Sanjay Manjrekar: Pakistan and the winning gene missing link

[MenInG]

So, another India versus Pakistan World Cup match is now in the history books.

And it’s the same story again: Plenty of hype and the contest ends up being completely one sided. And like it’s been for a while now, the better team wins and the same set of fans return home happy while the other set leaves disillusioned.


What we are seeing with India versus Pakistan matches is a fact of life - Change is the only constant. India is now the Pakistan of the 90s and Pakistan the India of the 90s.

Let me explain.

When we played Pakistan in the late 80s through to the 90s, they had strong leadership. To my mind, the world hasn’t seen a better cricket captain than Imran Khan. He was self-confident, he had learnt cricket the hard way, so he was not immune to understanding the psyche of a player with limited ability, and with it the embedded insecurities.

He inspired them, in fact, almost brainwashed them into believing that they were better than everyone else. It helped of course that there was great, natural ability already there, more in the pace department than batting. All it needed was the right channelling and a dash of cricket sophistication. Imran took care of that aspect.

So, the culture of the team was set by one man - Imran Khan. And anybody around him in that time was bound to be infected as that became the team culture.

Confident and resourceful with an attitude of playing to win at all times. And in the process if you failed, Imran had your back.

Ramiz Raja tells me that during the 1992 World Cup no one but Imran believed that they could win the tournament. And he kept drilling that into his team, who eventually started to feel the same way.

That was of course the mental side of it but for the dream to become a reality, Imran also had to ensure his tactics were sound. The story goes that Inzamam-ul-Haq was unwell before the semi-final against New Zealand and wasn’t keen to play. Imran told him you are playing no matter what, and now you decide how you are going to do that by talking to the team doctor. Inzamam played the innings of a lifetime to set-up Pakistan’s win.

Ijaz Ahmed once played an innings in a one-day international when he was trying to establish himself in the team. Typically, as a player in that situation tends to do, he batted with caution, focused on not getting out rather than scoring quickly. When he returned to the dressing room Imran told him, “If I see you batting like that again I will send you home, I don’t care if you get out while trying to score quickly.” Obviously, this message was directed towards Ijaz but resonated with the entire team loud and clear.

Under Imran, Pakistan had a great team culture...a winning culture.

Today India has that culture.

Team India Sweat It Out (14)

Virat Kohli is no Imran yet. But it’s really a mix of the Virat and MS Dhoni culture that we are currently witnessing. Under Sourav Ganguly, India became better than it was in the 90s but the process of becoming champions and winning on the big stage was started by Dhoni, and Kohli is taking the legacy forward. He has added a dose of energy to it, he is also lucky to have bowlers such as Jasprit Bumrah and Kuldeep Yadav to turn to.

Both Kohli and Dhoni in their very different ways exude similar vibes, the same air of confidence and superiority, that we just happen to be better than the opposition.

So, a Rishabh Pant enters the Indian team, breathes that air and that’s what he becomes - a confident young player ready to beat the world. This is exactly what happened to Wasim Akram, Waqar Younis, and Inzamam under Imran in the 80s and 90s.

Pakistan’s current situation is quite similar to what is happening to the Mumbai Ranji team. Mumbai does not quite enjoy the same dominance it did a few years back on the domestic circuit, and the reasons are well known - other teams have got better and there is greater competition. However, the main reason is what I call the ‘link’.

This is so crucial for maintaining your status as champions. The link between essentially the captain of the side, a handful of senior players and the new entrants in the team - a pipeline if you will, through which trade secrets and unintentionally, confidence, gets passed forward.

When I entered the Mumbai team, Sandeep Patil was the captain. Just playing under his leadership for two years, batting with him and being on the field under his command, I was learning some invaluable lessons at an impressionable age.

That made me leapfrog to becoming an India probable from a simple state player in a very short span of time, while another exceptional young cricketer somewhere in Vidarbha at the time would never make that kind of progress. It wasn’t that I was very much better, I was just groomed better. Key word here being ‘groomed.’

Imran took a player by his little finger and moulded him into a world beater. When Inzamam did not perform to his expectations at No. 3 during the 1992 World Cup, Imran did not dump him, but pushed him down the order and made his life easier while batting at No. 3 himself.

He led by example, just like Dhoni and Kohli do for India now.

On that treacherous Wanderers pitch last year, Kohli led from the front, showing keenness to bat on it even when the umpires could have given them the option to walk off. But Virat didn’t take that easy way out even when the game was a dead rubber after India had lost the Test series. Virat still desperately wanted to win the Test. How can a young player in the team not be affected by this?

When we as young 20-year olds walked into the Indian team, we saw nervousness in the eyes of our seniors and that’s why we felt nervous. I guess, that’s what young Pakistani players are seeing in the eyes of their seniors. Uncertainty, self-doubt.

Sarfaraz Ahmed is no Imran, he is not going to take Pakistan to the next level, and to be fair blaming him for the loss at Old Trafford is silly. India was a much stronger side and there was not much Sarfaraz could do about it.

For this to change, i.e. for Pakistan to be world beaters again, well, they have to hope that prodigious talent emerges from somewhere and with it emerges an amazing leader to take it on a winning path.

That’s for winning, but to keep winning, it’s that link, that passes on the ‘winning gene’ that is important. And once that link is broken, it’s like going back in a long queue and waiting your turn again.

https://www.news18.com/cricketnext/...missing-link-of-the-winning-gene-2193111.html

 

[Captain caveman]

Excellent article!
I've always respected sanjay both as a batsman and a commentator.
Sanjay knows what hes talking about and is one of the few asian commies who will tell you the truth, whether you like it or not!

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

Wow. That's a pretty impressive article whether you like Manjrekar or not.

 

[Aman]

Sanjay has gotten a lot of hate for his commentary but this article is well written and spot on.

 

[Pakhs]

Yes he is right, we have lost the link, the supply line for great talent has suddenly dried up after wasim and co retired. Last great talent to emerge from Pakistan was shoaib akhtar, younis khan and Yousuf all round about the same time. Since then we had an odd one here and there like Ajmal, Asif or Amir and now babar.

We were lucky to get them in the first place and got spoiled into thinking they will always come and didnt cash in and improved the domestic structure when we should have to ensure we always remained on top.

 

[Kianig89]

Pretty good by Manjrekar's standard impressed with him if only someone in PCB had that sense

 

[Mamoon]

Manjrekar analysis on Pakistan's demise and India's rise are quite average, and it is understandable because he is an Indian cricketer of the late 80s to mid 90s, when they were at their mediocre best, and Manjrekar himself was one of the poster boys of mediocrity.

Technically very good who looked like a great at the crease, but was a mental midget with no ability to handle pressure. Like most Pakistani ex-players, he believes in saviours and overstates the importance of a leadership figure.

You put Imran Khan in this team and absolutely nothing will change, because this team is 4-5 world class players short of competing with the best teams in the world. Imran alone cannot bridge that gap, and he cannot turn mediocre players into world beaters. Yes I know about what he did with Wasim, Waqar and Inzamam, but the fact is that those players had the ability to be groomed. You cannot polish crap, no one can.

Imran became Imran because he got out of Pakistan early. He became a cricketer and a captain at Oxford and Worcestershire, and most of our past greats benefited from County cricket. Unfortunately, Pakistan has done more than enough damage to the game of cricket, especially with the events of August 2010 to continue on that route. As a result, we now have to stand on our own two feet, and that is why we are struggling badly.

Pakistan needs to find a way of consistently producing world class players internally who do not have rotten mentality. Waiting for figures like Imran Khan to emerge from our system and save Pakistan cricket is meaningless. It is never going to happen. That is not how professional teams are built.

I wish the difference between Pakistan and India was only the difference between the leadership of Sarfraz and Kohli/Dhoni, because it would have made our lives very easy.

 

[big_gamer007]

Good article but these guys are still living in the past. Cricket has gone to a professional level, you can't start dominating the sport unless you have a good domestic structure.

All Pakistani, WI players of old refined their skills in county or Sheffield shield. So if Pakistan needs to become a world beater they need to fix domestic structure. If they don't fix domestic structure they might win a tournament here and there but won't be a dominant team.

All this winning mentality etc are just talks which come when you have a good pool of players. But first and foremost you need to get good players.

 

[big_gamer007]

Manjrekar analysis on Pakistan's demise and India's rise are quite average, and it is understandable because he is an Indian cricketer of the late 80s to mid 90s, when they were at their mediocre best, and Manjrekar himself was one of the poster boys of mediocrity.

Technically very good who looked like a great at the crease, but was a mental midget with no ability to handle pressure. Like most Pakistani ex-players, he believes in saviours and overstates the importance of a leadership figure.

You put Imran Khan in this team and absolutely nothing will change, because this team is 4-5 world class players short of competing with the best teams in the world. Imran alone cannot bridge that gap, and he cannot turn mediocre players into world beaters. Yes I know about what he did with Wasim, Waqar and Inzamam, but the fact is that those players had the ability to be groomed. You cannot polish a ****, no one can.

Imran became Imran because he got out of Pakistan early. He became a cricketer and a captain at Oxford and Worcestershire, and most of our past greats benefited from County cricket. Unfortunately, Pakistan has done more than enough damage to the game of cricket, especially with the events of August 2010 to continue on that route. As a result, we now have to stand on our own two feet, and that is why we are struggling badly.

Pakistan needs to find a way of consistently producing world class players internally who do not have rotten mentality. Waiting for figures like Imran Khan to emerge from our system and save Pakistan cricket is meaningless. It is never going to happen. That is not how professional teams are built.

I wish the difference between Pakistan and India was only the difference between the leadership of Sarfraz and Kohli/Dhoni, because it would have made our lives very easy.

Yup pretty much this, more than Imran and Clive Lloyd it was county and Sheffield shield which made WI/Pakistan great teams.

People still live in past, cricket has become very professional even IK and Lloyd will struggle now because of the way game is played and analysed.

 

[Technics 1210]

The article boils down to one single point - leadership.

Pakistan cricket is not short of talent, but is crucially missing a leader.

Find the right leader, and Pakistan cricket would comfortably demolish its competition at the world stage. No doubt about it.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

Manjrekar analysis on Pakistan's demise and India's rise are quite average, and it is understandable because he is an Indian cricketer of the late 80s to mid 90s, when they were at their mediocre best, and Manjrekar himself was one of the poster boys of mediocrity.

Technically very good who looked like a great at the crease, but was a mental midget with no ability to handle pressure. Like most Pakistani ex-players, he believes in saviours and overstates the importance of a leadership figure.

You put Imran Khan in this team and absolutely nothing will change, because this team is 4-5 world class players short of competing with the best teams in the world. Imran alone cannot bridge that gap, and he cannot turn mediocre players into world beaters. Yes I know about what he did with Wasim, Waqar and Inzamam, but the fact is that those players had the ability to be groomed. You cannot polish a ****, no one can.

Imran became Imran because he got out of Pakistan early. He became a cricketer and a captain at Oxford and Worcestershire, and most of our past greats benefited from County cricket. Unfortunately, Pakistan has done more than enough damage to the game of cricket, especially with the events of August 2010 to continue on that route. As a result, we now have to stand on our own two feet, and that is why we are struggling badly.

Pakistan needs to find a way of consistently producing world class players internally who do not have rotten mentality. Waiting for figures like Imran Khan to emerge from our system and save Pakistan cricket is meaningless. It is never going to happen. That is not how professional teams are built.

I wish the difference between Pakistan and India was only the difference between the leadership of Sarfraz and Kohli/Dhoni, because it would have made our lives very easy.

I don't think Manjrekar will disagree with you reg the impact of having quality players.

I think you missed the fundamental essence of his article.

In fact, what he talks about is one of the biggest reasons why....

1. Indian team achieved a lot post 2000.

2. RCB is beyond useless

3. CSK is so consistent even with some pretty average squads of late.

The list goes on and on.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

The article boils down to one single point - leadership.

Pakistan cricket is not short of talent, but is crucially missing a leader.

Find the right leader, and Pakistan cricket would comfortably demolish its competition at the world stage. No doubt about it.

Pakistan is short of talent too.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

Grassroot level support + professional setup + leadership + sufficient player pool size = success

Everything matters but leadership helps you bridge a lot of gap in the short term.

But to be a leader, you need to be a performer.

 

[Captain caveman]

Manjrekar analysis on Pakistan's demise and India's rise are quite average, and it is understandable because he is an Indian cricketer of the late 80s to mid 90s, when they were at their mediocre best, and Manjrekar himself was one of the poster boys of mediocrity.

Technically very good who looked like a great at the crease, but was a mental midget with no ability to handle pressure. Like most Pakistani ex-players, he believes in saviours and overstates the importance of a leadership figure.

You put Imran Khan in this team and absolutely nothing will change, because this team is 4-5 world class players short of competing with the best teams in the world. Imran alone cannot bridge that gap, and he cannot turn mediocre players into world beaters. Yes I know about what he did with Wasim, Waqar and Inzamam, but the fact is that those players had the ability to be groomed. You cannot polish a ****, no one can.

Imran became Imran because he got out of Pakistan early. He became a cricketer and a captain at Oxford and Worcestershire, and most of our past greats benefited from County cricket. Unfortunately, Pakistan has done more than enough damage to the game of cricket, especially with the events of August 2010 to continue on that route. As a result, we now have to stand on our own two feet, and that is why we are struggling badly.

Pakistan needs to find a way of consistently producing world class players internally who do not have rotten mentality. Waiting for figures like Imran Khan to emerge from our system and save Pakistan cricket is meaningless. It is never going to happen. That is not how professional teams are built.

I wish the difference between Pakistan and India was only the difference between the leadership of Sarfraz and Kohli/Dhoni, because it would have made our lives very easy.

Imran won the wc with ONLY 4 world class players in his team, one of which was a complete newbie and inconsistent(inzi).
The 4 were miandad, akram, mushi and a very raw inzi!
Imran himself was no longer a world class player, he could hardly bowl due to his shoulder injury and was only playing by taking painkiller injections before each game.
The rest of the team were mediocre.
THIS IS WHAT AN A TRUE LEADER CAN ACHIEVE!

 

[Technics 1210]

[A true leader will recognize the talent, the strengths, weaknesses, and the push the appropriate buttons to create an orchestra of success.

Most people here expect our batsmen to score a boundary every ball, take a wicket every ball etc. What they don't realize is that stats are not everything, but mindset and leadership is the be all and end all in Cricket.

You only have to look at West Indies and England of late. Change in leadership has resulted in mindset, and said teams have improved immensely over the past few years - with the SAME group of players.

 

[Technics 1210]

Grassroot level support + professional setup + leadership + sufficient player pool size = success

Everything matters but leadership helps you bridge a lot of gap in the short term.

But to be a leader, you need to be a performer.

No money in your formula of success? Not that I agree with the commercial aspect.

Agree a leader needs to be a performer too, but I would add, a leader would need to be educated too.

A leader doesn't help bridge a gap short term. I give you Sarauv Ganguly. This guy is considered the best Indian captain of all time, for one reason only, he changed the defeatist and weak mentality of the Indian team. He taught India how to become fearless and as a result changed the mindset of Indian cricket which is still prevalent today.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

No money in your formula of success? Not that I agree with the commercial aspect.

Agree a leader needs to be a performer too, but I would add, a leader would need to be educated too.

A leader doesn't help bridge a gap short term. I give you Sarauv Ganguly. This guy is considered the best Indian captain of all time, for one reason only, he changed the defeatist and weak mentality of the Indian team. He taught India how to become fearless and as a result changed the mindset of Indian cricket which is still prevalent today.

1. Money is implied. Effects of money is in grassroot development and professional setup.

2. Bridging the gap in the short term refers to the ability to produce results with less than optimal resources.

3. Leaders leave a legacy long after they are gone but for a team to benefit from it, there needs to be a structure.

4. The reason Pakistan crumbled after Imran left but India scaled new heights after Ganguly left is because of the systems & structure in place.

 

[Technics 1210]

4. The reason Pakistan crumbled after Imran left but India scaled new heights after Ganguly left is because of the systems & structure in place.

According to your points above, it was money.

Anyway, disagree with your points.

 

[Mamoon]

Imran won the wc with ONLY 4 world class players in his team, one of which was a complete newbie and inconsistent(inzi).
The 4 were miandad, akram, mushi and a very raw inzi!
Imran himself was no longer a world class player, he could hardly bowl due to his shoulder injury and was only playing by taking painkiller injections before each game.
The rest of the team were mediocre.
THIS IS WHAT AN A TRUE LEADER CAN ACHIEVE!

Sarfraz won the Champions Trophy with hardly any world class players. The way we won in 1992, in 2017 or the way India won in 1983 are not sustainable blueprints for success and consistency.

You cannot bank on luck, other results going your way, players producing freak performances and superior teams having bad days etc. all the time. It might happen once or twice for you in 50 years, but the only way to achieve consistent excellence is by having multiple world class players in your team. Leadership alone will not transform a rubbish team into an elite one.

Pakistan's best period was from late 70s to late 80s, and they were the most well-rounded team after West Indies. Yes Imran's leadership and Miandad's tactical nous played a significant role, but if you compare the lineups of all teams, you will realise why Pakistan were more consistent than everyone except West Indies. We really should have won the 1987 World Cup, but unfortunately we choked in the semifinal in Lahore against Australia.

The only way Pakistan can put an end to their mediocrity is by producing world class players. There are no shortcuts.

 

[Mamoon]

I don't think Manjrekar will disagree with you reg the impact of having quality players.

I think you missed the fundamental essence of his article.

In fact, what he talks about is one of the biggest reasons why....

1. Indian team achieved a lot post 2000.

2. RCB is beyond useless

3. CSK is so consistent even with some pretty average squads of late.

The list goes on and on.

RCB's lack of success and CSK and MI's dominance is more than just the gap between the captaincy of Kohli and Dhoni/Rohit. RCB's team have always lacked balance, and I think having both Kohli and de Villiers in the same lineup is proving to be counterproductive.

They put all their eggs in one basket and ignore other key areas where they are not very good. RCB's lack of success is more down to a collective failure of the team management and build a balanced team, rather than the inability of Kohli to be a great leader. His W/L ratio as Indian captain in all formats shows that he knows how to lead a team provided that he has quality players and a balanced team at his disposal.

 

[Technics 1210]

The only way Pakistan can put an end to their mediocrity is by producing world class players. There are no shortcuts.

You do not produce world class players, you nurture talent in to world class.

Leadership 101.

 

[Captain caveman]

Sarfraz won the Champions Trophy with hardly any world class players. The way we won in 1992, in 2017 or the way India won in 1983 are not sustainable blueprints for success and consistency.

You cannot bank on luck, other results going your way, players producing freak performances and superior teams having bad days etc. all the time. It might happen once or twice for you in 50 years, but the only way to achieve consistent excellence is by having multiple world class players in your team. Leadership alone will not transform a rubbish team into an elite one.

Pakistan's best period was from late 70s to late 80s, and they were the most well-rounded team after West Indies. Yes Imran's leadership and Miandad's tactical nous played a significant role, but if you compare the lineups of all teams, you will realise why Pakistan were more consistent than everyone except West Indies. We really should have won the 1987 World Cup, but unfortunately we choked in the semifinal in Lahore against Australia.

The only way Pakistan can put an end to their mediocrity is by producing world class players. There are no shortcuts.

I actually agree with you 100%!
But a great leader is essential, in my opinion!

 

[Mamoon]

You do not produce world class players, you nurture talent in to world class.

Leadership 101.

If a player doesn’t have the talent to be world class, you will never be able to nurture him no matter how good a leader you are. That is why, not every player became a world beater under Imran or Ganguly or other legendary captains.

There is no substitute for quality players. Take Roy, Bairstow, Root, Stokes, Archer, Rohit, Dhawan, Kuldeep, Bumrah and Chahal out of England and India respectively, and replace them with average players from domestic cricket, both Morgan and Kohli would struggle to lead their teams to wins.

 

[Mamoon]

I actually agree with you 100%!
But a great leader is essential, in my opinion!

Of course it is essential. You give two captains fairly evenly matched teams, and the better captain will lead his team to more wins. However, captaincy alone is not the different between a rubbish team and a top team.

 

[Kianig89]

Ramiz Raja Aamer Sohail Ijaz Ahmed Moin Khan players just above average yet Pakistan won the WC even infact in fina Pak were without 5th bowler openers flopped but the belief and leadership did it.

Same goes for SL in 96 Ranatunga nd Aravinda two iceman and mental giants stood up and SL defeated the Star studded Australia whivh had the Waughs Taylor Warne Mcgrath Bevan

So leadership does matter than resources

 

[in_cutter]

All this talk is getting boring. Time to move on & look forward.

 

[Technics 1210]

If a player doesn’t have the talent to be world class, you will never be able to nurture him no matter how good a leader you are. That is why, not every player became a world beater under Imran or Ganguly or other legendary captains.

There is no substitute for quality players. Take Roy, Bairstow, Root, Stokes, Archer, Rohit, Dhawan, Kuldeep, Bumrah and Chahal out of England and India respectively, and replace them with average players from domestic cricket, both Morgan and Kohli would struggle to lead their teams to wins.

You forgot to mention Butler.

I agree, talent is something you are born with, and cannot be taught. A great leader can distinguish between a cheap hack and someone who has talent which is worth investing time in.

No one is saying the current Pakistan ODI team lacks talent, and in the same breath no one saying the entire team is teeming with talent, but the Pakistan team most certainly has a pool of talent which right now is wasted under a dismal and downright pathetic leadership. Remember, it's a handful of players that can make a difference, and with the right leadership, it can make all the difference with the Pakistan team.

Morgan and Kohli are performers; they lead by example. This is the first and foremost prerequisite for a leader. They inspire their team. Their performances alone warrant respect. They lead with their performances. The rest is a piece of cake.

Archer? Really? He received a last minute ticket for England, so you shouldn't mention him in this context. His talent was not nurtured in England, but rather was picked simply for his speed. Time will tell whether he will become world class.

Roy, Bairstow, Stokes, and Butler, were average, but they transformed into quality players under Morgan's leadership. Leading back to the point, they had talent, and a leader nurtured that talent, and now we have an England team that is frankly the best ever ODI team in English history because not only has Morgan lead the team through his own performances, but the end result is the change in mindset.

It's all about leadership which is why Sarfraz simply has to go.

 

[Mamoon]

You forgot to mention Butler.

I agree, talent is something you are born with, and cannot be taught. A great leader can distinguish between a cheap hack and someone who has talent which is worth investing time in.

No one is saying the current Pakistan ODI team lacks talent, and in the same breath no one saying the entire team is teeming with talent, but the Pakistan team most certainly has a pool of talent which right now is wasted under a dismal and downright pathetic leadership. Remember, it's a handful of players that can make a difference, and with the right leadership, it can make all the difference with the Pakistan team.

Morgan and Kohli are performers; they lead by example. This is the first and foremost prerequisite for a leader. They inspire their team. Their performances alone warrant respect. They lead with their performances. The rest is a piece of cake.

Archer? Really? He received a last minute ticket for England, so you shouldn't mention him in this context. His talent was not nurtured in England, but rather was picked simply for his speed. Time will tell whether he will become world class.

Roy, Bairstow, Stokes, and Butler, were average, but they transformed into quality players under Morgan's leadership. Leading back to the point, they had talent, and a leader nurtured that talent, and now we have an England team that is frankly the best ever ODI team in English history because not only has Morgan lead the team through his own performances, but the end result is the change in mindset.

It's all about leadership which is why Sarfraz simply has to go.

Right now, Pakistan’s talent pool is not good enough for Pakistan to be a world beater. A ranking of 6th is a true reflection of where this team stands today.

Roy, Bairstow, Buttler and Stokes were not average players. They are simply reaching their peak years now. I mentioned Archer because England fast-tracked him since he is a great talent and looks a cut above other English pacers. It has nothing to do with Morgan’s leadership.

If Morgan was a miracle worker and responsible for England’s rise, he could have transformed England’s 2015 World Cup players into world beaters, but that is not possible. They were just not good ODI players.

England were lucky to have several quality ODI players at their disposal who were in the right age bracket. They didn’t get lucky because they had Morgan to lead the team.

Morgan deserves credit for raising his own game considerably in the last two years. This is where Sarfraz has been a complete letdown. However, this isn’t England’s best ever ODI side because Morgan is the captain; this is England’s best ever ODI side because this is their best ever generation of ODI players.

Pakistani fans are overstating the importance of leadership because they cannot accept the fact that their team is mediocre.

 

[jadaja]

This article shows how little Sanjay Manjerkar knows about cricket.His obession about Imran Khan is nauseating.You need a professional outlook towards cricket , it is not going to be achieved by one man who will come in and make all problems go away.

 

[LordJames]

So, another India versus Pakistan World Cup match is now in the history books.

And it’s the same story again: Plenty of hype and the contest ends up being completely one sided. And like it’s been for a while now, the better team wins and the same set of fans return home happy while the other set leaves disillusioned.


What we are seeing with India versus Pakistan matches is a fact of life - Change is the only constant. India is now the Pakistan of the 90s and Pakistan the India of the 90s.

Let me explain.

When we played Pakistan in the late 80s through to the 90s, they had strong leadership. To my mind, the world hasn’t seen a better cricket captain than Imran Khan. He was self-confident, he had learnt cricket the hard way, so he was not immune to understanding the psyche of a player with limited ability, and with it the embedded insecurities.

He inspired them, in fact, almost brainwashed them into believing that they were better than everyone else. It helped of course that there was great, natural ability already there, more in the pace department than batting. All it needed was the right channelling and a dash of cricket sophistication. Imran took care of that aspect.

So, the culture of the team was set by one man - Imran Khan. And anybody around him in that time was bound to be infected as that became the team culture.

Confident and resourceful with an attitude of playing to win at all times. And in the process if you failed, Imran had your back.

Ramiz Raja tells me that during the 1992 World Cup no one but Imran believed that they could win the tournament. And he kept drilling that into his team, who eventually started to feel the same way.

That was of course the mental side of it but for the dream to become a reality, Imran also had to ensure his tactics were sound. The story goes that Inzamam-ul-Haq was unwell before the semi-final against New Zealand and wasn’t keen to play. Imran told him you are playing no matter what, and now you decide how you are going to do that by talking to the team doctor. Inzamam played the innings of a lifetime to set-up Pakistan’s win.

Ijaz Ahmed once played an innings in a one-day international when he was trying to establish himself in the team. Typically, as a player in that situation tends to do, he batted with caution, focused on not getting out rather than scoring quickly. When he returned to the dressing room Imran told him, “If I see you batting like that again I will send you home, I don’t care if you get out while trying to score quickly.” Obviously, this message was directed towards Ijaz but resonated with the entire team loud and clear.

Under Imran, Pakistan had a great team culture...a winning culture.

Today India has that culture.

Team India Sweat It Out (14)

Virat Kohli is no Imran yet. But it’s really a mix of the Virat and MS Dhoni culture that we are currently witnessing. Under Sourav Ganguly, India became better than it was in the 90s but the process of becoming champions and winning on the big stage was started by Dhoni, and Kohli is taking the legacy forward. He has added a dose of energy to it, he is also lucky to have bowlers such as Jasprit Bumrah and Kuldeep Yadav to turn to.

Both Kohli and Dhoni in their very different ways exude similar vibes, the same air of confidence and superiority, that we just happen to be better than the opposition.

So, a Rishabh Pant enters the Indian team, breathes that air and that’s what he becomes - a confident young player ready to beat the world. This is exactly what happened to Wasim Akram, Waqar Younis, and Inzamam under Imran in the 80s and 90s.

Pakistan’s current situation is quite similar to what is happening to the Mumbai Ranji team. Mumbai does not quite enjoy the same dominance it did a few years back on the domestic circuit, and the reasons are well known - other teams have got better and there is greater competition. However, the main reason is what I call the ‘link’.

This is so crucial for maintaining your status as champions. The link between essentially the captain of the side, a handful of senior players and the new entrants in the team - a pipeline if you will, through which trade secrets and unintentionally, confidence, gets passed forward.

When I entered the Mumbai team, Sandeep Patil was the captain. Just playing under his leadership for two years, batting with him and being on the field under his command, I was learning some invaluable lessons at an impressionable age.

That made me leapfrog to becoming an India probable from a simple state player in a very short span of time, while another exceptional young cricketer somewhere in Vidarbha at the time would never make that kind of progress. It wasn’t that I was very much better, I was just groomed better. Key word here being ‘groomed.’

Imran took a player by his little finger and moulded him into a world beater. When Inzamam did not perform to his expectations at No. 3 during the 1992 World Cup, Imran did not dump him, but pushed him down the order and made his life easier while batting at No. 3 himself.

He led by example, just like Dhoni and Kohli do for India now.

On that treacherous Wanderers pitch last year, Kohli led from the front, showing keenness to bat on it even when the umpires could have given them the option to walk off. But Virat didn’t take that easy way out even when the game was a dead rubber after India had lost the Test series. Virat still desperately wanted to win the Test. How can a young player in the team not be affected by this?

When we as young 20-year olds walked into the Indian team, we saw nervousness in the eyes of our seniors and that’s why we felt nervous. I guess, that’s what young Pakistani players are seeing in the eyes of their seniors. Uncertainty, self-doubt.

Sarfaraz Ahmed is no Imran, he is not going to take Pakistan to the next level, and to be fair blaming him for the loss at Old Trafford is silly. India was a much stronger side and there was not much Sarfaraz could do about it.

For this to change, i.e. for Pakistan to be world beaters again, well, they have to hope that prodigious talent emerges from somewhere and with it emerges an amazing leader to take it on a winning path.

That’s for winning, but to keep winning, it’s that link, that passes on the ‘winning gene’ that is important. And once that link is broken, it’s like going back in a long queue and waiting your turn again.

https://www.news18.com/cricketnext/...missing-link-of-the-winning-gene-2193111.html

Imran Khan leading the current lot will not lead to success.

A charismatic and mentally strong leader is needed but this article does not explain the rise of Afghanistan and Bangladesh, they have never had an Imran Khan

 

[Technics 1210]

Right now, Pakistan’s talent pool is not good enough for Pakistan to be a world beater. A ranking of 6th is a true reflection of where this team stands today.

Roy, Bairstow, Buttler and Stokes were not average players. They are simply reaching their peak years now. I mentioned Archer because England fast-tracked him since he is a great talent and looks a cut above other English pacers. It has nothing to do with Morgan’s leadership.

If Morgan was a miracle worker and responsible for England’s rise, he could have transformed England’s 2015 World Cup players into world beaters, but that is not possible. They were just not good ODI players.

England were lucky to have several quality ODI players at their disposal who were in the right age bracket. They didn’t get lucky because they had Morgan to lead the team.

Morgan deserves credit for raising his own game considerably in the last two years. This is where Sarfraz has been a complete letdown. However, this isn’t England’s best ever ODI side because Morgan is the captain; this is England’s best ever ODI side because this is their best ever generation of ODI players.

Pakistani fans are overstating the importance of leadership because they cannot accept the fact that their team is mediocre.

On one hand you say Roy, Bairstow, Buttler and Stokes were not average players, but then you mention they were just not good ODI players in 2015?

The fact is, the English players you have mentioned did not start their careers for England by hitting the fastest centuries from the get go, it took time, an under the right leadership, their talent was nurtured and now England have one of the best batting line ups in the WC.

England were lucky to have several quality ODI players at their disposal who were in the right age bracket. They didn’t get lucky because they had Morgan to lead the team.

Ahhh, luck and fluke aspects make an appearance. What are you implying in the above? That leadership didn't have an effect on the current England squad and it was pot luck? Have you seen how the England team have transformed under Morgan compared to say when Cook was ODI captain? How long have you been following your second favourite team?

Morgan raised his game and it influenced the batsmen in the team to the extent England could pic and mix the top 6 and it wouldn't make a difference.

No Pakistani fans are not overstating the importance of leadership, every cricketer and cricketing board will tell you that leadership is important, you just want argue for the sake of it, because if there is any shred of credibility in what you are saying, then according to you Sarfraz is a great captain but is bestowed with bad luck and as such all the losses were flukes.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

RCB's lack of success and CSK and MI's dominance is more than just the gap between the captaincy of Kohli and Dhoni/Rohit. RCB's team have always lacked balance, and I think having both Kohli and de Villiers in the same lineup is proving to be counterproductive.

They put all their eggs in one basket and ignore other key areas where they are not very good. RCB's lack of success is more down to a collective failure of the team management and build a balanced team, rather than the inability of Kohli to be a great leader. His W/L ratio as Indian captain in all formats shows that he knows how to lead a team provided that he has quality players and a balanced team at his disposal.

Man... There is so much to dispute in this post.

Plus you are putting words in my mouth bro.

Unfortunately, I don't have time to make a long post to address it.

 

[Saj]

A good read this.

He is spot on about how the tables have turned. That aura that Imran had and how he instilled that into his players has gone over the border.

Pakistan cricket needs to sort out its priorities quickly.

 

[SportsWarrior]

Living in the past. Pakistan doesn't need a savior. They need a good first class setup. Don't give you the excuses like no international cricket in pakistan. You don't need international cricket to have a great first class set up. Irrespective of how prodigious talent one is , they cannot expect the learn on the job in international cricket. I cannot imagine player of the caliber Asif Ali playing for any team hoping to be a top team in world cup. Pakistan current set up is not producing quality player. Fix that.

 

[Technics 1210]

Living in the past. Pakistan doesn't need a savior. They need a good first class setup. Don't give you the excuses like no international cricket in pakistan. You don't need international cricket to have a great first class set up. Irrespective of how prodigious talent one is , they cannot expect the learn on the job in international cricket. I cannot imagine player of the caliber Asif Ali playing for any team hoping to be a top team in world cup. Pakistan current set up is not producing quality player. Fix that.

Say the Indians who mention past results? Streak anyone? Living in the past is mentioning SRT at every juncture.

You don't need a first class setup or international games at home to be a success at international level either and Pakistan have proved this. WT20 09, CT17, Asia Cup, Anne Do 2012, #1 Test Ranking, #1 T20 ranking, etc the list goes on for Pakistan.

Asif Ali is a poor pick in your drivel, his daughter passed away so his mindset is not in the right position.

Pakistan is producing quality players, most of the players in the current WC squad were responsible for thrashing India in CT17. Do you think these players forgot how to play cricket or are lacking a mindset due to poor leadership? Rhetorical meaning no need to answer it.

 

[Mamoon]

On one hand you say Roy, Bairstow, Buttler and Stokes were not average players, but then you mention they were just not good ODI players in 2015?

I am talking about the 2015 World Cup. Bairstow, Roy and Stokes were not in the squad.

This was England's 2015 World Cup squad:

Moeen, Anderson, Ballance, Bell, Bopara, Broad, Buttler, Finn, Hales, Jordan, Morgan, Root, Taylor, Tredwell, Woakes.

Apart from Morgan himself and the players in bold, there were no quality ODI players in that squad. No wonder the great leader Morgan went nowhere with this team. That is why England dropped the majority of the players from the squad and replaced them with the likes of Roy, Bairstow, Stokes, Rashid etc.

The fact is, the English players you have mentioned did not start their careers for England by hitting the fastest centuries from the get go, it took time, an under the right leadership, their talent was nurtured and now England have one of the best batting line ups in the WC.

They were not mediocre players to begin with as you are suggesting. They were quality ODI players and it was only a matter of them coming into their peak years. The likes of Roy, Bairstow, Buttler, Stokes etc. would have developed into quality players under any captain.

If Morgan is was the miracle worker who could transform mediocrity into world beaters, he would have transformed the likes Bell, Balance, Bopara into explosive ODI batsmen, but he obviously couldn't because no captain can develop players who are not good enough to begin with.

Ahhh, luck and fluke aspects make an appearance. What are you implying in the above? That leadership didn't have an effect on the current England squad and it was pot luck? Have you seen how the England team have transformed under Morgan compared to say when Cook was ODI captain? How long have you been following your second favourite team?

I am implying that England were able to turn their fortunes around in ODI cricket quickly because they already had the players at their disposal. In 2015, they dropped the likes of Cook, Ballance, Bell, Bopara, Jordan etc. and replaced them with superior, explosive players because they already had these players at their disposal.

During Cook's reign as captain from 2012-2015, these players were not ready for international cricket and neither did England have the mindset to adopt an aggressive brand of cricket. If England did not have these players to walk into the squad after the 2015 World Cup, they would not have been the number 1 team today regardless of how good a captain or leader Morgan is.

England's resurgance in ODIs post 2015 World Cup was down to two factors: (1) they decided to change the way they play ODI cricket and (2) they had explosive ODI players in their system that they were able to select. It had nothing to do with the myth that Morgan was able to transform mediocre, defensive players into explosive, modern players.

Morgan raised his game and it influenced the batsmen in the team to the extent England could pic and mix the top 6 and it wouldn't make a difference.

Morgan raising his game influenced no one. His team had been racking up big totals since the summer of 2015, and he had to catch up with them because his individual performance wasn't great until around 2017. His own great form simply made his own position tenable, since quite a few people felt that he was in the team only because he was the captain.

No Pakistani fans are not overstating the importance of leadership, every cricketer and cricketing board will tell you that leadership is important, you just want argue for the sake of it, because if there is any shred of credibility in what you are saying, then according to you Sarfraz is a great captain but is bestowed with bad luck and as such all the losses were flukes.

No one is arguing that leadership is not important. However, have quality players is more important than leadership. An average tactician or a leader can do wonders with a brilliant team, but a great leader and a great tactician will more often than not struggle if he was weak players at his disposal.

Pakistan's major problem at the moment is that it is a mediocre team that is rightfully ranked 6th in ODIs. Great leadership cannot transform a mediocre team into a world beating one UNLESS you provide the captain with top quality players. Sarfraz is not a great captain, he is far from it, but this team is not struggling because Sarfraz is a poor captain. This team is struggling because it has mediocre players and Sarfraz himself is one of those mediocre players.

I am not arguing for the sake of it. I am arguing with facts, and I have explicitly proved to you that England's resurgence in ODIs post 2015 World Cup had nothing to do with Morgan's leadership and captaincy. However, it is my fault because I am banging my head against a wall. What else do I expect from someone who was earlier arguing that if bilateral cricket is refused between Pakistan and India now, Pakistan will win.

 

[Mamoon]

Man... There is so much to dispute in this post.

Plus you are putting words in my mouth bro.

Unfortunately, I don't have time to make a long post to address it.

It is difficult to understand your point when you are not interested in elaborating on what you are trying to say.

 

[Technics 1210]

I am talking about the 2015 World Cup. Bairstow, Roy and Stokes were not in the squad.

This was England's 2015 World Cup squad:

Moeen, Anderson, Ballance, Bell, Bopara, Broad, Buttler, Finn, Hales, Jordan, Morgan, Root, Taylor, Tredwell, Woakes.

Apart from Morgan himself and the players in bold, there were no quality ODI players in that squad. No wonder the great leader Morgan went nowhere with this team. That is why England dropped the majority of the players from the squad and replaced them with the likes of Roy, Bairstow, Stokes, Rashid etc.

Yet those players in bold where no where near the players they are today, and this is thanks to leadership.

Nurturing is not an overnight phenomena. Effects of leadership do not occur over night, your complete lack of understanding pretty much explains why you voted for PTI/IK and now are relentless in criticizing the very leadership you voted for! Change is progression, not instant.

They were not mediocre players to begin with as you are suggesting. They were quality ODI players and it was only a matter of them coming into their peak years. The likes of Roy, Bairstow, Buttler, Stokes etc. would have developed into quality players under any captain.

If Morgan is was the miracle worker who could transform mediocrity into world beaters, he would have transformed the likes Bell, Balance, Bopara into explosive ODI batsmen, but he obviously couldn't because no captain can develop players who are not good enough to begin with.

They were mediocre players to begin with. You are making the mistake of judging them in hindsight. I can prove it. Show me YOUR posts on PP stating said players were quality from the get go in the same way you limp in with Archer being world class based on 3 matches prior to the WC? You cannot. And while you spent the last hour on Google, I suggest you look at the stats of said players in the first few years. Some of them played under Cook and didn't perform as well as they have under Morgan.

I am implying that England were able to turn their fortunes around in ODI cricket quickly because they already had the players at their disposal. In 2015, they dropped the likes of Cook, Ballance, Bell, Bopara, Jordan etc. and replaced them with superior, explosive players because they already had these players at their disposal.

During Cook's reign as captain from 2012-2015, these players were not ready for international cricket and neither did England have the mindset to adopt an aggressive brand of cricket. If England did not have these players to walk into the squad after the 2015 World Cup, they would not have been the number 1 team today regardless of how good a captain or leader Morgan is.

England's resurgance in ODIs post 2015 World Cup was down to two factors: (1) they decided to change the way they play ODI cricket and (2) they had explosive ODI players in their system that they were able to select. It had nothing to do with the myth that Morgan was able to transform mediocre, defensive players into explosive, modern players.

No, you are implying that England are LUCKY to have quality players based on hindsight and your lack of understanding when it comes to the influence of leadership.

For the record, England's resurgence wasn't just from 2015, it was from 2011/12. Following your second favourite team? Surely not.

Morgan raising his game influenced no one. His team had been racking up big totals since the summer of 2015, and he had to catch up with them because his individual performance wasn't great until around 2017. His own great form simply made his own position tenable, since quite a few people felt that he was in the team only because he was the captain.

Maybe you missed yesterday's game, the likes of Stokes came into bat and what was caught on the mic stumps sums up the influence of great leadership with Morgan. Let me know if you want me to link you up, I want to see if you are going to Google or whether you actually followed yesterday's game.

No one is arguing that leadership is not important. However, have quality players is more important than leadership. An average tactician or a leader can do wonders with a brilliant team, but a great leader and a great tactician will more often than not struggle if he was weak players at his disposal.

Pakistan's major problem at the moment is that it is a mediocre team that is rightfully ranked 6th in ODIs. Great leadership cannot transform a mediocre team into a world beating one UNLESS you provide the captain with top quality players. Sarfraz is not a great captain, he is far from it, but this team is not struggling because Sarfraz is a poor captain. This team is struggling because it has mediocre players and Sarfraz himself is one of those mediocre players.

This is just nonsense. A great leader can make the most of average players. Leicester City ring a bell? IK in 1992 ring a bell? Dev in 1983 ring a bell? Stop pretending you understand leadership, because you do not.

The very fact Pakistan is a low ranked ODI team but beat your favourite India #1 ODI team a few years ago - with more or less the same players as in the WC - proves how mindset and leadership is everything.

I am not arguing for the sake of it. I am arguing with facts, and I have explicitly proved to you that England's resurgence in ODIs post 2015 World Cup had nothing to do with Morgan's leadership and captaincy. However, it is my fault because I am banging my head against a wall. What else do I expect from someone who was earlier arguing that if bilateral cricket is refused between Pakistan and India now, Pakistan will win.

you have proved squat other than you spend time on Google and MS Word.

You are arguing for the sake of it because Pakistan is being discussed, had it been your motherland, India, you'd agree with every world I have said. Your definition of success is luck, and flukes, and from someone who has proven to be a fake patriot who has been rejected by society, I am not surprised you are seeking the much needed attention you crave for.

 

[Ram Shekhar]

Few good points but overall a very poor article. Sanjay Manjrekar doesn't know a lot about cricket.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

It is difficult to understand your point when you are not interested in elaborating on what you are trying to say.

I agree.

Not that I am not interested... Just tied up.

My fault really. Will try to post when I can.

 

[PakLFC]

Sanjay is a good and sensible man who appears very well mannered and polite. Pity I can't say that about the very annoying and full of himself Ravi Shastri. I feel that many Indian's are also very upset to see the decline of Pak Cricket. Indian fans want to see their arch rivals have a side that challenges them. Although it'll take time I am sure Pak Cricket will recover.

 

[ExplicitAI]

It is definitely the lack of world class players and picking players when their not mentally ready (Shoaib Malik and Asif Ali), people need to realise that you can consider a template XI if you want for the modern ODI game, so you need to pick players that are the best in the country for that role. I agree with the idea that captains like Imran, Kohli, Dhoni can't do much if you replaced every member of their team with mediocre players, they won't win games. But the captain himself needs to be performing and be able to make it into the team as a player himself, he doesn't need good looks or charisma but he needs to be an alpha-male.

 

[Captain caveman]

Of course it is essential. You give two captains fairly evenly matched teams, and the better captain will lead his team to more wins. However, captaincy alone is not the different between a rubbish team and a top team.

We pretty much agree on this subject.
Obviously, captaincy alone is not the difference between a rubbish team and a top team.
What i was trying to say, is that an exceptional leader can take an ordinary team and make it perform extraordinary at times, by instilling belief and knowledge in the players.
But to have a top team you need top players!

 

[Mamoon]

Yet those players in bold where no where near the players they are today, and this is thanks to leadership.

No, it had to do with the fact that they were young and not in their prime like they are now. The likes of Buttler, Bairstow and Stokes were highly rated long before they became regulars in international cricket. Players like Buttler and Stokes in particular were heralded as the next big things in international cricket. Their peaks simply coincided with Morgan's captaincy.

Nurturing is not an overnight phenomena. Effects of leadership do not occur over night, your complete lack of understanding pretty much explains why you voted for PTI/IK and now are relentless in criticizing the very leadership you voted for! Change is progression, not instant.

Not sure what Imran Khan and his political circus has to do with this discussion, but perhaps you did the right thing by bringing him up. Unfortunately, Imran Khan doesn't have a clue on how to build a good political team.

That is why, someone like Fawad Chaudhry, who thinks Pakistan sent Hubble telescope into space is now the Minister of Science and Technology. In addition, he has appointed a former PPP Finance Minister as his Financial Advisor, same PPP whose economic performance he vehemently criticises day and night.

Furthermore, he decided to appoint himself as Interior Minister, before he was sacked from the role within 8 months. Absolutely comedy.

You give these people 20 years and they won't change anything because they don't have the competency. A Prime Minister is like a captain of the team. He cannot do anything unless he has competent members in his cabinet and in his government.

You can be the most honest and competent PM in the world, but if you have someone like Fawad Chaudhry as Minister of Science and Technology and Hafeez Sheikh as Financial Advisor, and Firdous Awan as the government spokesperson, you are not going to achieving anything. These are tried and tested failures, just like most members of the 2015 England World Cup squad.

They were mediocre players to begin with. You are making the mistake of judging them in hindsight. I can prove it.

If you think they were mediocre to begin with, you don't understand cricket. Well, that is not a question anyway, you clearly don't. They were brilliant talents who simply needed time to develop and reach their peak.

Show me YOUR posts on PP stating said players were quality from the get go in the same way you limp in with Archer being world class based on 3 matches prior to the WC? You cannot.

Here is a thread from July 2014, a year before Morgan became the captain. PPers are criticising and mocking Stokes, and I was defending him.

http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/showthread.php?205364-Ben-Stokes-the-all-rounder

In fact, the first time I saw Stokes was way back in 2010, and anyone with half decent understanding of cricket could tell that he was a player of enormous talents who would have a very good career for England. There aren't many pre-2015 thread on Bairstow and Buttler.

And while you spent the last hour on Google, I suggest you look at the stats of said players in the first few years. Some of them played under Cook and didn't perform as well as they have under Morgan.

Anyone who watched a young Stokes and Buttler etc. play could tell that they had a lot of talent. Buttler smashing Parnell for 32 runs in an over back in 2012 was more than enough proof anyone needed to recognise his talents. If you are judging young talents solely by their stats, your exposing your inability to understand the game.

No, you are implying that England are LUCKY to have quality players based on hindsight and your lack of understanding when it comes to the influence of leadership.

Every great team needs some luck because it is about great players coming through at the same time. As strong as Australian domestic cricket is, if they were not lucky to have the likes of Ponting, Gilchrist, McGrath come through in the same generation, they would have not been invincible. Similarly, when Clive Lloyd's team got hammered in Australia and decided to invest in fearsome pacers, he was lucky enough to have the likes of Marshall, Holding, Roberts in the system.

For the record, England's resurgence wasn't just from 2015, it was from 2011/12. Following your second favourite team? Surely not.

England's resurgence did not start in 2011/2012. I do follow my second team, but it appears that you don't follow the team of your adopted home.

In 2011/2012, they had Cook and Trott in the top 3 and they did not pick bowlers based on their batting abilities. Their only aggressive players were Pietersen, Morgan and Kieswetter. Their side was decent for English conditions when the ball swung, but they were average on flat decks. The highlight of that team was smashing a deplorable Pakistan side 4-0 in UAE.

Maybe you missed yesterday's game, the likes of Stokes came into bat and what was caught on the mic stumps sums up the influence of great leadership with Morgan. Let me know if you want me to link you up, I want to see if you are going to Google or whether you actually followed yesterday's game.

Again, no one is arguing that Morgan is not a well-respected leader or is not a good captain. The point is that he is not responsible for the resurgence of the England team. With or without Morgan, this England team would have been a force because of the players that they have at their disposal.

This is just nonsense. A great leader can make the most of average players. Leicester City ring a bell? IK in 1992 ring a bell? Dev in 1983 ring a bell? Stop pretending you understand leadership, because you do not.

As I said earlier in this thread, the way Pakistan won the 1992 World Cup and the way India won in 1983 are not sustainable models for success. Those events are not replicable and not blueprints for consistent success. The difference between us and India is that we are still intoxicated by 1992 and are hoping to relive history, while India have moved on. That is why before every World Cup, our players to go Imran to listen to his cornered tigers story.

Have you heard of the Indian team going to Kapil before World Cups to listen to his cornered tigers speech, even thought his team produced a bigger cornered tigers moment than Imran's 92? No, because India knows that the only way to consistently be a top team is to implement a system that can regularly churn out top players.

No system can produce world class players all the time, but the reason India has been consistently a top 3 side since the early 2000s is because have regularly produced top players. This is where Pakistan have lagged behind. They have not invested in their production of players and continue to daydream of a superhero like Imran to dive in from the skies and save them from doom. That is the difference in perception and mentality of the two nations, and that is why we need to learn from them.

Leicester won the Premier League because of two main factors: They had the best DM in the league and the link-up between Mahrez and Vardy worked brilliantly. In addition, the likes of Man City, Chelsea, Man United, Liverpool, Arsenal and Spurs had underwhelming seasons. None of those teams accumulated more than 71 points.

If Leicester winning the league was all about leadership, why has Wes Morgan struggled since? Why did Ranieri fail to replicate the magic at Fulham?

The very fact Pakistan is a low ranked ODI team but beat your favourite India #1 ODI team a few years ago - with more or less the same players as in the WC - proves how mindset and leadership is everything.

that, along with our over 80% losing record against the top teams in the last two years exactly shows why we are a 6th ranked team. We can beat the top teams maybe 2 times in 10, but we cannot dominate them regularly because they simply have better players than us.

Pakistan did not beat India in the Champions Trophy Final and did not peak England in the World Cup because of leadership and mentality. Pakistan beat India because they played to their potential AND India underperformed. A weak team is not going to beat a stronger team simply by playing well, it also has to hope that the stronger team doesn't play well.

Pakistan lost 4-0 to England in the ODI series, got thumped by West Indies, beat England and is now getting thumped again. How do you explain this based on your mindset and leadership theory? So Sarfraz wasn't a good leader in the England series or against West Indies, he became a good leader against England and has now resorted back to his poor leadership against Australia and India. Brilliant.

you have proved squat other than you spend time on Google and MS Word.

You are arguing for the sake of it because Pakistan is being discussed, had it been your motherland, India, you'd agree with every world I have said. Your definition of success is luck, and flukes, and from someone who has proven to be a fake patriot who has been rejected by society, I am not surprised you are seeking the much needed attention you crave for.

Ultimately, it is my fault because you are either a troll or someone who is beyond cure. From Pakistan has a better standard of living than the UK, to Pakistan will beat India in bilateral now, to Stokes and Buttler were mediocre in their youth, to Pakistan's problem is leadership only. I don't think serious posters should be engaging you.

 

[Mamoon]

We pretty much agree on this subject.
Obviously, captaincy alone is not the difference between a rubbish team and a top team.
What i was trying to say, is that an exceptional leader can take an ordinary team and make it perform extraordinary at times, by instilling belief and knowledge in the players.
But to have a top team you need top players!

Absolutely, but consistency cannot be achieved unless you have top players at your disposal.

 

[yasir]

Manjrekar analysis on Pakistan's demise and India's rise are quite average, and it is understandable because he is an Indian cricketer of the late 80s to mid 90s, when they were at their mediocre best, and Manjrekar himself was one of the poster boys of mediocrity.

Technically very good who looked like a great at the crease, but was a mental midget with no ability to handle pressure. Like most Pakistani ex-players, he believes in saviours and overstates the importance of a leadership figure.

You put Imran Khan in this team and absolutely nothing will change, because this team is 4-5 world class players short of competing with the best teams in the world. Imran alone cannot bridge that gap, and he cannot turn mediocre players into world beaters. Yes I know about what he did with Wasim, Waqar and Inzamam, but the fact is that those players had the ability to be groomed. You cannot polish crap, no one can.

Imran became Imran because he got out of Pakistan early. He became a cricketer and a captain at Oxford and Worcestershire, and most of our past greats benefited from County cricket. Unfortunately, Pakistan has done more than enough damage to the game of cricket, especially with the events of August 2010 to continue on that route. As a result, we now have to stand on our own two feet, and that is why we are struggling badly.

Pakistan needs to find a way of consistently producing world class players internally who do not have rotten mentality. Waiting for figures like Imran Khan to emerge from our system and save Pakistan cricket is meaningless. It is never going to happen. That is not how professional teams are built.

I wish the difference between Pakistan and India was only the difference between the leadership of Sarfraz and Kohli/Dhoni, because it would have made our lives very easy.

Reverse Swing Edge:

There were couple of other factors, the most important one was "Reverse Swing" Technology. Most if not all away series are won because of reverse swing, even the decisive blow in WC final was thanks to Akram's reverse...Reverse was not a fluke Tech, the difference was that nobody else knew about it and we almost had patented it for 25+ years... In today's world, we have so special edge or any edge on reverse, that is commodity product, plus ICC has heavily scrutinized it. We have not come up with anything new.

Leadership is overrate, System wins:

Leadership is over rated in our culture, he have habbit of making people God and not focus on process of building system. We are emotional driven society more so than reason base. That's why religion and Army dominate the political and cultural landscape.

India in last 10-15 year has become lot more professional in every aspect of the culture than us. They have less of OLD desi culture and more so professional culture of west embedded in their society. Main reason in IT boom, their culture changed as they were working constantly with west for 25-30 years now, that has transformed their culture immensely. This is reflected not only in Cricket but in Tech sector of Indian society and lot of other sectors. This does not happen in a day, it happened over the period of quarter of century. You cannot give credit to any one or group of leaders. It has everything to do with boom of IT industry, where need to Indian work force was need of west, but Indian really learned and transformed from that experience. This learning was again harden by trial and error, learning from mistakes, like many products you develop.

On the other hand, we are still invested in 50 year old social, professional and civil model that has failed us than and is still failing us. We are still heavily invested in Faith based ideologies aka religion and Army, there is no other substantive pillar of society. We are not able to tap the High Tech, even when we could have. Result is that gulf(in every aspect of life) between us and India is as enormous as everybody witness last Sunday in Cricket.

Leadership alone is no answer to investment in system. Pakistani have Hail Mary approach to life, now all eggs are in IK leadership basket, which is such an irrational and rubbish approach. Like most Hail Marries chance of success is almost zero.

 

[Technics 1210]

No, it had to do with the fact that they were young and not in their prime like they are now. The likes of Buttler, Bairstow and Stokes were highly rated long before they became regulars in international cricket. Players like Buttler and Stokes in particular were heralded as the next big things in international cricket. Their peaks simply coincided with Morgan's captaincy.



Not sure what Imran Khan and his political circus has to do with this discussion, but perhaps you did the right thing by bringing him up. Unfortunately, Imran Khan doesn't have a clue on how to build a good political team.

That is why, someone like Fawad Chaudhry, who thinks Pakistan sent Hubble telescope into space is now the Minister of Science and Technology. In addition, he has appointed a former PPP Finance Minister as his Financial Advisor, same PPP whose economic performance he vehemently criticises day and night.

Furthermore, he decided to appoint himself as Interior Minister, before he was sacked from the role within 8 months. Absolutely comedy.

You give these people 20 years and they won't change anything because they don't have the competency. A Prime Minister is like a captain of the team. He cannot do anything unless he has competent members in his cabinet and in his government.

You can be the most honest and competent PM in the world, but if you have someone like Fawad Chaudhry as Minister of Science and Technology and Hafeez Sheikh as Financial Advisor, and Firdous Awan as the government spokesperson, you are not going to achieving anything. These are tried and tested failures, just like most members of the 2015 England World Cup squad.



If you think they were mediocre to begin with, you don't understand cricket. Well, that is not a question anyway, you clearly don't. They were brilliant talents who simply needed time to develop and reach their peak.



Here is a thread from July 2014, a year before Morgan became the captain. PPers are criticising and mocking Stokes, and I was defending him.

http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/showthread.php?205364-Ben-Stokes-the-all-rounder

In fact, the first time I saw Stokes was way back in 2010, and anyone with half decent understanding of cricket could tell that he was a player of enormous talents who would have a very good career for England. There aren't many pre-2015 thread on Bairstow and Buttler.



Anyone who watched a young Stokes and Buttler etc. play could tell that they had a lot of talent. Buttler smashing Parnell for 32 runs in an over back in 2012 was more than enough proof anyone needed to recognise his talents. If you are judging young talents solely by their stats, your exposing your inability to understand the game.



Every great team needs some luck because it is about great players coming through at the same time. As strong as Australian domestic cricket is, if they were not lucky to have the likes of Ponting, Gilchrist, McGrath come through in the same generation, they would have not been invincible. Similarly, when Clive Lloyd's team got hammered in Australia and decided to invest in fearsome pacers, he was lucky enough to have the likes of Marshall, Holding, Roberts in the system.



England's resurgence did not start in 2011/2012. I do follow my second team, but it appears that you don't follow the team of your adopted home.

In 2011/2012, they had Cook and Trott in the top 3 and they did not pick bowlers based on their batting abilities. Their only aggressive players were Pietersen, Morgan and Kieswetter. Their side was decent for English conditions when the ball swung, but they were average on flat decks. The highlight of that team was smashing a deplorable Pakistan side 4-0 in UAE.


Again, no one is arguing that Morgan is not a well-respected leader or is not a good captain. The point is that he is not responsible for the resurgence of the England team. With or without Morgan, this England team would have been a force because of the players that they have at their disposal.



As I said earlier in this thread, the way Pakistan won the 1992 World Cup and the way India won in 1983 are not sustainable models for success. Those events are not replicable and not blueprints for consistent success. The difference between us and India is that we are still intoxicated by 1992 and are hoping to relive history, while India have moved on. That is why before every World Cup, our players to go Imran to listen to his cornered tigers story.

Have you heard of the Indian team going to Kapil before World Cups to listen to his cornered tigers speech, even thought his team produced a bigger cornered tigers moment than Imran's 92? No, because India knows that the only way to consistently be a top team is to implement a system that can regularly churn out top players.

No system can produce world class players all the time, but the reason India has been consistently a top 3 side since the early 2000s is because have regularly produced top players. This is where Pakistan have lagged behind. They have not invested in their production of players and continue to daydream of a superhero like Imran to dive in from the skies and save them from doom. That is the difference in perception and mentality of the two nations, and that is why we need to learn from them.

Leicester won the Premier League because of two main factors: They had the best DM in the league and the link-up between Mahrez and Vardy worked brilliantly. In addition, the likes of Man City, Chelsea, Man United, Liverpool, Arsenal and Spurs had underwhelming seasons. None of those teams accumulated more than 71 points.

If Leicester winning the league was all about leadership, why has Wes Morgan struggled since? Why did Ranieri fail to replicate the magic at Fulham?



that, along with our over 80% losing record against the top teams in the last two years exactly shows why we are a 6th ranked team. We can beat the top teams maybe 2 times in 10, but we cannot dominate them regularly because they simply have better players than us.

Pakistan did not beat India in the Champions Trophy Final and did not peak England in the World Cup because of leadership and mentality. Pakistan beat India because they played to their potential AND India underperformed. A weak team is not going to beat a stronger team simply by playing well, it also has to hope that the stronger team doesn't play well.

Pakistan lost 4-0 to England in the ODI series, got thumped by West Indies, beat England and is now getting thumped again. How do you explain this based on your mindset and leadership theory? So Sarfraz wasn't a good leader in the England series or against West Indies, he became a good leader against England and has now resorted back to his poor leadership against Australia and India. Brilliant.


Ultimately, it is my fault because you are either a troll or someone who is beyond cure. From Pakistan has a better standard of living than the UK, to Pakistan will beat India in bilateral now, to Stokes and Buttler were mediocre in their youth, to Pakistan's problem is leadership only. I don't think serious posters should be engaging you.

Tautology, irrelevance, inconsistency, and hatred.

You are the first guy on the planet to claim leadership is not relevant and doesn't have an influence. You've shifted the goalposts again. I cannot compete with your stupidity and outright lies which are based on your hatred of pakistan. Like I said, had it been india you'd be high living.

If anyone is a troll, it's you. Stick to your - performance is pure luck - mantra coupled with your sham patriotism. We all know you just need an excuse anyway.

 

[Technics 1210]

Forgot to add, [MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION] commenting on a Ben Stokes thread in 2014 (not the other English players) is what you call a fluke. Commenting on 1 out of the 7 players mentioned is equivalent to a broken clock being correct twice a day. Here's the kicker, Morgan was captain in 2014.

 

[Bhaijaan]

Manjrekar analysis on Pakistan's demise and India's rise are quite average, and it is understandable because he is an Indian cricketer of the late 80s to mid 90s, when they were at their mediocre best, and Manjrekar himself was one of the poster boys of mediocrity.

Technically very good who looked like a great at the crease, but was a mental midget with no ability to handle pressure. Like most Pakistani ex-players, he believes in saviours and overstates the importance of a leadership figure.

You put Imran Khan in this team and absolutely nothing will change, because this team is 4-5 world class players short of competing with the best teams in the world. Imran alone cannot bridge that gap, and he cannot turn mediocre players into world beaters. Yes I know about what he did with Wasim, Waqar and Inzamam, but the fact is that those players had the ability to be groomed. You cannot polish crap, no one can.

Imran became Imran because he got out of Pakistan early. He became a cricketer and a captain at Oxford and Worcestershire, and most of our past greats benefited from County cricket. Unfortunately, Pakistan has done more than enough damage to the game of cricket, especially with the events of August 2010 to continue on that route. As a result, we now have to stand on our own two feet, and that is why we are struggling badly.

Pakistan needs to find a way of consistently producing world class players internally who do not have rotten mentality. Waiting for figures like Imran Khan to emerge from our system and save Pakistan cricket is meaningless. It is never going to happen. That is not how professional teams are built.

I wish the difference between Pakistan and India was only the difference between the leadership of Sarfraz and Kohli/Dhoni, because it would have made our lives very easy.

Couldn’t agree more with you bro.

Way too much idol worshipping in our part of the world.

No Rishabh Pant doesn’t need Virat and Dhoni’s vibes to feel confident. He belongs to another generation of Indian cricket and Indian people whose confident is at another level already. In fact I would imagine other seniors getting affected by someone like Pant or Gill’s 2019 era young vibrance. Their fitness level, skill And hitting ability for their age is remarkable. They are product of professional set up our old players didn’t have access to.

The investment made on grass root level cricket, on first class cricket on under 19 cricket on A tours is showing its results. That’s what it is.

Not Dhoni or Ganguly’s magic wand or Kohli’s aggression lol.

Sanjay Manjrekar truly represents 80s India’s mediocrity and cluelessness

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Reverse Swing Edge:

There were couple of other factors, the most important one was "Reverse Swing" Technology. Most if not all away series are won because of reverse swing, even the decisive blow in WC final was thanks to Akram's reverse...Reverse was not a fluke Tech, the difference was that nobody else knew about it and we almost had patented it for 25+ years... In today's world, we have so special edge or any edge on reverse, that is commodity product, plus ICC has heavily scrutinized it. We have not come up with anything new.

Leadership is overrate, System wins:

Leadership is over rated in our culture, he have habbit of making people God and not focus on process of building system. We are emotional driven society more so than reason base. That's why religion and Army dominate the political and cultural landscape.

India in last 10-15 year has become lot more professional in every aspect of the culture than us. They have less of OLD desi culture and more so professional culture of west embedded in their society. Main reason in IT boom, their culture changed as they were working constantly with west for 25-30 years now, that has transformed their culture immensely. This is reflected not only in Cricket but in Tech sector of Indian society and lot of other sectors. This does not happen in a day, it happened over the period of quarter of century. You cannot give credit to any one or group of leaders. It has everything to do with boom of IT industry, where need to Indian work force was need of west, but Indian really learned and transformed from that experience. This learning was again harden by trial and error, learning from mistakes, like many products you develop.

On the other hand, we are still invested in 50 year old social, professional and civil model that has failed us than and is still failing us. We are still heavily invested in Faith based ideologies aka religion and Army, there is no other substantive pillar of society. We are not able to tap the High Tech, even when we could have. Result is that gulf(in every aspect of life) between us and India is as enormous as everybody witness last Sunday in Cricket.

Leadership alone is no answer to investment in system. Pakistani have Hail Mary approach to life, now all eggs are in IK leadership basket, which is such an irrational and rubbish approach. Like most Hail Marries chance of success is almost zero.

Agree with a lot of this. It tends to be forgotten that Imran himself succeeded because he bypassed the amateurish PCB set-up and moulded the side in his own image. It was the only way to succeed at that time due to lack of professional structure.

India has become a lot more professional in the last couple of decades, their domestic cricket is miles ahead of Pakistan's and that is where players learn a professional attitude. Pakistan players have some talent, but it needs to be honed properly to compete with the leading sides.

You just have to look at the fielding and batting techniques to see the massive gulf in standards these days. Even previously it was overcome by bowling prowess which relies less on technique and method, and more on brawn.

 

[Mamoon]

Tautology, irrelevance, inconsistency, and hatred.

You are the first guy on the planet to claim leadership is not relevant and doesn't have an influence. You've shifted the goalposts again. I cannot compete with your stupidity and outright lies which are based on your hatred of pakistan. Like I said, had it been india you'd be high living.

If anyone is a troll, it's you. Stick to your - performance is pure luck - mantra coupled with your sham patriotism. We all know you just need an excuse anyway.

Typical. You come out all guns blazing with your weak, outlandish argument, then you are presented with facts, then you start getting on the back-foot and your replies get shorter and shorter, and eventually you have no answer. I have categorically disproved all your claims and now you are throwing your toys out of the pram. However, as I said, it is my fault. I should know better.

Forgot to add, [MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION] commenting on a Ben Stokes thread in 2014 (not the other English players) is what you call a fluke. Commenting on 1 out of the 7 players mentioned is equivalent to a broken clock being correct twice a day. Here's the kicker, Morgan was captain in 2014.

The only "kicker" is that you run your mouth without getting your facts right. Morgan was appointed ODI captain on December 20, 2014. The Stokes thread was made in July 2014. By the way, the likes of Buttler, Bairstow etc. were not discussed much on PP before they became prominent in the ODI team and there are very few (if any) dedicated threads for them in the archives.

 

[Mamoon]

Reverse Swing Edge:

There were couple of other factors, the most important one was "Reverse Swing" Technology. Most if not all away series are won because of reverse swing, even the decisive blow in WC final was thanks to Akram's reverse...Reverse was not a fluke Tech, the difference was that nobody else knew about it and we almost had patented it for 25+ years... In today's world, we have so special edge or any edge on reverse, that is commodity product, plus ICC has heavily scrutinized it. We have not come up with anything new.

Leadership is overrate, System wins:

Leadership is over rated in our culture, he have habbit of making people God and not focus on process of building system. We are emotional driven society more so than reason base. That's why religion and Army dominate the political and cultural landscape.

India in last 10-15 year has become lot more professional in every aspect of the culture than us. They have less of OLD desi culture and more so professional culture of west embedded in their society. Main reason in IT boom, their culture changed as they were working constantly with west for 25-30 years now, that has transformed their culture immensely. This is reflected not only in Cricket but in Tech sector of Indian society and lot of other sectors. This does not happen in a day, it happened over the period of quarter of century. You cannot give credit to any one or group of leaders. It has everything to do with boom of IT industry, where need to Indian work force was need of west, but Indian really learned and transformed from that experience. This learning was again harden by trial and error, learning from mistakes, like many products you develop.

On the other hand, we are still invested in 50 year old social, professional and civil model that has failed us than and is still failing us. We are still heavily invested in Faith based ideologies aka religion and Army, there is no other substantive pillar of society. We are not able to tap the High Tech, even when we could have. Result is that gulf(in every aspect of life) between us and India is as enormous as everybody witness last Sunday in Cricket.

Leadership alone is no answer to investment in system. Pakistani have Hail Mary approach to life, now all eggs are in IK leadership basket, which is such an irrational and rubbish approach. Like most Hail Marries chance of success is almost zero.

Complete agree with you. You nailed it.

Unfortunately, our troll friend is still dreaming for a leader like Imran to emerge with a wand and transform this pathetic 6th ranked team into world beaters. This is the rotten mentality I have been yapping about for the past few weeks now.

 

[Technics 1210]

Typical. You come out all guns blazing with your weak, outlandish argument, then you are presented with facts, then you start getting on the back-foot and your replies get shorter and shorter, and eventually you have no answer. I have categorically disproved all your claims and now you are throwing your toys out of the pram. However, as I said, it is my fault. I should know better.

Not at all, I actually came out with one line, and you came out with an essay trying to refute the truth, but failed. If you want us to believe that leadership makes no difference then you deserve to be where you are at now.

The only "kicker" is that you run your mouth without getting your facts right. Morgan was appointed ODI captain on December 20, 2014. The Stokes thread was made in July 2014. By the way, the likes of Buttler, Bairstow etc. were not discussed much on PP before they became prominent in the ODI team and there are very few (if any) dedicated threads for them in the archives.

I asked you to point out when YOU highlighted England players are world class from the get go like you have with Archer based on 3 matches. Maybe you missed it, Stokes debut was in 2011 in ODIs, not in 2014. If the best you could muster is a thread 3 years after Stokes' debut it only further proves my point that once England leadership changed, Stokes became a better player. You further insult yourself by claiming the other players do not have dedicated threads, when in actual fact they do (try searching harder).

Basically you are just full of lies, and your sham patriotism is the only proof of anything here.

 

[PakLFC]

Seems as if Pakistanis like Sanjay where as Indian's don't!!? The end of the world is nigh!

 

[BalluBalleBaaz]

Accurate assessment of the situation based on current realities

 

[gani999]

I have to agree with [MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION].

Pakistan may have done well in 1992 thanks to Imran Khan's pep-talking but it is sure not what's happening with the present Indian setup. I doubt Kohli is giving them cornered tiger talks at the dinner table every night.
As an observer of Indian cricket for a while now, the one big difference I see is the hunger in the Indian team. Every kid who's in wants to make a difference. That's what makes even a fringe player like Shankar give his best and make an impact.

And as the Asia cup showed, India does not need Kohli around to be the winning team.

This hunger and the desire for glory is what I find missing in Pakistan today. You have players that look lethargic on the field, yawning away and wishing they were at their favourite biryani joint instead. The seniors all look bored and the juniors look like rabbits caught in the headlight, waiting to be run over.
The drive and cocky confidence that I used to see in the likes of Imran and Miandad are simply gone.

Maybe it's lack of patriotism, and the complete absence of motivation to play and win for the country.

 

[Mamoon]

Not at all, I actually came out with one line, and you came out with an essay trying to refute the truth, but failed. If you want us to believe that leadership makes no difference then you deserve to be where you are at now.

Again, typical. You get smashed in an argument and you end up putting words in other people's mouths. Leadership makes a difference BUT leadership alone cannot transform a mediocre team into world beaters. Every captain/leader needs quality players to work with in order to have sustained dominance/success.

If it is all about leadership and captaincy, why did England revamp its ODI squad after the 2015 World Cup? Why didn't they keep the same squad, and let Morgan work his magic? Why did they feel the need to move on from the likes of Ballance, Bell, Anderson, Broad etc.?

If it is all about leadership and captaincy, why did India replace Ashwin and Jadeja with Kuldeep and Chahal after the Champions Trophy? Why didn't Kohli inspire the former to bowl like the latter?

Thankfully, you are not a selector. You would run a team into the ground by picking mediocre players, hoping that your inspirational captain would transform them into elite players with his magic wand.

I asked you to point out when YOU highlighted England players are world class from the get go like you have with Archer based on 3 matches. Maybe you missed it, Stokes debut was in 2011 in ODIs, not in 2014. If the best you could muster is a thread 3 years after Stokes' debut it only further proves my point that once England leadership changed, Stokes became a better player. You further insult yourself by claiming the other players do not have dedicated threads, when in actual fact they do (try searching harder).

Basically you are just full of lies, and your sham patriotism is the only proof of anything here.

I joined this forum in Sep 2012. I have no business with what was discussed before I came here and I am aware of any Buttler/Bairstow threads from that time period. The notion that Stokes became a better player once England's leadership changed is utter nonsense, and it has been disproved already.

Stokes made his debut at 20 in 2011, but he was very young and very raw. However, his talent was never in any doubt. In the 2013/14 Ashes, at the age of 22, he scored 120 against a rampaging Johnson on the quickest and bounciest pitch in the world.

No other English batsmen scored a hundred in that series. That alone was more than enough proof that he was a high class player who will only get better with age.

Do you think he scored 258 in South Africa and the hundred in India because of "the change of leadership"? So within a couple of years of becoming the Limited Overs captain, Morgan had started to affect Stokes' performance in Test cricket as well? Or was his improvement in Test cricket down to Cook? Do you even realise how fallacious your so-called argument is?

Stokes' improvement had nothing to do with Morgan or Cook - it was simply a matter of him maturing and developing as a player with age and experience. You give a super talented young player opportunities to perform, and provided that he has the work ethic (which Stokes does), he will almost always blossom into a top player.

England didn't axe Stokes from any format even when he was inconsistent, because they knew that he will eventually come good. It has nothing to do with Morgan's leadership.

The only thing that is being insulted here is the intelligence of every poster on this forum thanks to your trolling. Again, it is my fault for engaging you over and over again, but I find it hard to help myself because you come up with minnow-level arguments and it only takes a few mins to put you out of your misery.

Also, lets not talk about "sham patriotism". You are the one who was arguing that the standard of living in Pakistan is better than the UK, and basically everything in Pakistan is superior. However, yet, you are not interested in packing up your bags, throwing your maroon passport into the fire and coming back to Pakistan for good.

If that is not "sham patriotism", I don't know what is. Anyway, off you go.

 

[Mamoon]

I have to agree with [MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION].

Pakistan may have done well in 1992 thanks to Imran Khan's pep-talking but it is sure not what's happening with the present Indian setup. I doubt Kohli is giving them cornered tiger talks at the dinner table every night.
As an observer of Indian cricket for a while now, the one big difference I see is the hunger in the Indian team. Every kid who's in wants to make a difference. That's what makes even a fringe player like Shankar give his best and make an impact.

And as the Asia cup showed, India does not need Kohli around to be the winning team.

This hunger and the desire for glory is what I find missing in Pakistan today. You have players that look lethargic on the field, yawning away and wishing they were at their favourite biryani joint instead. The seniors all look bored and the juniors look like rabbits caught in the headlight, waiting to be run over.
The drive and cocky confidence that I used to see in the likes of Imran and Miandad are simply gone.

Maybe it's lack of patriotism, and the complete absence of motivation to play and win for the country.

Post 1999, the mentality of Indian cricket shifted. Instead of hoping for prodigies like Tendulkar to emerge and be worshipped by billions, and for an inspirational leader like Kapil to emerge and produce cornered tigers moments for them, they realised that consistency and long-term success in sports is a methodical process. Fairytale stories of defying odds etc. will only happen once or twice in 50 years.

Players come through a proper system and are properly conditioned at every level, there is high emphasis on fitness, age-fudging and chucking is not allowed, and IPL is a tremendous platform for the mental conditioning of these players. Yes they will have lean runs in the future because players like Kohli and Rohit will not come around all the time, but because their is a method to their success, they will ensure that Indian cricket will never fall to the pits of mediocrity like Pakistan cricket.

Unfortunately, on the other hand, Pakistan is still stuck with its rotten mentality of hoping for miracles and inspirational figures to fall from the sky and create magical moments. For decades, we were reliant on Country cricket to polish our players, but we have closed that door on ourselves.

Vast majority of the domestic players are unfit, age-fudging is common - you have 35 year olds pretending to be 23, there is no discipline, no knowledge of proper diet and training for athletes. You have the likes of Prithvi Shaw scoring 500 runs over two days at the age of 13, but our domestic pitches ensure that matches are over in two days. The players in the national team have awful mentality as well. Our captain was proudly stating before the World Cup that unpredictability is good and that is why all teams are scared for us, and they are still dreaming of 1992.

Pakistan cricket has a disease and even the likes of Mickey Arthur have been infected. Even now, he is talking about the cornered tigers nonsense in his press conferences.

Pakistan has the second biggest market and talent pool in the game and the passion for the game in the country is still huge. Our growth could be immense, but nothing will change as long as we don't change our rotten mentality.

 

[Hitman]

Again, typical. You get smashed in an argument and you end up putting words in other people's mouths. Leadership makes a difference BUT leadership alone cannot transform a mediocre team into world beaters. Every captain/leader needs quality players to work with in order to have sustained dominance/success.

If it is all about leadership and captaincy, why did England revamp its ODI squad after the 2015 World Cup? Why didn't they keep the same squad, and let Morgan work his magic? Why did they feel the need to move on from the likes of Ballance, Bell, Anderson, Broad etc.?

If it is all about leadership and captaincy, why did India replace Ashwin and Jadeja with Kuldeep and Chahal after the Champions Trophy? Why didn't Kohli inspire the former to bowl like the latter?

Thankfully, you are not a selector. You would run a team into the ground by picking mediocre players, hoping that your inspirational captain would transform them into elite players with his magic wand.




I joined this forum in Sep 2012. I have no business with what was discussed before I came here and I am aware of any Buttler/Bairstow threads from that time period. The notion that Stokes became a better player once England's leadership changed is utter nonsense, and it has been disproved already.

Stokes made his debut at 20 in 2011, but he was very young and very raw. However, his talent was never in any doubt. In the 2013/14 Ashes, at the age of 22, he scored 120 against a rampaging Johnson on the quickest and bounciest pitch in the world.

No other English batsmen scored a hundred in that series. That alone was more than enough proof that he was a high class player who will only get better with age.

Do you think he scored 258 in South Africa and the hundred in India because of "the change of leadership"? So within a couple of years of becoming the Limited Overs captain, Morgan had started to affect Stokes' performance in Test cricket as well? Or was his improvement in Test cricket down to Cook? Do you even realise how fallacious your so-called argument is?

Stokes' improvement had nothing to do with Morgan or Cook - it was simply a matter of him maturing and developing as a player with age and experience. You give a super talented young player opportunities to perform, and provided that he has the work ethic (which Stokes does), he will almost always blossom into a top player.

England didn't axe Stokes from any format even when he was inconsistent, because they knew that he will eventually come good. It has nothing to do with Morgan's leadership.

The only thing that is being insulted here is the intelligence of every poster on this forum thanks to your trolling. Again, it is my fault for engaging you over and over again, but I find it hard to help myself because you come up with minnow-level arguments and it only takes a few mins to put you out of your misery.

Also, lets not talk about "sham patriotism". You are the one who was arguing that the standard of living in Pakistan is better than the UK, and basically everything in Pakistan is superior. However, yet, you are not interested in packing up your bags, throwing your maroon passport into the fire and coming back to Pakistan for good.

If that is not "sham patriotism", I don't know what is. Anyway, off you go.

Done and dusted )

 

[Technics 1210]

Again, typical. You get smashed in an argument and you end up putting words in other people's mouths. Leadership makes a difference BUT leadership alone cannot transform a mediocre team into world beaters. Every captain/leader needs quality players to work with in order to have sustained dominance/success.

If it is all about leadership and captaincy, why did England revamp its ODI squad after the 2015 World Cup? Why didn't they keep the same squad, and let Morgan work his magic? Why did they feel the need to move on from the likes of Ballance, Bell, Anderson, Broad etc.?

If it is all about leadership and captaincy, why did India replace Ashwin and Jadeja with Kuldeep and Chahal after the Champions Trophy? Why didn't Kohli inspire the former to bowl like the latter?

Thankfully, you are not a selector. You would run a team into the ground by picking mediocre players, hoping that your inspirational captain would transform them into elite players with his magic wand.




I joined this forum in Sep 2012. I have no business with what was discussed before I came here and I am aware of any Buttler/Bairstow threads from that time period. The notion that Stokes became a better player once England's leadership changed is utter nonsense, and it has been disproved already.

Stokes made his debut at 20 in 2011, but he was very young and very raw. However, his talent was never in any doubt. In the 2013/14 Ashes, at the age of 22, he scored 120 against a rampaging Johnson on the quickest and bounciest pitch in the world.

No other English batsmen scored a hundred in that series. That alone was more than enough proof that he was a high class player who will only get better with age.

Do you think he scored 258 in South Africa and the hundred in India because of "the change of leadership"? So within a couple of years of becoming the Limited Overs captain, Morgan had started to affect Stokes' performance in Test cricket as well? Or was his improvement in Test cricket down to Cook? Do you even realise how fallacious your so-called argument is?

Stokes' improvement had nothing to do with Morgan or Cook - it was simply a matter of him maturing and developing as a player with age and experience. You give a super talented young player opportunities to perform, and provided that he has the work ethic (which Stokes does), he will almost always blossom into a top player.

England didn't axe Stokes from any format even when he was inconsistent, because they knew that he will eventually come good. It has nothing to do with Morgan's leadership.

The only thing that is being insulted here is the intelligence of every poster on this forum thanks to your trolling. Again, it is my fault for engaging you over and over again, but I find it hard to help myself because you come up with minnow-level arguments and it only takes a few mins to put you out of your misery.

Also, lets not talk about "sham patriotism". You are the one who was arguing that the standard of living in Pakistan is better than the UK, and basically everything in Pakistan is superior. However, yet, you are not interested in packing up your bags, throwing your maroon passport into the fire and coming back to Pakistan for good.

If that is not "sham patriotism", I don't know what is. Anyway, off you go.

There you go again, changing your tune and going off on a tangent with an essay. Why are you so defensive? Hit the spot did I?

When will you ever learn? You are not worthy of any level of argument. You do not engage, you vent your frustration and post verbatim arguments from the internet ending up undermining and contradicting yourself.

I cannot reason with someone who believes everything about cricket is based on luck and flukes, and especially someone who takes joy in Pakistan's losses while pretending to be Pakistani. You argue for the sake of it - I mean, you actually pinned the blame of Pakistan's WC streak against India on Imran Khan!

Your hatred knows no bounds. Wouldn't be so bad if you changed your profile flag to India - then you might actually make some sense. You are a sham patriot, and I am not the only one who sees this - enjoy your spectator high fives from your brethren - and rest assured I will pull you up again for making false statements whether you engage or not.

 

[madwolf]

Sanjay has gotten a lot of hate for his commentary but this article is well written and spot on.

Comedy gold this!

 

[madwolf]

Seems as if Pakistanis like Sanjay where as Indian's don't!!? The end of the world is nigh!

You sound like a young one. No one, I mean no one from India like Sanjay. Neither his performance nor his commentary. He is a soft, mental midget, who belongs in the congress party with RaGa.

India's adversaries, they love him.

 

[PakLFC]

You sound like a young one. No one, I mean no one from India like Sanjay. Neither his performance nor his commentary. He is a soft, mental midget, who belongs in the congress party with RaGa.

India's adversaries, they love him.

So you have been all over India for an opinion on Sanjay?

 

[madwolf]

So you have been all over India for an opinion on Sanjay?

been around enough places to hear his name mentioned with curse words for his performance and dismissed for his commentary.

so have u seen him play?

 

[Kaka4pope]

Some but not all of Pakistan’s players would go up a level under an Imran like captain - Amir, Shaheen, Zaman, Babar, maybe even Shadab and Hassan.

Wouldn’t make them world beaters - there’s no Inzamam, Yousuf, Akhtar, Wasim etc...but would make them meaner players for sure.

 

[Technics 1210]

You sound like a young one. No one, I mean no one from India like Sanjay. Neither his performance nor his commentary. He is a soft, mental midget, who belongs in the congress party with RaGa.

India's adversaries, they love him.

Agree, awful player, worst commentator ever (loves to name drop SRT), and twice in this WC was removed from his slot because he showed biased against England.

He is the perfect BCCI spokesman!

 

[PakLFC]

been around enough places to hear his name mentioned with curse words for his performance and dismissed for his commentary.

so have u seen him play?

Yes I have seen him play and he was an okay batsman. Not the most attack minded nonetheless a difficult one to dismiss. You wouldn't have seen even 5% of India.

 

[KingKhanWC]

I stopped reading after this

"Virat Kohli is no Imran yet."

Kohli will never be anywhere near IK, just look at his emotions on the field of play which are still immature.

No Indian including the very very poor commentator Manjraker will make any sense in regards to Pakistan cricket. Pak fans should stop listening to Indian pundits, waste of time.

 

[madwolf]

Agree, awful player, worst commentator ever (loves to name drop SRT), and twice in this WC was removed from his slot because he showed biased against England.

He is the perfect BCCI spokesman!

Which channel is commenting for?

 

[Technics 1210]

which channel is commenting for?

sky.

 

[Usergame]

Imran won the wc with ONLY 4 world class players in his team, one of which was a complete newbie and inconsistent(inzi).
The 4 were miandad, akram, mushi and a very raw inzi!
Imran himself was no longer a world class player, he could hardly bowl due to his shoulder injury and was only playing by taking painkiller injections before each game.
The rest of the team were mediocre.
THIS IS WHAT AN A TRUE LEADER CAN ACHIEVE!

They were almost out in the group stage. It wasnt just leadership. Once they got to senis they had nothing to lose and played 2 great matches.

The talent isnt there now snd neither is the professionalism.

Another mistake pakistan make is consistently listening to the a lot of the 90s players. As a whole pakistan were very inconsistent in the 90s too despite being 2nd in talent to aussie only - they folded in so many away test series.

 

[Usergame]

I stopped reading after this

"Virat Kohli is no Imran yet."

Kohli will never be anywhere near IK, just look at his emotions on the field of play which are still immature.

No Indian including the very very poor commentator Manjraker will make any sense in regards to Pakistan cricket. Pak fans should stop listening to Indian pundits, waste of time.

Imran is ny fav allrounder ever however I think a lot of his captaincy exploits are overrated as are his terrible speeches and sayings. Pakistan should stop following that and follow what works now.
If Imran was a legendary captain - pakistan had enough talent in the late 80's to early 90s to be the best cricket team in the world. But quite often they'd fold away from home in tests.

 

[KingKhanWC]

Imran is ny fav allrounder ever however I think a lot of his captaincy exploits are overrated as are his terrible speeches and sayings. Pakistan should stop following that and follow what works now.
If Imran was a legendary captain - pakistan had enough talent in the late 80's to early 90s to be the best cricket team in the world. But quite often they'd fold away from home in tests.

Please do describe in details how his captaincy is overrated?

Without Imran Pakistan would not have been the team they were in the 80's and then in the 90's, the talent was nothing without his leadership. Have you read his biography or of those who played against him?

 

[90MPH]

You need both, leadership and quality players.

One doesn’t work (as well as) without the other.

Pakistan need to sort out the roots of the problems, not enough quality being produced. That includes the bowlers.
The system definitely needs an overhaul. After that we have to be patient to see the results. No quick fix.

 

[happydavy]

That's typical Sanjay living in 80s and 90s. He believes that shah rukh Khan enters the dressing room, tells the team that no one can take away those 8 hours from them, team gets motivated and wins. On the other hand is Kohli, who couple of years back in an interview said that difference between "great attempt but difficult chance" vs "a superb catch" is microseconds, which don't get decided when you are taking the catch but hours of practise and training that you had spent for 2 years before the ball went up in the air.

 

[Pete Rose]

Meh. We don’t play enough bilaterals to know where we stand vs India. As a reminder, our 4th choice fast bowler who is sitting at home with tape on his mouth dismantled India’s best the last time we were there.
I understand we all have to write articles about this streak mythology, but I wouldn’t put too much stock in it.

 

[waleed88]

Manjrekar's opinions have always gone mainstream, specially in the socialverse of Pakistan, whether he writes something in his book, or an article that shares his opinions about the Pakistan team which are so typical and predictable for the 1 millionth time. It starts off with a beautiful scenery of how it was rainbows and unicorns when Imran was captain, to a tumultous state of our cricket now.... Obviously the only reason these articles are shared is because of the mythology surrounding Imran and what Imran did, as if cricket didn't exist before or after Imran khan.

It is a very basic and ignorant way to look at our cricket from a lense of Manjrekar who has barely visited Pakistan cricket since the days of Tensports ODI series bilaterals that took place annually between the two teams until 2007.

 

[waleed88]

It is not the gene or the mentality. The fact is we as a team are not good enough.

We as a batting unit can't chase 300. We get bowled out for a 100 after being 77-5 while teams from this spot are able to post totals close to 300.

We are still a pretty decent bowling outfit, considering we bowled out Australia for 309 but then couldn't chase that total down.

If we don't play cricket the way it is played today, we will keep suffering the consequences for years to come.

The table over 9 games will be exactly reflective of where our team stand. No fluke wins will get you a semi final berth in this world cup. Only the most consistent teams go through. The stats read 1 win from 5. We are not consistent enough.

 

[Savak]

In order to improve your chances of success in international cricket, you have got to invest in your domestic cricket structure, academies, A tours, U-16 and U-19 teams, schools and universities. India has done this tremendously in the last 10 years while Pakistan on the other hand were sleeping, and suffering from the after shocks of the war on terror, political and economic situation in the country.

 

[RainStopsPlay]

I stopped reading after this

"Virat Kohli is no Imran yet."

Kohli will never be anywhere near IK, just look at his emotions on the field of play which are still immature.

No Indian including the very very poor commentator Manjraker will make any sense in regards to Pakistan cricket. Pak fans should stop listening to Indian pundits, waste of time.

Virat Kohli doesn't have to be an Imran Khan or Dhoni to win India the WC! How many Pakistan's own Captains/players in the last 2 decades have replicated/replaced Imran the leader? A big fat ZERO!