. Why was shaheen bowling full, because although bowling at that length is dangerou due to the flick of a wrost can cause an easy 4, but its that area where you can generate movement and get the ball to swing where the batsman can miss and you get wicket lbw or bowled. It worked.

Harris rauf bowled well, but his pace does meam that a tap of the bat leads to a boundary. Naseem shah aswell.

England was not hitting sixes, they were just utilizing pakistans pace agains them because we were forced to bowl attacking deliveries due to the low score and england had advantage.

Pakistan does not need an overhaul just for the sake of things. We played good cricketz we just didnt play according to MCG.

I dont know how much more could had pakistan attacked at mcg, this was not a ground where you needed to attack. You play Asif Ali here and he would had failed aswell.

Thus, the whole theory of this thread is flawd and misses the point completely with regards to why we lost.
Click to expand...

Exactly correct analysis...
 
The reason England can bat the way they do is because their batting lineup goes all the way down to number 11. No other team has that luxury. England has mastered the T20 formula of maximizing the number of allrounders in the team.

Look at India, they tried to adopt the ‘fearless approach’ but soon realized that once you are 3-4 down in powerplay you end up being in an even worse position because the tail can’t bat.
 
Joseph Gomes said:
Ever since Eoin Morgan became captain, England has transformed their team and entered a new era of LOI batting. But England hasn't just transformed themselves, they have also transformed cricket.

England's new approach of playing aggressive from beginning to end doesn't always bring result, but it does work most of the time. The old method of anchoring then exploding at death doesn't work anymore. The intent should be to assert dominance from ball 1 and continue. This has resulted in England winning 2 LOI world cups since 2019. And many more will follow.

Pakistan (and most other teams, including India), are stuck in a shell. A T20I doesn't last more than 120 balls, there's no need to get set and accelerate. Batters shouldn't expect bowlers to bail out, no matter however good the bowling is.

Congrats to England, they are far more deserving to win the cup than any other country. They have cracked the code, it's about time other teams learn to copy, or stay behind.
Click to expand...

Congrats to England.

Sure, BUT both finals that England won were due to Stokes clutch innings, and he played the classic old school way. The rest of the batting pretty much imploded and if it weren’t for stokes, 137 was looking curtains for the “best batting” in the WC.

“Aggressive batting” is overrated. It’s one dimensional. Teams should learn to adapt to all conditions and be able to determine the right score on the ground and work backwards from that to figure out plans and tactics. If Pak had done that and didn’t resort to “intent” and “agressive batting” in last 5 overs, and played to the conditions and nudged it around to 160, it could have been more than enough for Eng…
 
Farabi said:
Thanks. POTM!

+1
Click to expand...

Like England today at 49-3 in 6 overs? How is this modern? We have been doing this for a decade plus…and faltering chasing even 140 with ease. No thank you.

Last think we need is more hack type players who once in a while give you a out of the world start but mostly have us at 40-3 and out of the game
 
This years psl will bring in lots of changes. Bowling is sorted but there will be new openers and aggression knocking on the selectors. This is going to happen.
 
Pakistan need power hitters , not sloggers.

To change mind set get a proper coach and give time , make long term plans and be patient if new players with positive batsmen lose a few games .
 
After reaching the finals of the World Cup, cant see our approach towards the game changing much. Rizwan and Babar will continue to open the batting. They will have success some days because Babar in the end is a good batsman while Rizwan is mentally very strong however overall we will struggle to post targets over 175 regularly. In essence we will continue to waste the powerplay. Also, after this WC dont see us changing Shan Masood or Iftikhar either so expect this same team 2 years down the line unless there is a drastic dip in form. We probably would need to lose a series against Bangladesh or Zimbabwe for selectors to really make changes.

Though yes England have nailed the template on how T20s should be played.
 
AamchiMumbaikar said:
KL should be dropped.

Rope in Samson/ Shaw/ Ishan/ Gill and DD, let's see who grabs more opportunities!!!

Also please ... add more bowlers who can hit a boundary, out batting currently ends at no 6 which is criminal
Click to expand...


Big hitters in domestic cricket Tilak Varma, Sharukh khan, Tewatia, J Sharma
 
jnaveen1980 said:
This "Modern" england is good only on flat tracks. lol If ball does slightly something they become 1970s England
Click to expand...

This World Cup was played on lively wickets, not flat tracks. They won.

2019 World Cup was not played on flat pitches either, most games were low scoring. They won.

Lazy analysis for sure.
 
The word aggression resonates with mid-wicket slogs for Pakistan batsmen. That too of front foot to volleys with 65m boundaries.

If any of these crielteria are not met then they'll look like they can't even hold the bat.

No other shot shall be attempted.
 
Major said:
Weird thread.

Pakistan didnt even lose the game because it doesnt play modern day cricket. It lost because the batters try to play modern day cricket failed.

You dont play aggressive cricket just for the sake of it.

Cricket should be played according to the situation. Match was in MCG, and from the first india vs pakistan match we knew that at MCG you cant hit boundaries and need to rotate strike. It is easier to score twos and threes at mcg rather than getting boundaries.

When babar and rizwan were rotating strike everything was well. Rizwan got out and in came Garris. Harris is a modern day cricketer isnt he? He ended up play 5 dot balls. Why? Because he was playing at MCG not SCG ot even perth. All his shots went straight to the fielder because you cant hit on this ground. You need a delivery in am area where you can hit in the empty space.

Harris played 5 dot balls that created score card pressure. He could had score singles and doubles, but no he did not. Reason being we think modern day cricket is all sixes and fours when in fact its about playing according to the situation and conditions. Harris played a terrible innings and threw his wicket and created pressure.

Shan masood came in and because shan rotated strike at mcg against india, he knew what mcg warranted. Shan batted beutifully by rotating the strike

At the end when shan, shadab, and nawaz got out, it was because they were thinking about scoring 10+ runs an over through boundaries, when the same goal could had been achieved by singles, doubles amd tripples.

Waseem jr, the so called all rounder, again wasted 7 deliveries because instead of rotating strike he was trying to strike the ball at MCG. Doesnt happen.

Now you will comment, but buttler did it on the same ground. Buttler was facing Pakistani pacers bowling full length delivery at 140kph+. Why was shaheen bowling full, because although bowling at that length is dangerou due to the flick of a wrost can cause an easy 4, but its that area where you can generate movement and get the ball to swing where the batsman can miss and you get wicket lbw or bowled. It worked.

Harris rauf bowled well, but his pace does meam that a tap of the bat leads to a boundary. Naseem shah aswell.

England was not hitting sixes, they were just utilizing pakistans pace agains them because we were forced to bowl attacking deliveries due to the low score and england had advantage.

Pakistan does not need an overhaul just for the sake of things. We played good cricketz we just didnt play according to MCG.

I dont know how much more could had pakistan attacked at mcg, this was not a ground where you needed to attack. You play Asif Ali here and he would had failed aswell.

Thus, the whole theory of this thread is flawd and misses the point completely with regards to why we lost.
Click to expand...

With that sort of field placement there was no chance for 1's and 2's England hit 6 more boundaries than us.

It all comes down to how we make use of our powerplay when only 2 fielders are allowed outside the circle.

what exactly babar and rizwan are doing to take advantage of the powerplay?

This is where we lose everytime and the reason why babar needs to come 1 down and allow harris/fakhar/asif to open and make use of the power play vs the fast bowlers.

Even if we lose a wicket or 2 it doesn't matter england lost 3 wickets in powerplay

Coming at 3 that's where babar is useful with shan masood tuk tuking and building innings wi Vs spin bowlers and taking those singles doubles and tripples your talking about.

If these 2 last till the last powerplay they will go all out if not with their tuk tuking it will leave us with a half decent score it does not put scoreboard pressure on our lower order hence then don't have to go 10+ an over
 
Talk is cheap but England have the players who can play this kind of cricket. Australia has Maxwell, Stoinis, Marsh who are close.
Rest of the countries simply don't have Hales, Butler, Bairstow, Livingstone, Moeen ali type hitters, so it is not possible for them to play that kind of cricket.
 
SamNJ said:
Talk is cheap but England have the players who can play this kind of cricket. Australia has Maxwell, Stoinis, Marsh who are close.
Rest of the countries simply don't have Hales, Butler, Bairstow, Livingstone, Moeen ali type hitters, so it is not possible for them to play that kind of cricket.
Click to expand...
Agree.Other teams don’t have batsmen who can hit the ball a long way.England has many.Salt,Brooks,Butler,Livingstone,Moeed,Bairstow,Hales,Jacks,Cox and many others are big hitters.
 
The problem with this thread, is that England don't mindlessly bash. They literally have the best power hitters in the world, however they still focus on singles and doubles.

It's their mentality, while other teams look at pitches and say "oh hey, I think it's a good 280 to 290 pitch", England genuinely believe that one day they'll make a 500, and they almost did against Netherlands.

They stick to the basics like any other team, taking singles, finding gaps, putting bad balls away, but the key difference is mindset.

They have their sights set on putting such a total that no batting team can reasonably chase it. They also do other innovative things, like playing unorthodox shots, so good pitched deliveries still go to the boundary, they try to turn 1's into 2's and 2's into 3's, and they don't bother playing for personal milestones.

The fact that each player in England except for Joe root can just play in any position from opening to No 8 speaks volume.

Always captilising on short and wide, overpitched and full toss deliveries + mastering playing unorthodox shots to put away good deliveries and force the bowler to change line and length and not play their natural game + never playing for personal milestones, always setting 450+ target in sight + always trying to turn singles into doubles is what puts them ahead.

They don't mindlessly bash like fans assume. Other players in the world like kholi can be predictable, while kholi is good, he's still traditional in pretty much accumulating, punishing bad deliveries and accelerating and trying a bit of calculated risk at the end of the innings.

England batsmen are just too unpredictable and don't stick to the same formula as other teams hence their the best.
 
Powerplay batting strike rates for T20I teams since 2022:

135.9 – South Africa
133.9 – West Indies
133.2 – England
132.3 – Australia
128.0 – India
122.9 – Ireland
120.5 – New Zealand
119.9 – Bangladesh
115.2 – Pakistan
109.8 – Sri Lanka
108.8 – Afghanistan
108.8 – Zimbabwe

We had a good T20I side until 2021, and now we have fallen to a level where we are struggling to even hit sixes in the power play.
 
It's not about learning from soneone else they all are international players and all know how to swing the bat. All they need is a positive courageous mindset and better execution and that will start happening when they stop playing for their own records.
 
Cricket Warrior said:
It's not about learning from soneone else they all are international players and all know how to swing the bat. All they need is a positive courageous mindset and better execution and that will start happening when they stop playing for their own records.
Click to expand...
Once you reach the international level then it's all about mental toughness.
 
We have those players in our squad, but we are wasting them in the middle order. A prime example is Fakhar Zaman.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
Babar Azam should be ashamed and learn from Ibrahim Zadran how to win matches against big teams?
Replies
52
Views
2K
Snowflake
S
NeVerMind
Is it time for British Pakistanis to support England over Pakistan in cricket?
2
Replies
151
Views
6K
BouncerGuy
BouncerGuy
Cricket Warrior
“It's become a norm to offer undue criticism on Pakistan team": Haris Rauf
Replies
23
Views
1K
BouncerGuy
BouncerGuy
BouncerGuy
Beyond the Boundary: Pakistan Champions Trophy 2025 campaign: Only Win, no time for Learn (By Rana)
Replies
12
Views
1K
jnaveen1980
J
FearlessRoar
Unbiased fact: Pakistan cricket falls behind due to a lack of communication skills, modern technology, and equipment
Replies
9
Views
655
BouncerGuy
BouncerGuy
Back
Top