What's new

Playing Mohammad Rizwan at #4 probably cost Pakistan dearly in the ODI series vs Australia

S

srh

Senior T20I Player
Joined
Jan 25, 2009
Runs
18,288
Playing Rizwan at #4 has cost Pakistan dearly. This has forced Pakistan to play an accumulator Saad Ali at #6 making Pakistan lower order extremely week. Arthur is not a good talent evaluator.
 
No, batsmen scoring selfish centuries, fifties and forties caused Pakistan to lose the series
 
Yes because Umar Akmal's awesome hoicks to midwicket, 5 times out in 5 games, would have won Pakistan the games for sure
 
Zhasan said:
No, batsmen scoring selfish centuries, fifties and forties caused Pakistan to lose the series
Click to expand...

If you see any successful chase by any other team in history, a RRR of 7 to 9 for the last 5-6 overs is very common. That is not where Pakistan lost, Pakistan lost because they have no finisher who has the confidence to close those games. They have either sloggers or players who cannot accelerate.
 
Indiafan said:
Yes because Umar Akmal's awesome hoicks to midwicket, 5 times out in 5 games, would have won Pakistan the games for sure
Click to expand...

He was playing selflessly and willing to sacrifice his wicket every time the going got tough.
 
Indiafan said:
If you see any successful chase by any other team in history, a RRR of 7 to 9 for the last 5-6 overs is very common. That is not where Pakistan lost, Pakistan lost because they have no finisher who has the confidence to close those games. They have either sloggers or players who cannot accelerate.
Click to expand...

100% right. We do not have any finishers and don’t have batsmen who can accelerate and this has been a problem for years
 
adzzy786 said:
He was playing selflessly and willing to sacrifice his wicket every time the going got tough.
Click to expand...

Lol this is hilarious . Umar Akmal and his brain farts are now being termed as an act of Seflessness. The man can do no wrong .
 
With two hundreds in five games, he really proved that it was a tactical blunder.
 
srh said:
Playing Rizwan at #4 has cost Pakistan dearly. This has forced Pakistan to play an accumulator Saad Ali at #6 making Pakistan lower order extremely week. Arthur is not a good talent evaluator.
Click to expand...

Just last month you were ready to play Rizwan at any cost and abused Sarfaraz left and right. Now a sudden change of heart?
 
Mamoon said:
With two hundreds in five games, he really proved that it was a tactical blunder.
Click to expand...

Rizwan scored two centuries in one series
Sarfraz hasn't scored one century in multiple series' in the past few years
 
I disagree . His innings the other day was scored at SR of 100 and was in fact like that all through the innings . He scored well above the rate . Remember we chasing 270 not 350.

He scored 102 of 100 balls. Which means the rest of the team needed to score about 168 of 200 balls. So how he cost them the series is beyond me as he never even batted in the first match and went cheaply In the other two games without facing many balls.
 
Yasir Shah was the biggest liability both in bowling and even batting. Him playing made our tail obnoxiously long, Zafar Gohar shouldve been selected.
 
aloo paratha said:
Yasir Shah was the biggest liability both in bowling and even batting. Him playing made our tail obnoxiously long, Zafar Gohar shouldve been selected.
Click to expand...

Having such a poor limited over spinner in UAE was a disaster
 
Our bowling was a bigger issue than our batting. We already know our batting line up cannot score big 300 scores. I thought our bowling was capable but to be fair we selected some poor bowlers.
 
Don't think so, Rizwan is an accumulator and he was rightly elevated up the order and did a good job in most of the odis.

We don't have a certified finisher in our ranks and that is evident from the last two odis. None of the players who were missing today can claim to be finishers either, I've seen Malik finish games but only against weaker opposition. No one in the batting order is good enough to finish games against stronger opposition.
 
Not sure what Sarfraz has to do with every thread. He is captain and better wicketkeeperso he will play. Rizwan is competing with a full time batsmen, and there are many better than him
 
Last edited:
I would say Rizwan + Harris

On the face of it, both had 2 centuries in the series and were very successful.

But in reality, in modern day cricket you can afford to score a century at a SR of 90 or 100. If you're going to play 100 balls, you need to score 130.
If you're playing 130 balls, you need to get to 160

SR of 90/100 is okay for half centuries, but doesn't cut it for centuries. Not on flat UAE wickets
 
PakPremi said:
Not sure what Sarfraz has to do with every thread. He is captain and better wicketkeeperso he will play. Rizwan is competing with a full time batsmen, and there are many better than him
Click to expand...

People's obsession and hate with Sarfraz is next level. Even though he is not playing this series haters still find a way to bash him left , right and center.
 
The blind hate is disgusting. Rizwan has played very well. After years of bashing like idiots, I can see why it's difficult to digest.
 
Maybe we should just play Rizwan as a full time batsman. Him and Haris were the only two with any consistency.
 
I'd disagree... Because if you have someone providing you a 100 runs at a 100 strike rate, thats a majority of the innings going at 6 an over. It now comes down to someone late in the order to provide a 30 off 20 or 45 off 30 and finish the game.
 
coy0607 said:
I would say Rizwan + Harris

On the face of it, both had 2 centuries in the series and were very successful.

But in reality, in modern day cricket you can afford to score a century at a SR of 90 or 100. If you're going to play 100 balls, you need to score 130.
If you're playing 130 balls, you need to get to 160

SR of 90/100 is okay for half centuries, but doesn't cut it for centuries. Not on flat UAE wickets
Click to expand...

I'd disagree... Because if you have someone providing you a 100 runs at a 100 strike rate, thats a majority of the innings going at 6 an over. It now comes down to someone late in the order to provide a 30 off 20 or 45 off 30 and finish the game.
 
hashimafzal said:
I'd disagree... Because if you have someone providing you a 100 runs at a 100 strike rate, thats a majority of the innings going at 6 an over. It now comes down to someone late in the order to provide a 30 off 20 or 45 off 30 and finish the game.
Click to expand...

That's my view as well. We were well placed in those games to win the games when Rizwan got out, far as I am concerned the middle order hitters totally failed to follow through. If you have a wk who can score centuries you are in a pretty good position. He has a far more secure game than Sarfraz, and is a better keeper too. Sarfraz can hit better, but his match winning knocks are too few and far between these days.
 
hashimafzal said:
I'd disagree... Because if you have someone providing you a 100 runs at a 100 strike rate, thats a majority of the innings going at 6 an over. It now comes down to someone late in the order to provide a 30 off 20 or 45 off 30 and finish the game.
Click to expand...

I agree. In a perfect scenario you have both: the set batsmen really picking it up in the last 10 overs and sloggers coming in late and doing the same.

Pakistan team clearly doesn't have a good end of innings hitter, so the set batsmen have to take on even more responsibility. If the set batsmen isn't going to score at a higher rate, then no one in this Pakistani team is
 
Dont think that is a fair assesssment. For me Rizwan was the find of the series. I know he has been around for a while, but he has guaranteed his spot.

I would play him at 4 in the WC.
 
OP are you for real?? The guy scored two tons in this series at a pretty good SR. Sarfraz hasn't scored one in four years.
 
He has done his job,lack of finisher/pinch hitter is what cost us the most in this series.
 
And lack of spinners too,zafar is so good i don't understand why he is not playing,even the young umar is far better than yasir.
 
Who care about Sarfraz? I have long lobby to remove him for LOI teams (both ODI and T20l) for a WK who is a better hitter someone like Bismillah Khan.

This thread is about this tour only. And it is about improvisation with the choices available i.e. looking for the best solution with what is available.

Pakistan's ODI team was missing a hitter at #6 to be sandwiched between Umar Akmal at #5 and Imad Wasim at #7. From the current available squad, Saad is a better accumulator than Rizwan while Rizwan can hit better than Saad so Pakistan should have play Saad at #4 and Rizwan at #6. That would have strengthened the middle order and lower middle order. But alas Arthur had no clue about a batsman's strengths and weaknesses. This is not the 1st time Arthur has royally screwed up.
 
hashimafzal said:
I'd disagree... Because if you have someone providing you a 100 runs at a 100 strike rate, thats a majority of the innings going at 6 an over. It now comes down to someone late in the order to provide a 30 off 20 or 45 off 30 and finish the game.
Click to expand...

It's the PP syndrome, blame the guy who made most of the runs, don't blame the others who couldn't see the game through.
 
Dont get the hate for Rizwan. Name me another Pakistan wicket-keeper who has scored two separate centuries in a 5 game ODI series? I cant think of another one in recent times. His keeping is pretty tidy too.

Sarfraz is no Dhoni in terms of being a finisher and has been a dud with the bat since the beginning of 2018.
 
Last edited:
Needed those 15 runs of 10 balls type of selfless innings which the specialist captain plays these days.
 
srh said:
Who care about Sarfraz? I have long lobby to remove him for LOI teams (both ODI and T20l) for a WK who is a better hitter someone like Bismillah Khan.

This thread is about this tour only. And it is about improvisation with the choices available i.e. looking for the best solution with what is available.

Pakistan's ODI team was missing a hitter at #6 to be sandwiched between Umar Akmal at #5 and Imad Wasim at #7. From the current available squad, Saad is a better accumulator than Rizwan while Rizwan can hit better than Saad so Pakistan should have play Saad at #4 and Rizwan at #6. That would have strengthened the middle order and lower middle order. But alas Arthur had no clue about a batsman's strengths and weaknesses. This is not the 1st time Arthur has royally screwed up.
Click to expand...

Saad is over hyped
 
I don't think the OP is actually putting the blame on Rizwan but is talking about how we messed up the batting order with the wrong type of player coming in and the wrong time. Saad Ali for example.
 
Sherlock said:
I don't think the OP is actually putting the blame on Rizwan but is talking about how we messed up the batting order with the wrong type of player coming in and the wrong time. Saad Ali for example.
Click to expand...

Not like Saad Ali was going to score as much as Rizwan did.

Plus it's unfair to Rizwan to have a newbie slotted in Rizwan's position.

Rizwan has waited a long time and now Saad has to do the same.
 
Sherlock said:
I don't think the OP is actually putting the blame on Rizwan but is talking about how we messed up the batting order with the wrong type of player coming in and the wrong time. Saad Ali for example.
Click to expand...

I guess this situation happened as it was wrong kinds of players selected for wrong formats. When they already selected consolidators in Shan, Imam, Abid, Haris, Rizwan there was no need for Saad Ali in the squad. If he would have batted in his normal position than Rizwan would have had to play down the order where he would also have struggled.

Instead of Saad they should have selected someone who could hit the ball well.
 
srh said:
Who care about Sarfraz? I have long lobby to remove him for LOI teams (both ODI and T20l) for a WK who is a better hitter someone like Bismillah Khan.

This thread is about this tour only. And it is about improvisation with the choices available i.e. looking for the best solution with what is available.

Pakistan's ODI team was missing a hitter at #6 to be sandwiched between Umar Akmal at #5 and Imad Wasim at #7. From the current available squad, Saad is a better accumulator than Rizwan while Rizwan can hit better than Saad so Pakistan should have play Saad at #4 and Rizwan at #6. That would have strengthened the middle order and lower middle order. But alas Arthur had no clue about a batsman's strengths and weaknesses. This is not the 1st time Arthur has royally screwed up.
Click to expand...

Rizwan has proven to be much more effective at #4 than #6.

It's unfortunate for Saad Ali but there was no place for him in this lineup. At best, he could've played above Umar Akmal at #5.
 
This kind of posters deserve a selfless Batsman batting at # 8.
Btw, Rizwan didn't bat in 1st ODI, he only faced 3 balls in 3rd ODI then why we lost those matches?
 
I think, Rizwan did exceptionally well, considering he was keeping as well in late March with 5 games in 10 days. However, he was in even better touch for A teams in similar conditions but looked very poor in SAF. I think he has done enough to go to WC, but not sure he’ll be successful there.
 
Pakistan can not afford 4 accumulators in top 5 though.

In my opinion babar and fakhar should open the innings ,followed by haris , rizwan and hafeez. If hafeez isnt fit, we might as well open with imam and fakhar. Pakistans bowling isnt good enough these days , pakistan batting has to compete as well.
 
I have a question to all the members.

What if Haris Rizwan and Abid would not have made these hundreds. what would have been over score.

What if they would have just made 50 of 30 balls. Than what you think would have been our score.

??????
 
Mamoon said:
With two hundreds in five games, he really proved that it was a tactical blunder.
Click to expand...

I do not know what people expect,The alternatives are Malik and Sarfarz ,Sarfaraz can,t bat for more than an hour and the lesser said about Malik the better it is.So we have to be happy with Rizwan resurgence,
 
Not at all

Rizwan did his job well. He scored 2 hundreds at a good strike rate. I can't remember any Pakistani batsmen in last few years except Babar doing that. It is the failure of lower middle order not to finish the game properly. Umar,Saad all failed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Cricket Warrior
"We needed more bravery in certain situations": Mohammad Rizwan
2
Replies
136
Views
6K
ask_analyse_act
ask_analyse_act
FearlessRoar
"As representatives of the nation, we must accept that we failed to meet expectations": Mohammad Rizwan
Replies
28
Views
2K
ask_analyse_act
ask_analyse_act
FearlessRoar
[VIDEOS] PCB appoints Mohammad Rizwan as ODI and T20I Captain
2 3 4
Replies
278
Views
11K
mominsaigol
mominsaigol
The Bald Eagle
  • Locked
New Zealand vs Pakistan | 2nd ODI | Hamilton | April 02 | Pre-Match Discussion
Replies
57
Views
3K
The Bald Eagle
The Bald Eagle
The Bald Eagle
  • Poll Poll
New Zealand (292/8) defeat Pakistan (208) by 84 runs in the second ODI to take an unassailable 2-0 lead in the 3-match series
6 7 8
Replies
624
Views
18K
harshjoshi87
harshjoshi87
Back
Top