Dr_Bassim
Senior T20I Player
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2009
- Runs
- 18,939
- Post of the Week
- 8
Pakistan is a team which vacillates between extreme highs and lows. On their day, they look indefatigable, marching on like soldiers to the victorious land without any difficulty. On bad days, they look like 11 villagers, straggled together to eke out a team, just so the other team can have a good time.
When Pakistan hosted England after many years on home soil, it was an iconic moment.
A quickfire T20I start by Babar and Rizwan provided the right impetus in the first T201 before Pakistan lost their way and ended up with less than 160 which was chased down with venomous ease by England. That brought the critics back to the table. Should Babar and Rizwan be opening? Is the middle order worse Hong Kong? And what is Pakistan's ceiling as a score in T201?
The Gods did not disappoint in the next game as Pakistan went on to chase 200 with a world record opening partnership and shutting those same critics with supreme ease. Every over went for nearly 10 an over and the target was made to seem like a Lamborghini tractor cutting through ripe fields.
If that made the fans spin on the high, the next game was the complete opposite as Pakistan bowed to the pressure. Extreme lows. The critics were out again as England made it 2-1.
What followed was a yore of yesteryear, as Haris Rauf bowled some magical fast balls to snatch victory from jaws of defeat after Liam Dawson threatened to do the same for England. Spinning the cobwebs in the fourth game Pakistan managed to defend 140 odd and suddenly lead the series 3-2.
At that point, most people would have been excited.
But then England started attacking. And they attacked Pakistan to oblivion, where Pakistan had no answers to the viciousness of English batsmen as they carved through the bowlers as if they had seen a ghost.
A target of 170 was chased in under 15 overs to level the series and the final match a target of 210 was defended with ridiculous ease as Babar and Rizwan failed to repeat the heroics of the second T20I.
All doom and gloom? Not really. The series did end up with 4-3 result and Pakistan managed to compete adequately in most games. Haris Rauf bowled brilliantly, and in him Pakistan have found their one answer to death bowling. Shadab showed a few tricks on a turning track and Iftikhar even proved he could be useful on a spinning track.
But the weaknesses are just too glaring to overlook.
Its either Babar and Rizwan or bust. And they will eventually bust, if they have to chase 190 plus. And most teams will score 190 plus in Australia. Pakistan has to change their approach of being comfortable. I don't think that Babar and Rizwan are the best names for opening and one of them probably has to slot down the order and "Asif" or any other striker has to be given license to hit from ball 1. If it works, we score rapidly. If it doesn't, at least we tried. But to accept that Pakistan will target 160 only and try defending that (as Babar mentioned repeatedly) doesn't bode well for the future.
The middle order was non-existential. To be fair, they were always challenged by either lack of overs or too many overs with a 200 plus target bar one game. But whatever they showed in all those games was that they don't have the ability to win games.
Which brings us to the original question.
Why did we play Babar and Rizwan in 7 out of 7 games (Rizwan 6 out of 7). Were Pakistan trying to win the bilateral series? Which was of negligible value considering this was a hit out practice for the impending World Cup. Or were they trying to prove that Babar and Rizwan are the best openers Pakistan has? This is also probably true, but it doesn't help the middle order conundrum.
In short, Pakistan failed to experiment with the "fear of defeat" looming over their heads. They rarely changed the combination and tactics and they even made a guffaw whereby their lead coach declared that it was "fate that their team lost".
The fact that this was an amazing leadup to experiment and Pakistan failed to change anything doesn't give me any hope in the next Tri Series either where teams will look to change and chop and find what is the right combination.
In Pakistan's mind 160 is the target and Babar and Rizwan will open and everything else has to fall into place and if it doesn't, well it never was there anyway. That is a "defeatist attitude".
Pakistan has to find a way to change their approach. The only way this could be happen is to "play dice".
In other words, drop Rizwan and Babar and tell them they are on a plane to Australia anyways and will open in Australia. Let the team play without them.
With great power comes great responsibility, as Abe Lincoln once said. Make Shadab captain and see what our team does.
At least we won't die wondering what might have been.
The series was amazing, but it has left the same very questions unanswered as they were posed when the series started.
When Pakistan hosted England after many years on home soil, it was an iconic moment.
A quickfire T20I start by Babar and Rizwan provided the right impetus in the first T201 before Pakistan lost their way and ended up with less than 160 which was chased down with venomous ease by England. That brought the critics back to the table. Should Babar and Rizwan be opening? Is the middle order worse Hong Kong? And what is Pakistan's ceiling as a score in T201?
The Gods did not disappoint in the next game as Pakistan went on to chase 200 with a world record opening partnership and shutting those same critics with supreme ease. Every over went for nearly 10 an over and the target was made to seem like a Lamborghini tractor cutting through ripe fields.
If that made the fans spin on the high, the next game was the complete opposite as Pakistan bowed to the pressure. Extreme lows. The critics were out again as England made it 2-1.
What followed was a yore of yesteryear, as Haris Rauf bowled some magical fast balls to snatch victory from jaws of defeat after Liam Dawson threatened to do the same for England. Spinning the cobwebs in the fourth game Pakistan managed to defend 140 odd and suddenly lead the series 3-2.
At that point, most people would have been excited.
But then England started attacking. And they attacked Pakistan to oblivion, where Pakistan had no answers to the viciousness of English batsmen as they carved through the bowlers as if they had seen a ghost.
A target of 170 was chased in under 15 overs to level the series and the final match a target of 210 was defended with ridiculous ease as Babar and Rizwan failed to repeat the heroics of the second T20I.
All doom and gloom? Not really. The series did end up with 4-3 result and Pakistan managed to compete adequately in most games. Haris Rauf bowled brilliantly, and in him Pakistan have found their one answer to death bowling. Shadab showed a few tricks on a turning track and Iftikhar even proved he could be useful on a spinning track.
But the weaknesses are just too glaring to overlook.
Its either Babar and Rizwan or bust. And they will eventually bust, if they have to chase 190 plus. And most teams will score 190 plus in Australia. Pakistan has to change their approach of being comfortable. I don't think that Babar and Rizwan are the best names for opening and one of them probably has to slot down the order and "Asif" or any other striker has to be given license to hit from ball 1. If it works, we score rapidly. If it doesn't, at least we tried. But to accept that Pakistan will target 160 only and try defending that (as Babar mentioned repeatedly) doesn't bode well for the future.
The middle order was non-existential. To be fair, they were always challenged by either lack of overs or too many overs with a 200 plus target bar one game. But whatever they showed in all those games was that they don't have the ability to win games.
Which brings us to the original question.
Why did we play Babar and Rizwan in 7 out of 7 games (Rizwan 6 out of 7). Were Pakistan trying to win the bilateral series? Which was of negligible value considering this was a hit out practice for the impending World Cup. Or were they trying to prove that Babar and Rizwan are the best openers Pakistan has? This is also probably true, but it doesn't help the middle order conundrum.
In short, Pakistan failed to experiment with the "fear of defeat" looming over their heads. They rarely changed the combination and tactics and they even made a guffaw whereby their lead coach declared that it was "fate that their team lost".
The fact that this was an amazing leadup to experiment and Pakistan failed to change anything doesn't give me any hope in the next Tri Series either where teams will look to change and chop and find what is the right combination.
In Pakistan's mind 160 is the target and Babar and Rizwan will open and everything else has to fall into place and if it doesn't, well it never was there anyway. That is a "defeatist attitude".
Pakistan has to find a way to change their approach. The only way this could be happen is to "play dice".
In other words, drop Rizwan and Babar and tell them they are on a plane to Australia anyways and will open in Australia. Let the team play without them.
With great power comes great responsibility, as Abe Lincoln once said. Make Shadab captain and see what our team does.
At least we won't die wondering what might have been.
The series was amazing, but it has left the same very questions unanswered as they were posed when the series started.
Last edited by a moderator:
