UzmanBeast
First Class Star
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2020
- Runs
- 3,533
- Post of the Week
- 6
Across departments, regions, and different levels of infrastructure, Pakistan Cricket lacks visionaries and thinkers of the game. Events unfolding now are a culmination of the lack of development of a gritty, fighting mentality across all our levels of cricket.
Over our history, we have been blessed with some extremely raw talents. The most successful of these talents were revolutionary thinkers of the game. The intelligence in cricket, and the quality of knowledge possessed by some of these legends of the past were translated into great performances in tough situations. The 'street smarts' of back then have not only been lost in most cases, but unfortunately, they have failed to be developed by the future generations of cricketers. That pool of cricketing knowledge within the country has shrunk if anything, because despite batsmen and bowlers alike entering the circuit with heaps of talent, they leave little mark, if any, on the state of the country's cricket.
Simply ask yourselves, what 'era' of cricket has Pakistan enjoyed post the Imran Khan era? You can hardly think of any era, perhaps only Misbah-ul-Haq's era as test captain comes close, yet, perhaps the only 'revolutionary' aspect of that side was the rise and success of the leg-spinner Yasir Shah in an era which saw leg-spin diminish significantly in test cricket.
This knowledge deficit means that the team which we have selected now (again with a lack of vision and long-term planning in mind) is left stranded in unfamiliar waters, where lesser ranked teams are able to use their enhanced pool of knowledge to bring the advantage in their favor. This translates to simple decisions such as playing another left-arm spinner, bowling wider yorkers in the super over, and many other decisions.
The fact of the matter is that the Pakistan Cricket Team is not a very smart cricket team, by any means. And I do not mean academically or with regards to any stupid comments such as the inability to speak English, all of which is irrelevant. I mean with regards to the ability to understand, execute, and dominate cricketing matches and scenarios.
The problem lies in the whole cricketing turmoil that we know as Pakistan Cricket.
I'll only focus on T20s at the moment given that we are in the world cup at the moment.
From a batting perspective, this team is stuck in a phase of transitioning to a copied template of aggressive intent and powerful batting and a more cautious, cumulative manner in scoring runs. Once Rizwan lost his wicket, instead of playing a more reserved role, Usman Khan went after the opposition, and rightly so. After he fell, Fakhar Zaman tried his hand at the same 'shoot first, ask questions later' approach. Yet, neither could make an impact on the game.
The issue therein lies in the inability of the cricketers to take calculated, favorable risks on a regular basis. Usman Khan, as correctly pointed out by the commentators, was better off hitting straight than towards long-off, which is where the fielder was placed. Fakhar Zaman could have pulled that same delivery off the back foot knowing that the bounce on the pitch was not true at the time. Staying ahead of the game is the issue for this team, because most times, they react to situations too late. Once Usman Khan's wicket had been lost, with the team teetering at 24-2, there should have been sufficient evidence that a partnership between two of the better batsmen in the team was required. Yet, it took another wicket to fall from a poor shot for the batsmen to realize that all guns blazing was not the approach. In a ground which had favorable dimensions for a batting team with deeper pockets, the fact that singles and doubles being rejected where they were possible is alarming. The number of dot balls was incredibly high, nearly 50 or more if I'm not mistaken. that comes down to the captain of the team, who played 19 of those dot deliveries himself. Yes, it is a pressure situation, and he did make the right decision to take the game deep. But taking the game deep can also be done by being more positive in the running, and understanding that the flow of runs should not be choked. I believe Babar Azam was 5 runs from 18 deliveries at some stage post the powerplay, which is a horrendous sign for a batting team. On this pitch, I understand that it was indeed difficult to bat given the intelligent bowling by the USA team, yet, a minimum of a run-a-ball should be the expectation.
If one notices how the USA team approached the chase, they stood put when it mattered, punished poor deliveries when they arrived, and most importantly, they ran positively. Our fielders gave away doubles and singles where there should have been none, and part of the reason comes to the bowlers themselves.
Bowlers executing skills depends on bowlers taking the time to think about the impact of their deliveries on the game. It depends on the type of approach they have on that particular phase of the game. At times, it is sensible to bowl defensively, whereas other times, it is appropriate to bowl for wickets. The powerplay bowling was sub-par with the conditions available. Bowling on a good length was hardly seen, despite it being the most challenging length for Pakistan's batters to face even. This merely comes down to lack of attentiveness and proactiveness in the players - observing the success factors of other teams means sometimes having to put behind your egos and appreciating that the opposition has made better use of conditions. When it came to the death even, our bowlers who are known around the world for their death bowling failed to bowl to their respective fields. I'll go through a few shoddy decisions the bowling group made in the entire game, which ended up costing the match from a bowling perspective.
Case A - Shadab Khan bowling leg-breaks and googlies on a leg-stump line to Aaron Jones, who hit 10 sixes against Canada in the midwicket region, just to get deposited there for a six.
Case B - Shaheen Shah Afridi goes around the wicked to bowl wider out-swinging yorkers. Why is mid-off not pushed back to long-on? Seriously, what level of thinking is needed to understand that it is unlikely for a batsman to be able to turn the ball round the corner when it is swinging in the opposite direction and coming in at a yorker length? This cost the team a four.
Case C - Haris Rauf bowling yorkers on middle-leg stump line to Aaron Jones when he should have observed that Aaron Jones' off-side game was heavily limited. Similarly, long-off was not back and Jones first hit a six to the leg-side (favored side) and four down to long-off (no fielder).
Vision, intelligence, and acumen are so fundamentally important in a team setting. A visionary leader will select a team that is capable of not only doing the simple things correctly, but a team that possesses the talent and thinking capacity to adapt to difficult conditions and circumstances and still come out winning. Players who are intelligent will know which of their skillsets to hone and develop to become more dominant in the world game, and will know how to weigh risks and rewards in pressure situations. And this intelligence paves the way for a team and its players to read the game, understand the requirements of the circumstances, and execute plans which have a higher chance of success than failure. Even if a team like this falls short, they will have the capacity to assess their faults and ensure that mistakes spanning two editions of a world cup are not repeated.
I ask you to look through this Pakistan Team and name any visionaries you find in the squad. Do not be met with surprise if you cannot find one, because quite simply, I cannot find one either.
Over our history, we have been blessed with some extremely raw talents. The most successful of these talents were revolutionary thinkers of the game. The intelligence in cricket, and the quality of knowledge possessed by some of these legends of the past were translated into great performances in tough situations. The 'street smarts' of back then have not only been lost in most cases, but unfortunately, they have failed to be developed by the future generations of cricketers. That pool of cricketing knowledge within the country has shrunk if anything, because despite batsmen and bowlers alike entering the circuit with heaps of talent, they leave little mark, if any, on the state of the country's cricket.
Simply ask yourselves, what 'era' of cricket has Pakistan enjoyed post the Imran Khan era? You can hardly think of any era, perhaps only Misbah-ul-Haq's era as test captain comes close, yet, perhaps the only 'revolutionary' aspect of that side was the rise and success of the leg-spinner Yasir Shah in an era which saw leg-spin diminish significantly in test cricket.
This knowledge deficit means that the team which we have selected now (again with a lack of vision and long-term planning in mind) is left stranded in unfamiliar waters, where lesser ranked teams are able to use their enhanced pool of knowledge to bring the advantage in their favor. This translates to simple decisions such as playing another left-arm spinner, bowling wider yorkers in the super over, and many other decisions.
The fact of the matter is that the Pakistan Cricket Team is not a very smart cricket team, by any means. And I do not mean academically or with regards to any stupid comments such as the inability to speak English, all of which is irrelevant. I mean with regards to the ability to understand, execute, and dominate cricketing matches and scenarios.
The problem lies in the whole cricketing turmoil that we know as Pakistan Cricket.
I'll only focus on T20s at the moment given that we are in the world cup at the moment.
From a batting perspective, this team is stuck in a phase of transitioning to a copied template of aggressive intent and powerful batting and a more cautious, cumulative manner in scoring runs. Once Rizwan lost his wicket, instead of playing a more reserved role, Usman Khan went after the opposition, and rightly so. After he fell, Fakhar Zaman tried his hand at the same 'shoot first, ask questions later' approach. Yet, neither could make an impact on the game.
The issue therein lies in the inability of the cricketers to take calculated, favorable risks on a regular basis. Usman Khan, as correctly pointed out by the commentators, was better off hitting straight than towards long-off, which is where the fielder was placed. Fakhar Zaman could have pulled that same delivery off the back foot knowing that the bounce on the pitch was not true at the time. Staying ahead of the game is the issue for this team, because most times, they react to situations too late. Once Usman Khan's wicket had been lost, with the team teetering at 24-2, there should have been sufficient evidence that a partnership between two of the better batsmen in the team was required. Yet, it took another wicket to fall from a poor shot for the batsmen to realize that all guns blazing was not the approach. In a ground which had favorable dimensions for a batting team with deeper pockets, the fact that singles and doubles being rejected where they were possible is alarming. The number of dot balls was incredibly high, nearly 50 or more if I'm not mistaken. that comes down to the captain of the team, who played 19 of those dot deliveries himself. Yes, it is a pressure situation, and he did make the right decision to take the game deep. But taking the game deep can also be done by being more positive in the running, and understanding that the flow of runs should not be choked. I believe Babar Azam was 5 runs from 18 deliveries at some stage post the powerplay, which is a horrendous sign for a batting team. On this pitch, I understand that it was indeed difficult to bat given the intelligent bowling by the USA team, yet, a minimum of a run-a-ball should be the expectation.
If one notices how the USA team approached the chase, they stood put when it mattered, punished poor deliveries when they arrived, and most importantly, they ran positively. Our fielders gave away doubles and singles where there should have been none, and part of the reason comes to the bowlers themselves.
Bowlers executing skills depends on bowlers taking the time to think about the impact of their deliveries on the game. It depends on the type of approach they have on that particular phase of the game. At times, it is sensible to bowl defensively, whereas other times, it is appropriate to bowl for wickets. The powerplay bowling was sub-par with the conditions available. Bowling on a good length was hardly seen, despite it being the most challenging length for Pakistan's batters to face even. This merely comes down to lack of attentiveness and proactiveness in the players - observing the success factors of other teams means sometimes having to put behind your egos and appreciating that the opposition has made better use of conditions. When it came to the death even, our bowlers who are known around the world for their death bowling failed to bowl to their respective fields. I'll go through a few shoddy decisions the bowling group made in the entire game, which ended up costing the match from a bowling perspective.
Case A - Shadab Khan bowling leg-breaks and googlies on a leg-stump line to Aaron Jones, who hit 10 sixes against Canada in the midwicket region, just to get deposited there for a six.
Case B - Shaheen Shah Afridi goes around the wicked to bowl wider out-swinging yorkers. Why is mid-off not pushed back to long-on? Seriously, what level of thinking is needed to understand that it is unlikely for a batsman to be able to turn the ball round the corner when it is swinging in the opposite direction and coming in at a yorker length? This cost the team a four.
Case C - Haris Rauf bowling yorkers on middle-leg stump line to Aaron Jones when he should have observed that Aaron Jones' off-side game was heavily limited. Similarly, long-off was not back and Jones first hit a six to the leg-side (favored side) and four down to long-off (no fielder).
Vision, intelligence, and acumen are so fundamentally important in a team setting. A visionary leader will select a team that is capable of not only doing the simple things correctly, but a team that possesses the talent and thinking capacity to adapt to difficult conditions and circumstances and still come out winning. Players who are intelligent will know which of their skillsets to hone and develop to become more dominant in the world game, and will know how to weigh risks and rewards in pressure situations. And this intelligence paves the way for a team and its players to read the game, understand the requirements of the circumstances, and execute plans which have a higher chance of success than failure. Even if a team like this falls short, they will have the capacity to assess their faults and ensure that mistakes spanning two editions of a world cup are not repeated.
I ask you to look through this Pakistan Team and name any visionaries you find in the squad. Do not be met with surprise if you cannot find one, because quite simply, I cannot find one either.
