What's new

Seven Test losses and the Mace - Pakistan has had a strange 2016

Junaids

Senior T20I Player
Joined
Jan 12, 2013
Runs
17,956
Post of the Week
11
Pakistan has had a strange old 2016.

Their Test series results were:

England: Drew 2-2 away
West Indies: Won 2-1 at home
New Zealand: Lost 2-0 away
Australia: Lost 2-0 away

So 4 wins, 0 draws and 7 defeats.

The teams which beat Pakistan were themselves dreadful: England lost 7 Tests in 2016 as well, Australia lost 5 and New Zealand were slaughtered by Australia and South Africa.

Pakistan can consider themselves fortunate not to have played against the outstanding current team, India, who might have embarrassed them even more.

The catalogue of errors looks something like this:

1. The selectors persisted with the same bowlers during a year in which none emerged with great credit and only Mohammad Amir, Yasir Shah and Wahab Riaz commanded occasional respect.

2. All cricket watchers know that old batsmen never flourish in Australia - so Pakistan picked two of them, at Numbers 4 and 5, with predictable results. On a blameless MCG surface, at least Sami Aslam and Babar Azam fell to the new ball. Misbah and Younis got out in the 20th over, to a spinner who was about to be dropped!

3. The selectors to all intents and purposes ignored players who had performed well in the conditions before. On the 2009-10 tour of Australia the outstanding players were Salman Butt, Mohammad Asif, Mohammad Amir and Umar Akmal. And the selectors left 3 of the 4 at home, in favour of older and inferior replacements.

4. The only relative bright spot was the 2-2 draw in England. But apart from the fact that England were a weak team, the success owed itself to arriving early and acclimatising. Which Pakistan consequently elected not to do in New Zealand and Australia.

5. Misbah's attritional, defensive captaincy just cannot be overlooked. The Edgbaston Test was transformed from a probable victory into an improbable defeat by his misuse of a toiling Yasir Shah for excessive spells. The same pattern continued all year, as if Misbah did not understand that the bounce in England and Australia was too true for him to be effective with negative fields. Yasir conceded 213, 207 and 172 in separate innings in England and Australia.

6. Perhaps above all, 2016 was the year when Mickey Arthur was proved right and Misbah was proved wrong about team composition. Arthur has always insisted that 5 bowlers are needed outside Asia for the quicks to maintain their pace by bowling short spells. Misbah disagreed and imagined that Yasir Shah could close up an end outside Asia. Misbah was wrong.

And yet Pakistan briefly held the World Test Championship Mace in 2016.

And the cupboard is in no way bare.

Sami Aslam, Babar Azam and Mohammad Nawaz have emerged this year, and now need to be given a long run in the team.

Azhar Ali, Asad Shafiq and Sarfraz Ahmed at ages 29-32 should be the senior players in the team - not the absurdly old Misbah and Younis - and they have all enhanced their reputations.

Mohammad Amir has yet to turn in a match-winning performance since his comeback, but he is bowling well and must be persisted with. As should Yasir Shah.

So that makes a foundation of 7-8 players who can hold their heads up high and who offer hope for the future.

Clearly time is up for both Misbah and Younis. On merit, neither should ever play another Test after the Sydney Test, and to be honest neither should play that one either. In the 4 Tests in New Zealand and Australia, Younis has 126 runs at an average of 15.75 and Misbah has 64 runs at an average of 10.67.

But Misbah and Younis have both had glorious careers in different ways, and it is a shame that neither they nor the selectors had the wisdom to realise that Australia and New Zealand were a bridge too far for men of their ages.

It is probably reasonable to pencil in Imam-ul-Haq as the next batsman to join the team. Salman Butt would have been useful in Australia, but as someone who objects to anyone aged over 35 being selected in any circumstances, I don't see the point in calling up a 32 year old after the tour to the place he does best in has finished.

The problem is what is not coming through in other areas.

Pakistan desperately needs a tall right-arm quick bowler in his twenties. Sohail Khan and Imran Khan are obviously not good enough, and the options now are not good. Mohammad Asif should obviously have played the 8 Tests this year outside Asia, but it may now be too late to be worth calling him up. Hasan Ali might be next in line, but his height is probably an impossible handicap.

The team also desperately needs an all-rounder who can be a fourth quick bowler outside Asia. No real effort has been made to groom one, and that has been costly. Faheem Ashraf and Aamer Yamin seem too short, and Hammad Azam seems too slow. It might have to be Amad Butt, who needs a lot of work to turn him into either a credible bowler or a credible Number 8 batsman.

Pakistan can make a start by ushering Misbah and Younis into retirement. They have had stellar careers, but Test cricket is not a place for men in their forties. Sohail Khan and Imran Khan also need to be replaced by younger, fitter, taller and faster right-arm bowlers.

But with the generational change made, Pakistan can start to do themselves justice at Test level.
 
Some still believe that Pakistan will beat India. :))

I didn't say that - I said the opposite!

But still, this looks like the foundation of a Test team to me:

1. Imam-ul-Haq
2. Sami Aslam
3. Azhar Ali
4. Babar Azam
5. Asad Shafiq
6. Mohammad Nawaz
7. Sarfraz Ahmed
8. ????????????
9. Mohammad Amir
10. Yasir Shah
11. ????????????
 
The only reason for the mace was India getting screwed by rain in WI.
 
I think too much shouldn't be made for rank 1 unless you hold it for some period.
 
I didn't say that - I said the opposite!

But still, this looks like the foundation of a Test team to me:

1. Imam-ul-Haq
2. Sami Aslam
3. Azhar Ali
4. Babar Azam
5. Asad Shafiq
6. Mohammad Nawaz
7. Sarfraz Ahmed
8. ????????????
9. Mohammad Amir
10. Yasir Shah
11. ????????????

what have you seen in nawaz lol?
 
Some still believe that Pakistan will beat India. :))

Stranger things have been known to happen with pakistan, though it would not surprise me in the slightest if they won a series against us. Especially with Misbah and Younis even in india.
 
The teams which beat Pakistan were themselves dreadful: England lost 7 Tests in 2016 as well, Australia lost 5 and New Zealand were slaughtered by Australia and South Africa..
I believe we were also slaughtered by India :bm
 
Do you agree that the standard of teams today is abysmal?

It has been the case for some time, but lopsided series comes also due to lack of preparation. Teams are not as bad as they look on scorecard when visiting different conditions. Many teams did play well despite not winning and some time that extra time/preparation is enough to push you for that win. You can find many examples in the last 5-6 years involving many teams where they fought hard but didn't have enough to win.
 
I didn't say that - I said the opposite!

But still, this looks like the foundation of a Test team to me:

1. Imam-ul-Haq
2. Sami Aslam
3. Azhar Ali
4. Babar Azam
5. Asad Shafiq
6. Mohammad Nawaz
7. Sarfraz Ahmed
8. ????????????
9. Mohammad Amir
10. Yasir Shah
11. ????????????

Yes you didn't, but others have/do.
 
Really?

In the 70's many teams were weak.

But the 80's?

Aus wasn't that great,India defeated England in England and South Africa didnt play,Lanka was almost a minnow.

West Indies and Pakistan only two good teams??
 
Really?

In the 70's many teams were weak.

But the 80's?

I'am talking about overall quality of cricket, entertainment and results. Never seen so many awesome fast bowlers regularly bowl 140K+ ... ( I know according to you Marshall could bowl 150K from 4-5 step runup but I strongly disagree and obviously there was no SAF and SL was a minnow ) .
 
Last edited:
Some still believe that Pakistan will beat India. :))

If this same aus team is played with on any subcontinental wicket against pak they will get smashed.pak are a totally different beast in subcontinental wickets.if anything it will be a gripping contest btw ind and pak with pakistan having a slight upperhand.
 
How do you rate Pakistan Test team now?

:azhar2:yk:misbah4:amir2:sharjeel Now how do you rate them after the disastrous 2016?
 
If this same aus team is played with on any subcontinental wicket against pak they will get smashed.pak are a totally different beast in subcontinental wickets.if anything it will be a gripping contest btw ind and pak with pakistan having a slight upperhand.

Pakistan lost matches to Windies, NZ, SA in UAE. Compare these teams performances in India. Ind far superior in SC conditions to ANY team.
 
I'am talking about overall quality of cricket, entertainment and results. Never seen so many awesome fast bowlers regularly bowl 140K+ ... ( I know according to you Marshall could bowl 150K from 4-5 step runup but I strongly disagree and obviously there was no SAF and SL was a minnow ) .

Marshall in some ways was like a more skilled and rounded Waqar.

If you only saw footage of Waqar in 1998-2002 you'd think that he was a 133-143K bowler, like on the Hobart'99 footage.

But he had lost 10-15K from earlier in his career.

The problem with assessing Marshall is that most of the surviving footage is from England, where he used to cut back his pace to get more swing.
 
World no 1 was a minor blip.

Back to their usual mercurial self.

Racking up 450 in one innings on a flat pitch and then fading away in 50 odd overs in the next go on the same pitch.

This DEMANDS high levels of consistency, something which Pakistan regularly churns up.

Also Pakistan always makes test cricket entertaining and no one in the Australian crowd would be complaining for such an exciting finale.

On to the 3rd test we move, with the hope that the next test will bring us some light from the depths of gloom, despair and despondency.

We had a tour of Down Under to Forget because even our usual punching bags, New Zealand, manage to dethrone us. Previously, it was said, that we lost in New Zealand because we were more focused on Australia.
Now that excuse is also trashed because we didn't offer much in Australia either.

Most of the times I tell myself, take this team with a grain of salt.

When they surprise you, be surprised. When they do the obvious, just laugh and move on. It's just a game of cricket, not about wrecking lives.

So what if everyone had a bad day today?

SCG beckons and hopefully good days.
 
Pakistan lost matches to Windies, NZ, SA in UAE. Compare these teams performances in India. Ind far superior in SC conditions to ANY team.

Pak won test series against west indies drew against sa when they were the top ranked side.drawing vs nz may be a slight downer but overall have a very good record in asia over the past 2 or 3 years.while ind have made a fortune playing incessantly on rank turners.
 
I didn't say that - I said the opposite!

But still, this looks like the foundation of a Test team to me:

1. Imam-ul-Haq
2. Sami Aslam
3. Azhar Ali
4. Babar Azam
5. Asad Shafiq
6. Mohammad Nawaz
7. Sarfraz Ahmed
8. ????????????
9. Mohammad Amir
10. Yasir Shah
11. ????????????

Nawaz is utterly useless with the bat. Unless he greatly, greatly enhances his batting skills and technique No. six is a question mark too.
 
:azhar2:yk:misbah4:amir2:sharjeel Now how do you rate them after the disastrous 2016?

We're good at home and crap away. Just like every other team over the last few years with the exception of South Africa.

No point acting like the sky is falling just because we performed to expecations, just like we shouldn't act like all our current problems have disappeared when a new look squad heads back to the UAE and dishes out some phainty to visiting teams.
 
Pakistan has had a strange old 2016.

Their Test series results were:

England: Drew 2-2 away
West Indies: Won 2-1 at home
New Zealand: Lost 2-0 away
Australia: Lost 2-0 away

So 4 wins, 0 draws and 7 defeats.

The teams which beat Pakistan were themselves dreadful: England lost 7 Tests in 2016 as well, Australia lost 5 and New Zealand were slaughtered by Australia and South Africa.

Pakistan can consider themselves fortunate not to have played against the outstanding current team, India, who might have embarrassed them even more.

The catalogue of errors looks something like this:

1. The selectors persisted with the same bowlers during a year in which none emerged with great credit and only Mohammad Amir, Yasir Shah and Wahab Riaz commanded occasional respect.

2. All cricket watchers know that old batsmen never flourish in Australia - so Pakistan picked two of them, at Numbers 4 and 5, with predictable results. On a blameless MCG surface, at least Sami Aslam and Babar Azam fell to the new ball. Misbah and Younis got out in the 20th over, to a spinner who was about to be dropped!

3. The selectors to all intents and purposes ignored players who had performed well in the conditions before. On the 2009-10 tour of Australia the outstanding players were Salman Butt, Mohammad Asif, Mohammad Amir and Umar Akmal. And the selectors left 3 of the 4 at home, in favour of older and inferior replacements.

4. The only relative bright spot was the 2-2 draw in England. But apart from the fact that England were a weak team, the success owed itself to arriving early and acclimatising. Which Pakistan consequently elected not to do in New Zealand and Australia.

5. Misbah's attritional, defensive captaincy just cannot be overlooked. The Edgbaston Test was transformed from a probable victory into an improbable defeat by his misuse of a toiling Yasir Shah for excessive spells. The same pattern continued all year, as if Misbah did not understand that the bounce in England and Australia was too true for him to be effective with negative fields. Yasir conceded 213, 207 and 172 in separate innings in England and Australia.

6. Perhaps above all, 2016 was the year when Mickey Arthur was proved right and Misbah was proved wrong about team composition. Arthur has always insisted that 5 bowlers are needed outside Asia for the quicks to maintain their pace by bowling short spells. Misbah disagreed and imagined that Yasir Shah could close up an end outside Asia. Misbah was wrong.

And yet Pakistan briefly held the World Test Championship Mace in 2016.

And the cupboard is in no way bare.

Sami Aslam, Babar Azam and Mohammad Nawaz have emerged this year, and now need to be given a long run in the team.

Azhar Ali, Asad Shafiq and Sarfraz Ahmed at ages 29-32 should be the senior players in the team - not the absurdly old Misbah and Younis - and they have all enhanced their reputations.

Mohammad Amir has yet to turn in a match-winning performance since his comeback, but he is bowling well and must be persisted with. As should Yasir Shah.

So that makes a foundation of 7-8 players who can hold their heads up high and who offer hope for the future.

Clearly time is up for both Misbah and Younis. On merit, neither should ever play another Test after the Sydney Test, and to be honest neither should play that one either. In the 4 Tests in New Zealand and Australia, Younis has 126 runs at an average of 15.75 and Misbah has 64 runs at an average of 10.67.

But Misbah and Younis have both had glorious careers in different ways, and it is a shame that neither they nor the selectors had the wisdom to realise that Australia and New Zealand were a bridge too far for men of their ages.

It is probably reasonable to pencil in Imam-ul-Haq as the next batsman to join the team. Salman Butt would have been useful in Australia, but as someone who objects to anyone aged over 35 being selected in any circumstances, I don't see the point in calling up a 32 year old after the tour to the place he does best in has finished.

The problem is what is not coming through in other areas.

Pakistan desperately needs a tall right-arm quick bowler in his twenties. Sohail Khan and Imran Khan are obviously not good enough, and the options now are not good. Mohammad Asif should obviously have played the 8 Tests this year outside Asia, but it may now be too late to be worth calling him up. Hasan Ali might be next in line, but his height is probably an impossible handicap.

The team also desperately needs an all-rounder who can be a fourth quick bowler outside Asia. No real effort has been made to groom one, and that has been costly. Faheem Ashraf and Aamer Yamin seem too short, and Hammad Azam seems too slow. It might have to be Amad Butt, who needs a lot of work to turn him into either a credible bowler or a credible Number 8 batsman.

Pakistan can make a start by ushering Misbah and Younis into retirement. They have had stellar careers, but Test cricket is not a place for men in their forties. Sohail Khan and Imran Khan also need to be replaced by younger, fitter, taller and faster right-arm bowlers.

But with the generational change made, Pakistan can start to do themselves justice at Test level.

First time I agree with you Junaid when you say Salman Butt and Asif are not the way forward.

For future test series, both Usman Salahuddin and Asif Zakir should be included. Misbah won't be there and one of them can play in his place. I want Younis to play the next two test series in WI and Bangladesh to groom Babar, Sami and Asif Zakir/Usman Salahuddin. After Younis, the remaining one of Asif Zakir/Usman Salahuddin can play.

Azhar should continue to open with Sami. Although I suggest resting Sami for Sydney to test Sharjeel. If Sharjeel fails in Sydney or is absolutely found out at test level, Pakistan can look for Imam Ul Haq.

For fast bowlers, Only Amir and Wahab should remain. I would like Imran to be given a chance at Sydney to show what he is made of. Hassan Ali, Junaid Khan, M Abbas, Mir Hamza and Atif Jabbar can fill 2/3 positions left by Sohail, Rahat and possibly Imran. Sohail is clearly not fit for intl. cricket and Rahat has been too inconsistent for too long.

I don't think any fast bowling all rounder is ready for test cricket yet. Immad Butt's batting is non-existent and he did not take wickets in domestic. Even Amir Yamin struggled for wickets on supposedly green unprepared domestic pitches. How will Immad and Yamin take wickets in intl. cricket? So no point in selecting someone just for the heck of it or grooming him while playing tests for Pakistan.
 
First time I agree with you Junaid when you say Salman Butt and Asif are not the way forward.

For future test series, both Usman Salahuddin and Asif Zakir should be included. Misbah won't be there and one of them can play in his place. I want Younis to play the next two test series in WI and Bangladesh to groom Babar, Sami and Asif Zakir/Usman Salahuddin. After Younis, the remaining one of Asif Zakir/Usman Salahuddin can play.

Azhar should continue to open with Sami. Although I suggest resting Sami for Sydney to test Sharjeel. If Sharjeel fails in Sydney or is absolutely found out at test level, Pakistan can look for Imam Ul Haq.

For fast bowlers, Only Amir and Wahab should remain. I would like Imran to be given a chance at Sydney to show what he is made of. Hassan Ali, Junaid Khan, M Abbas, Mir Hamza and Atif Jabbar can fill 2/3 positions left by Sohail, Rahat and possibly Imran. Sohail is clearly not fit for intl. cricket and Rahat has been too inconsistent for too long.

I don't think any fast bowling all rounder is ready for test cricket yet. Immad Butt's batting is non-existent and he did not take wickets in domestic. Even Amir Yamin struggled for wickets on supposedly green unprepared domestic pitches. How will Immad and Yamin take wickets in intl. cricket? So no point in selecting someone just for the heck of it or grooming him while playing tests for Pakistan.
Great post!

I think that Imran will play at Sydney for 2 reasons. Firstly, because Sohail Khan isn't fit enough to play again on Tuesday. But secondly because I think Mickey Arthur wants to clear out the dead wood, and thinks that if Imran bowls his 125K pies in Sydney then it will be easier to axe him forever.

In terms of the bowling, if you keep Amir and Wahab then you can't select Mir Hamza or Junaid Khan. The need is for right-arm quicks to add balance.

As for the all-rounders, I feel the same about Aamer Yamin as Mohammad Nawaz. You simply must have them for balance, and hope that one of them makes the step up against the weak Test opposition you encounter for the next year.
 
It's pretty simple. Every team moves in cycles. A bunch of youngsters form a young team and keep ascending and improving with experience. They reach a peak after a while and then start to decline when time inevitably catches up with them. This Pakistan team has 8 players of 30 years and above in their team. That is a huge number. Their average age is probably somewhere around 30-35. Only Sami, Babar and Amir are below 30 (and Sami will probably get replaced by MoHa). To put things into perspective, the Indian team in comparison has just 3 players above 30 and none above 32. There needs to be an injection of youth into the team as there is no point in carrying aged players. I have seen that Pakistan often give debuts to players when they're too old and everything is delayed. You have a player like Azhar (the potential next captain) who is in his thirties but still hasn't become the captain while players like Smith, Kohli and Williamson become captains by their 25th birthday.

Firstly a proper plan should be made for the post Misbah and Younis era. The transition should be smooth and if there is no proper blueprint, then the transition period can be very rough and prolonged which is going to cost your rankings. Good scouts must be available with the selectors and youngsters with a proper technique must be identified. There is no point in selecting players with crouched stances and atypical techniques which might be successful for the UAE but they will get found out in overseas tours. So it's vital that youngsters with the best technique and promise are selected as I'm a firm believer that a good technique will always help you in any conditions. Secondly the make up of the bowling attack has to be changed. There are too many left armers and no good young right armer. Don't need Asif which will be taking a step back, select a good promising youngster. The side needs a proper 2nd spinner. I find it surprising that Zulfiqar Babar is Pakistan's 2nd best spinner. Jayant Yadav who is India's 3rd spinner will probably outbowl him comfortably. A young offie and left arm spinner needs to be inducted.

(Any opener)
Azhar
Babar
Asad
Haris
Sarfaraz (wk)
(Pace/spin AR)
Yasir
Asghar
Amir
(Any right armer)

Pakistan should play the above team at home. I'm not sure if Haris will be available, but he should be slowly inducted into the team after he recovers fully. There are 3 other spots available and should be filled with the most promising youngsters in the domestic circuit. The team should develop fine and has a blend of experience (not geriatrics) and youth. However there is still one issue with the team which isn't an easy one to sort out. Temperamentally, most Pak batsmen are strong and can bat for hours without giving their wickets away. However when they're put under the cosh on the final day, they crack quite easily and are mentally weak. I expected Pakistan to collapse if Australia put them after lunch with a lead of 160-180 as their batsmen are not known for batting under pressure out of their comfort zone or when they're needed to sieze the initiative. The team isn't ruthless enough and loses heart when the opposition team makes a fightback after a good Pakistan performance in the first innings. It happened against England at Abu Dhabi, but they got away with it then. But they couldn't get away with it at Edgbaston, then again they got away with it in the first test against West Indies, but succumbed in the last test. History repeated itself in New Zealand and now again in Australia.

There is a reason why Pakistan draws very few tests outside asia, they aren't good at saving a test on the final day. That is not a specific issue to this team alone and is a historical trend with most Pakistan teams. That will not get sorted out unless the mentality changes and mentally strong players are produced in the domestic. Key is to not scar the young players and groom them mentally as test cricket is 90% a mental game. If they do this, the ruthlessness quality will automatically come.
 
It's pretty simple. Every team moves in cycles. A bunch of youngsters form a young team and keep ascending and improving with experience. They reach a peak after a while and then start to decline when time inevitably catches up with them. This Pakistan team has 8 players of 30 years and above in their team. That is a huge number. Their average age is probably somewhere around 30-35. Only Sami, Babar and Amir are below 30 (and Sami will probably get replaced by MoHa). To put things into perspective, the Indian team in comparison has just 3 players above 30 and none above 32. There needs to be an injection of youth into the team as there is no point in carrying aged players. I have seen that Pakistan often give debuts to players when they're too old and everything is delayed. You have a player like Azhar (the potential next captain) who is in his thirties but still hasn't become the captain while players like Smith, Kohli and Williamson become captains by their 25th birthday.

Firstly a proper plan should be made for the post Misbah and Younis era. The transition should be smooth and if there is no proper blueprint, then the transition period can be very rough and prolonged which is going to cost your rankings. Good scouts must be available with the selectors and youngsters with a proper technique must be identified. There is no point in selecting players with crouched stances and atypical techniques which might be successful for the UAE but they will get found out in overseas tours. So it's vital that youngsters with the best technique and promise are selected as I'm a firm believer that a good technique will always help you in any conditions. Secondly the make up of the bowling attack has to be changed. There are too many left armers and no good young right armer. Don't need Asif which will be taking a step back, select a good promising youngster. The side needs a proper 2nd spinner. I find it surprising that Zulfiqar Babar is Pakistan's 2nd best spinner. Jayant Yadav who is India's 3rd spinner will probably outbowl him comfortably. A young offie and left arm spinner needs to be inducted.

(Any opener)
Azhar
Babar
Asad
Haris
Sarfaraz (wk)
(Pace/spin AR)
Yasir
Asghar
Amir
(Any right armer)

Pakistan should play the above team at home. I'm not sure if Haris will be available, but he should be slowly inducted into the team after he recovers fully. There are 3 other spots available and should be filled with the most promising youngsters in the domestic circuit. The team should develop fine and has a blend of experience (not geriatrics) and youth. However there is still one issue with the team which isn't an easy one to sort out. Temperamentally, most Pak batsmen are strong and can bat for hours without giving their wickets away. However when they're put under the cosh on the final day, they crack quite easily and are mentally weak. I expected Pakistan to collapse if Australia put them after lunch with a lead of 160-180 as their batsmen are not known for batting under pressure out of their comfort zone or when they're needed to sieze the initiative. The team isn't ruthless enough and loses heart when the opposition team makes a fightback after a good Pakistan performance in the first innings. It happened against England at Abu Dhabi, but they got away with it then. But they couldn't get away with it at Edgbaston, then again they got away with it in the first test against West Indies, but succumbed in the last test. History repeated itself in New Zealand and now again in Australia.

There is a reason why Pakistan draws very few tests outside asia, they aren't good at saving a test on the final day. That is not a specific issue to this team alone and is a historical trend with most Pakistan teams. That will not get sorted out unless the mentality changes and mentally strong players are produced in the domestic. Key is to not scar the young players and groom them mentally as test cricket is 90% a mental game. If they do this, the ruthlessness quality will automatically come.

Now we are not playing difficult series anyways so we are alright with same squad
 
Now we are not playing difficult series anyways so we are alright with same squad

That's the problem. We lost miserably in 2011 and it was personally the most difficult time to be an Indian fan then. It was like seeing a 45 year old trying to play football with 25 year olds. Every one of the geriatrics were booted out and we toured overseas with a very young team in 2014. Even though we couldn't win or draw a single series, I actually felt happy as the young inexperienced team competed for the most part (except the last half of the England tour) and you knew that they were getting better with experience. That the team was raw was obvious but it also had a core group of young and talented players in Kohli, Pujara, Rahane, Ashwin, Rahul, etc., and a team could be built around them. They might not uproot trees when they tour outside asia next, but I'm pretty sure they will give a much better showing than their previous outings.

It's one thing losing with a young team and it's another thing losing with a team of passengers and geriatrics. The young players will atleast learn and get tough with defeats and experience which will help them in the subsequent tours. There is no point in carrying with players 35+ as they will continue to deteriorate with age as no one can fight nature. I think a shake up of the current Pak team needs to be done. Not a drastic one, but some players need to get the chop.
 
Pak won test series against west indies drew against sa when they were the top ranked side.drawing vs nz may be a slight downer but overall have a very good record in asia over the past 2 or 3 years.while ind have made a fortune playing incessantly on rank turners.

Come on, we aren't skilled enough to make 750 on rank turners.:srini
 
It's pretty simple. Every team moves in cycles. A bunch of youngsters form a young team and keep ascending and improving with experience. They reach a peak after a while and then start to decline when time inevitably catches up with them. This Pakistan team has 8 players of 30 years and above in their team. That is a huge number. Their average age is probably somewhere around 30-35. Only Sami, Babar and Amir are below 30 (and Sami will probably get replaced by MoHa). To put things into perspective, the Indian team in comparison has just 3 players above 30 and none above 32. There needs to be an injection of youth into the team as there is no point in carrying aged players. I have seen that Pakistan often give debuts to players when they're too old and everything is delayed. You have a player like Azhar (the potential next captain) who is in his thirties but still hasn't become the captain while players like Smith, Kohli and Williamson become captains by their 25th birthday.

Firstly a proper plan should be made for the post Misbah and Younis era. The transition should be smooth and if there is no proper blueprint, then the transition period can be very rough and prolonged which is going to cost your rankings. Good scouts must be available with the selectors and youngsters with a proper technique must be identified. There is no point in selecting players with crouched stances and atypical techniques which might be successful for the UAE but they will get found out in overseas tours. So it's vital that youngsters with the best technique and promise are selected as I'm a firm believer that a good technique will always help you in any conditions. Secondly the make up of the bowling attack has to be changed. There are too many left armers and no good young right armer. Don't need Asif which will be taking a step back, select a good promising youngster. The side needs a proper 2nd spinner. I find it surprising that Zulfiqar Babar is Pakistan's 2nd best spinner. Jayant Yadav who is India's 3rd spinner will probably outbowl him comfortably. A young offie and left arm spinner needs to be inducted.

(Any opener)
Azhar
Babar
Asad
Haris
Sarfaraz (wk)
(Pace/spin AR)
Yasir
Asghar
Amir
(Any right armer)

Pakistan should play the above team at home. I'm not sure if Haris will be available, but he should be slowly inducted into the team after he recovers fully. There are 3 other spots available and should be filled with the most promising youngsters in the domestic circuit. The team should develop fine and has a blend of experience (not geriatrics) and youth. However there is still one issue with the team which isn't an easy one to sort out. Temperamentally, most Pak batsmen are strong and can bat for hours without giving their wickets away. However when they're put under the cosh on the final day, they crack quite easily and are mentally weak. I expected Pakistan to collapse if Australia put them after lunch with a lead of 160-180 as their batsmen are not known for batting under pressure out of their comfort zone or when they're needed to sieze the initiative. The team isn't ruthless enough and loses heart when the opposition team makes a fightback after a good Pakistan performance in the first innings. It happened against England at Abu Dhabi, but they got away with it then. But they couldn't get away with it at Edgbaston, then again they got away with it in the first test against West Indies, but succumbed in the last test. History repeated itself in New Zealand and now again in Australia.

There is a reason why Pakistan draws very few tests outside asia, they aren't good at saving a test on the final day. That is not a specific issue to this team alone and is a historical trend with most Pakistan teams. That will not get sorted out unless the mentality changes and mentally strong players are produced in the domestic. Key is to not scar the young players and groom them mentally as test cricket is 90% a mental game. If they do this, the ruthlessness quality will automatically come.

Absolutely brilliant post.

My only reservation is about Haris Sohail, who needs to play some First Class cricket to prove his fitness and form.

You have, I hoped, notice that I don't advocate for Asif and Butt now that this tour has gone. I still think that Asif is the best quick and that Butt is the second best top order batsman, but I agree with you - Mickey Arthur needs to be given younger talent to groom.
 
Helps when trash spinners are serving pies:ashwin with due respect to karun nair ji:sharjeel

In all seriousness, I think India Pakistan will be a mouth watering prospect in the SC anywhere with India having a bit of an advantage due to a potent 2nd and 3rd spinner unlike Pakistan who are totally dependent on Yasir alone.
 
Its certainly far better than what it was in the 70s and 80s.

You are right that the standard of play is far better than the 70s and 80s.

One thing many people don't understand is the nature of progress in sports. Suppose we actually did not measure the time a runner took to run, say the 100 meters, but just gave medals to whoever won etc. The record would then show that Jim Thorpe won multiple Olympic medals. People would make statements such as "Thorpe was the greatest, he would beat Bolt".

However, as we do actually have measurements, we know Thorpe ran the 100 in 10.9 seconds and Bolt ran it in 9.58 seconds.

As cricketing performance cannot be objectively measured, people wrongly claim that those from an earlier age could compete with modern players. The reality is that if Bradman played at the level he did 70 years ago, he would not rank among the top 10 batsmen today. With improved modern training he may have ranked.

We recently had a poster saying that the current world #1 Indian team would have ranked 6th in the world 30 years ago. Such talk is cheap, but anyone who understands how sports has progressed knows that it is absurd.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It's pretty simple. Every team moves in cycles. A bunch of youngsters form a young team and keep ascending and improving with experience. They reach a peak after a while and then start to decline when time inevitably catches up with them. This Pakistan team has 8 players of 30 years and above in their team. That is a huge number. Their average age is probably somewhere around 30-35. Only Sami, Babar and Amir are below 30 (and Sami will probably get replaced by MoHa). To put things into perspective, the Indian team in comparison has just 3 players above 30 and none above 32. There needs to be an injection of youth into the team as there is no point in carrying aged players. I have seen that Pakistan often give debuts to players when they're too old and everything is delayed. You have a player like Azhar (the potential next captain) who is in his thirties but still hasn't become the captain while players like Smith, Kohli and Williamson become captains by their 25th birthday.

Firstly a proper plan should be made for the post Misbah and Younis era. The transition should be smooth and if there is no proper blueprint, then the transition period can be very rough and prolonged which is going to cost your rankings. Good scouts must be available with the selectors and youngsters with a proper technique must be identified. There is no point in selecting players with crouched stances and atypical techniques which might be successful for the UAE but they will get found out in overseas tours. So it's vital that youngsters with the best technique and promise are selected as I'm a firm believer that a good technique will always help you in any conditions. Secondly the make up of the bowling attack has to be changed. There are too many left armers and no good young right armer. Don't need Asif which will be taking a step back, select a good promising youngster. The side needs a proper 2nd spinner. I find it surprising that Zulfiqar Babar is Pakistan's 2nd best spinner. Jayant Yadav who is India's 3rd spinner will probably outbowl him comfortably. A young offie and left arm spinner needs to be inducted.

(Any opener)
Azhar
Babar
Asad
Haris
Sarfaraz (wk)
(Pace/spin AR)
Yasir
Asghar
Amir
(Any right armer)

Pakistan should play the above team at home. I'm not sure if Haris will be available, but he should be slowly inducted into the team after he recovers fully. There are 3 other spots available and should be filled with the most promising youngsters in the domestic circuit. The team should develop fine and has a blend of experience (not geriatrics) and youth. However there is still one issue with the team which isn't an easy one to sort out. Temperamentally, most Pak batsmen are strong and can bat for hours without giving their wickets away. However when they're put under the cosh on the final day, they crack quite easily and are mentally weak. I expected Pakistan to collapse if Australia put them after lunch with a lead of 160-180 as their batsmen are not known for batting under pressure out of their comfort zone or when they're needed to sieze the initiative. The team isn't ruthless enough and loses heart when the opposition team makes a fightback after a good Pakistan performance in the first innings. It happened against England at Abu Dhabi, but they got away with it then. But they couldn't get away with it at Edgbaston, then again they got away with it in the first test against West Indies, but succumbed in the last test. History repeated itself in New Zealand and now again in Australia.

There is a reason why Pakistan draws very few tests outside asia, they aren't good at saving a test on the final day. That is not a specific issue to this team alone and is a historical trend with most Pakistan teams. That will not get sorted out unless the mentality changes and mentally strong players are produced in the domestic. Key is to not scar the young players and groom them mentally as test cricket is 90% a mental game. If they do this, the ruthlessness quality will automatically come.

This is a brilliant post.I agree with your points.Like Junaids said,we need a fast bowling allrounder for matches outside Asia,but for now,I guess Nawaz will have to do.We need to induct more youngsters in the team and remove the underperforming oldies.We're losing anyways,why not try youngsters who can potentially play better in the future?
 
The paradox of this Pakistan Test team is that between Aug 2014-Nov 2016 it embarked upon a 7 series unbeaten run - their longest ever undefeated streak in their history. Yes you can say many of those wins were in Asian conditions, but winning at home mustn't be taken for granted given how we lost series in Pakistan even with arguably more talented sides than this.

The last two occasions they went on a similar run was arguably our greatest ever Test side under Imran between 1985-1989 and after the spot-fixing scandal under Misbah between Nov 2010 and Jul 2012, the latter coming after a run of NINE Test series without a single series victory.

Yet this 5 Test losing streak is their longest in their history - joint with the 5 match losing streak experienced in 1999-00.

Its a flawed team, requiring an overhaul in its bowling attack and replacements for the two stalwarts in Younis and Misbah. But there are still some good players to work with so let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater and talk about mass changes. 2017 brings a less arduous fixture list and an ideal opportunity to test youngsters.
 
You are right that the standard of play is far better than the 70s and 80s.

One thing many people don't understand is the nature of progress in sports. Suppose we actually did not measure the time a runner took to run, say the 100 meters, but just gave medals to whoever won etc. The record would then show that Jim Thorpe won multiple Olympic medals. People would make statements such as "Thorpe was the greatest, he would beat Bolt".

However, as we do actually have measurements, we know Thorpe ran the 100 in 10.9 seconds and Bolt ran it in 9.58 seconds.

As cricketing performance cannot be objectively measured, people wrongly claim that those from an earlier age could compete with modern players. The reality is that if Bradman played at the level he did 70 years ago, he would not rank among the top 10 batsmen today. With improved modern training he may have ranked.

We recently had a poster saying that the current world #1 Indian team would have ranked 6th in the world 30 years ago. Such talk is cheap, but anyone who understands how sports has progressed knows that it is absurd.

This is just nonsense.

Most of the advances in track and field are due to smart doping.

But in terms of Ball sports, there is zero evidence of any overall improvement.

Put Barcelona against the Juventus team of 1982 under 1982 rules and Suarez, Messi and Neymar would be kicked into wheelchairs by half-time.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It's pretty simple. Every team moves in cycles. A bunch of youngsters form a young team and keep ascending and improving with experience.

No, some teams like Australia are always good. India is getting to the point where it will be always good due to the steady supply of talented players from its domestic system. Players like Gambhir, Yuvraj, Raina etc. were great but were quickly replaced when age started catching up with them. The reason this could be done was that there is a steady supply of young talent from the domestic system. If we didn't have Rahul, Nair, Vijay, Pandey etc. we would still be playing our older players.

They reach a peak after a while and then start to decline when time inevitably catches up with them. This Pakistan team has 8 players of 30 years and above in their team. That is a huge number. Their average age is probably somewhere around 30-35. Only Sami, Babar and Amir are below 30 (and Sami will probably get replaced by MoHa). To put things into perspective, the Indian team in comparison has just 3 players above 30 and none above 32. There needs to be an injection of youth into the team as there is no point in carrying aged players.

You are wrong in thinking that just a policy change of giving young players a chance to play early is a solution. The problem is the lack of sufficient supply of talent from the domestics. And you will only get a good supply of talent when you get rid of politics in the system and players are rewarded due to their performance and not due to patronage.

Temperamentally, most Pak batsmen are strong and can bat for hours without giving their wickets away. However when they're put under the cosh on the final day, they crack quite easily and are mentally weak.

Temperamentally strong and can bat for hours, but mentally weak and crack easily???

There is a reason why Pakistan draws very few tests outside asia, they aren't good at saving a test on the final day. That is not a specific issue to this team alone and is a historical trend with most Pakistan teams.

Wrong again, their batting can collapse anytime. Pakistan did extraordinarily well on the final day of the 1st test, they lost due to their 1st innings performance or lack thereof.
 
No, some teams like Australia are always good. India is getting to the point where it will be always good due to the steady supply of talented players from its domestic system. Players like Gambhir, Yuvraj, Raina etc. were great but were quickly replaced when age started catching up with them. The reason this could be done was that there is a steady supply of young talent from the domestic system. If we didn't have Rahul, Nair, Vijay, Pandey etc. we would still be playing our older players.



You are wrong in thinking that just a policy change of giving young players a chance to play early is a solution. The problem is the lack of sufficient supply of talent from the domestics. And you will only get a good supply of talent when you get rid of politics in the system and players are rewarded due to their performance and not due to patronage.



Temperamentally strong and can bat for hours, but mentally weak and crack easily???



Wrong again, their batting can collapse anytime. Pakistan did extraordinarily well on the final day of the 1st test, they lost due to their 1st innings performance or lack thereof.

Australia are not "always good". This team is rubbish, as Sri Lanka and South Africa both proved. Like the 1983-87 team. They just had the good fortune to encounter a team whose selectors thought they could win with a 42 and a 43 year old batsman.
 
Most of the advances in track and field are due to smart doping.

But in terms of Ball sports, there is zero evidence of any overall improvement.

Yeah, sure. Phelps and Bolt have their records due to "smart doping".

If you actually understood my post, you would have noticed that I said we cannot have evidence for ball sports because objective measures do not exist similar to athletics, swimming etc. However, given the progress in sports where objective measures are available, we can infer that there has been similar improvement in other sports. Modern training methods and professionalism is the reason for advancement in all sports.
 
Last edited:
In current era, most teams are champions at their home ground and rubbish in away tours.

Only exception among the top 7 test teams playing against each other was South Africa winning the test series in Australia this year.
 
Australia are not "always good". This team is rubbish, as Sri Lanka and South Africa both proved.

Go take a look at the rankings. Australia is never out of the top 3 for any extended period of time.
 
Yeah, sure. Phelps and Bolt have their records due to "smart doping".

If you actually understood my post, you would have noticed that I said we cannot have evidence for ball sports because objective measures do not exist similar to athletics, swimming etc. However, given the progress in sports where objective measures are available, we can infer that there has been similar improvement in other sports. Modern training methods and professionalism is the reason for advancement in both kinds of sports.

We can't infer that at all.

I accept that there has been a post-WW2 increase in professionalism. But people like Fred Trueman bowled far more overs than Mitchell Starc, and there is every reason to believe that - like with Barcelona now - the greater emphasis on technique relative to conditioning almost certainly meant that they were better players.

Look at what happens when England go to Asia. Or compare Pakistan's results in Australia now with those on the 76-77, 79-80 and 81-82 tours. The players of yesteryear clearly had more exposure to a wider range of conditions and were superior as a result.

I put it to you that a composite team of the seventies and now of Pakistan in Australia would look like this:

Azhar Ali (ahead of Sadiq Mohammad)
Majid Khan
Asif Iqbal
Javed Miandad
Zaheer Abbas
Mushtaq Mohammad
Imran Khan
Sarfraz Ahmed
Sarfraz Nawaz
Intikhab Alam
Mohammad Amir

That means 8 players of the 1970's and 3 modern ones.
 
We can't infer that at all.

I accept that there has been a post-WW2 increase in professionalism. But people like Fred Trueman bowled far more overs than Mitchell Starc, and there is every reason to believe that - like with Barcelona now - the greater emphasis on technique relative to conditioning almost certainly meant that they were better players.

Look at what happens when England go to Asia. Or compare Pakistan's results in Australia now with those on the 76-77, 79-80 and 81-82 tours. The players of yesteryear clearly had more exposure to a wider range of conditions and were superior as a result.

I put it to you that a composite team of the seventies and now of Pakistan in Australia would look like this:

Azhar Ali (ahead of Sadiq Mohammad)
Majid Khan
Asif Iqbal
Javed Miandad
Zaheer Abbas
Mushtaq Mohammad
Imran Khan
Sarfraz Ahmed
Sarfraz Nawaz
Intikhab Alam
Mohammad Amir

That means 8 players of the 1970's and 3 modern ones.

And I would say that batsmen from the 70s and 80s would find their averages halved or worse if they faced modern bowlers. As [MENTION=134300]Tusker[/MENTION] wrote "Never seen so many awesome fast bowlers regularly bowl 140K+"

Note that the speed at which bowlers bowl is one of the few things that can be objectively measured. Other things are just talk and hype.
 
And I would say that batsmen from the 70s and 80s would find their averages halved or worse if they faced modern bowlers. As [MENTION=134300]Tusker[/MENTION] wrote "Never seen so many awesome fast bowlers regularly bowl 140K+"

Note that the speed at which bowlers bowl is one of the few things that can be objectively measured. Other things are just talk and hype.
You think that people who played against Dennis Lillee, Jeff Thomson, Andy Roberts, Michael Holding, Richard Hadlee, Imran Khan and Mike Procter would find Starc and Hazlewood harder? Seriously?
 
No, some teams like Australia are always good. India is getting to the point where it will be always good due to the steady supply of talented players from its domestic system. Players like Gambhir, Yuvraj, Raina etc. were great but were quickly replaced when age started catching up with them. The reason this could be done was that there is a steady supply of young talent from the domestic system. If we didn't have Rahul, Nair, Vijay, Pandey etc. we would still be playing our older players.

So you're saying that Australia didn't go through a decline in the transition period when they lost 3-1 in the 2010-11 Ashes at home?

Or when they got whitewashed 4 zip in India in 2013?

Or when they lost 3-0 in the Ashes in England in the same year?

You are wrong in thinking that just a policy change of giving young players a chance to play early is a solution. The problem is the lack of sufficient supply of talent from the domestics. And you will only get a good supply of talent when you get rid of politics in the system and players are rewarded due to their performance and not due to patronage.

Isn't that what I was saying as well. I don't want players getting into the team through influence as well. I want young players getting into the team on account of their performance. Where did I say otherwise. The problems in the domestic setup of Pakistan are well known and I didn't want to elaborate on it again what's pretty much known to everyone.

Temperamentally strong and can bat for hours, but mentally weak and crack easily???

By temperament, I mean that their players do not play fanciful shots and throw their wickets away like the likes of Rohit and Maxwell often do. They are pretty solid players in most of the dutation of the match but they are poor in handling the pressure of batting time to save a game on the last day. That is why you often see many Pak batsmen batting for long hours in the first innings without throwing their wicket away and making huge scores, but they aren't as good if the scenario changes to 5th day and they are required to bat out time to save a test. There is a difference between the two, I may not have worded it properly in my original post.

Wrong again, their batting can collapse anytime. Pakistan did extraordinarily well on the final day of the 1st test, they lost due to their 1st innings performance or lack thereof.

In the first test they were under no pressure whatsoever because they were not expected to draw the test, let alone winning it and so they batted normally for the most part of the match but finally cracked when it came to the last 50 runs. Even then, I was surprised by the application they showed in the final innings pressure or no pressure. I expected them to fold meekly because there is a trend with this team if you have followed them over the past year or so.

This team isn't immune to having batting collapses, especially in their 2nd innings when they are put under a bit of pressure as they showed in Abu Dhabi against England, Birmingham against England, Dubai and Sharjah against the West Indies, Hamilton against New Zealand and now in Melbourne against Australia.
 
Overreaction by some posters

This same Aussie team will be crushed by this Pakistan in the UAE.We need to let go of our inferiority complex that the team is not good enough if we get beaten in foreign conditions.If so,the same stick should be used to measure these teams when they play in the SC.

Look at England.Certain posters were calling them the best team in the world after a couple of good series,but they lost a test in Bangladesh and were whooped in India.

We will see how good this Aussie team is once they play in India.We all saw what happened against a relatively weak Sri Lanka.

Yes,we certainly do need to change some players.We need a good allrounder,a couple of good quicks and suitable middle order batsmen,
 
Last edited:
You think that people who played against Dennis Lillee, Jeff Thomson, Andy Roberts, Michael Holding, Richard Hadlee, Imran Khan and Mike Procter would find Starc and Hazlewood harder? Seriously?

If you understand the nature of progress in sports, the new training methods and professionalism, you would agree. We tend to evaluate past generations highly due to nostalgia.
 
It's the same for India in many ways. We played a lot of cricket in the UAE in 2014/2015 and now the Indians have had a lot of home series getting them that nr 1 spot as well.

In the end it's worse for Misbah as these are his last matches. He deserved a better farewell, but then again he should have known when to quit instead of doing the PCB a favour.
 
Overreaction by some posters

This same Aussie team will be crushed by this Pakistan in the UAE.We need to let go of our inferiority complex that the team is not good enough if we get beaten in foreign conditions.If so,the same stick should be used to measure these teams when they play in the SC.

Look at England.Certain posters were calling them the best team in the world after a couple of good series,but they lost a test in Bangladesh and were whooped in India.

We will see how good this Aussie team is once they play in India.We all saw what happened against a relatively weak Sri Lanka.

Yes,we certainly do need to change some players.We need a good allrounder,a couple of good quicks and suitable middle order batsmen,

We haven't won in Australia for 20 years, let alone drawing a test match.

Fallacious comparison.

Australia won in UAE in 2002 when Pakistan managed to get bowled out for 53 and 59.

Even India has managed draws.

Pakistan is on downward 11-0 spiral in Australia since forever.
 
So you're saying that Australia didn't go through a decline in the transition period when they lost 3-1 in the 2010-11 Ashes at home?

Or when they got whitewashed 4 zip in India in 2013?

Or when they lost 3-0 in the Ashes in England in the same year?

The issue is the length of time it takes to make the transition. If there is a steady supply of talent, the time to make the transition is shorter. So saying that all teams go through similar transitions is not correct. Some do it faster and others slower. Australia does it faster, as their dropping Voges shows. I am pretty sure that if Voges was Pakistani, he would be in the team for many more years.
 
It's the same for India in many ways. We played a lot of cricket in the UAE in 2014/2015 and now the Indians have had a lot of home series getting them that nr 1 spot as well.

In the end it's worse for Misbah as these are his last matches. He deserved a better farewell, but then again he should have known when to quit instead of doing the PCB a favour.
We played 21 tests away from home, since Dec 2013, probably more than any other team in the last 3 years. In that time just 4 in Asia & 4 at home, so we've richly deserved this current home season. This isn't meant as a slight on Pak but if you're talking about having the luxury of playing at home then look no further than Eng & Aus, especially the former!
We haven't won in Australia for 20 years, let alone drawing a test match.

Fallacious comparison.

Australia won in UAE in 2002 when Pakistan managed to get bowled out for 53 and 59.

Even India has managed draws.

Pakistan is on downward 11-0 spiral in Australia since forever.
You can take a bit of a consolation in the fact that Aus could be facing the same humiliation when they tour us in 2017, with 11-zip on the cards.
 
The issue is the length of time it takes to make the transition. If there is a steady supply of talent, the time to make the transition is shorter. So saying that all teams go through similar transitions is not correct. Some do it faster and others slower. Australia does it faster, as their dropping Voges shows. I am pretty sure that if Voges was Pakistani, he would be in the team for many more years.

Australia actually went through an extended transition time after their legends retired in comparison to a side like India when went through the transition period in 2 years after 2011. Only when MJ recovered his mojo back and Australia demolished England 5-0 at home did they complete the transition of sorts. Still I would say that it was only a temporary one and they still haven't truly replaced their legends of the past decade, as their dire record in Asia shows.
 
We played 21 tests away from home, since Dec 2013, probably more than any other team in the last 3 years. In that time just 4 in Asia & 4 at home, so we've richly deserved this current home season. This isn't meant as a slight on Pak but if you're talking about having the luxury of playing at home then look no further than Eng & Aus, especially the former!You can take a bit of a consolation in the fact that Aus could be facing the same humiliation when they tour us in 2017, with 11-zip on the cards.

I know and that's what I meant. We had the same period as well with having all our matches in Asia in 2014 and 2015. It made us nr 1 and now it's in India's hands.

Tours outside Asia remain a challenge for all Asian teams.
 
I know and that's what I meant. We had the same period as well with having all our matches in Asia in 2014 and 2015. It made us nr 1 and now it's in India's hands.

Tours outside Asia remain a challenge for all Asian teams.
Just as the tour of Asia for non Asian teams ;-)

The problem with Asian teams however is that they tend to pick more players based on (past) reputation instead of current form. This is what lead India to an 8-nil thumping back in 2011, god how could Dhoni survive such an ignominy is still a mystery to me! Pak is also doing something similar, except I wouldn't put as much blame on Misbah here, MSD was head & shoulders worse away from home IMO.
 
Just as the tour of Asia for non Asian teams ;-)

The problem with Asian teams however is that they tend to pick more players based on (past) reputation instead of current form. This is what lead India to an 8-nil thumping back in 2011, god how could Dhoni survive such an ignominy is still a mystery to me! Pak is also doing something similar, except I wouldn't put as much blame on Misbah here, MSD was head & shoulders worse away from home IMO.

You know the worst part? Before MSD our overseas form was looking good. For a decade in Australia (from 2000-2009) our results were - played 9, won 2, lost 4, drew 3. This included a 1-1 series draw and a controversial 2-1 loss (spirit of cricket comment by Kumble, Bucknor). In the same decade no team even came close, England played 10 matches, won 1 lost 9.

We won a series in England, won in WI, SL and NZ. Drew in SA. Thats when we achieved no 1 status. Our overseas test form was looking good. And then it was all reversed since 2011. We had aging players, Dhoni became defensive.
 
Last edited:
2016 was a horrible year for us in all formats of the game. Kicked out of the T20 WC with no shame, losing horrendously under a terrible captain in ODI's and now a losing streak in Tests which was our biggest pride.
 
You know the worst part? Before MSD our overseas form was looking good. For a decade in Australia (from 2000-2009) our results were - played 9, won 2, lost 4, drew 3. This included a 1-1 series draw and a controversial 2-1 loss (spirit of cricket comment by Kumble, Bucknor). In the same decade no team even came close, England played 10 matches, won 1 lost 9.

We won a series in England, won in WI, SL and NZ. Drew in SA. Thats when we achieved no 1 status. Our overseas test form was looking good. And then it was all reversed since 2011. We had aging players, Dhoni became defensive.
I could understand persisting with him till the end of 2011 Oz tour but after that, as Mohinder Amarnath stated, he should've been sacked. He lost us games in SA, NZ, Eng & Oz & that too from winning positions. The fact that he achieved similar results from two vastly different set of teams shows that he wasn't up to snuff as a captain & his batting overseas, the less said about that the better.

With Pakistan they should give Sarfaraz the captaincy IMO or Babar, ala Smith in 2003, since captaincy on good/young shoulders can bring out the best in them not unlike Kohli. With a leaser who's performing the team will always do well, well almost always.
 
Last edited:
You can take a bit of a consolation in the fact that Aus could be facing the same humiliation when they tour us in 2017, with 11-zip on the cards.

Please take revenge on our behalf our dear neighbours :P
 
Normally, I come to the forum to witness some unwarranted wrist slitting. Today is not one of those days. Today, it is warranted and completely justified.

Even after first test I was backing Pak to win the series. This Aus team is a joke. They are ripe for a beating at home. How did you manage to lose to them like this ? Beyond belief.
 
This is just nonsense.

Most of the advances in track and field are due to smart doping.

But in terms of Ball sports, there is zero evidence of any overall improvement.

Put Barcelona against the Juventus team of 1982 under 1982 rules and Suarez, Messi and Neymar would be kicked into wheelchairs by half-time.

Great post

Athletics and aerobic sports have seen advances because of "sports science", which is just a euphemism for doping. If anybody has any doubt, they need only look up all the recent news around Team Sky in Pro cycling; a doping scandal surrounding that team emerged this year and it is no longer a mystery how Sky's team leaders have managed to put out objectively superior performances than past greats in the sport such as Lance Armstrong. It certainly isn't because of advances made in technique, tactics, or any other legit measures.

Regarding cricket I do think you overrate previous generations, however I agree with you that it is fallacious to use other sports as a yardstick to claim that cricket too of necessity must also have advanced.

The only thing we know for certain is that fielding standards in terms of outfield catches, run outs, and ground fielding have massively improved. Slips catching is probably no better. Modem fielding units probably save 50 runs a day compared to an equivalent '50s era fielding unit.

With bowling it's like there are a lot more bowlers around nowadays that can bowl serious pace; the medium pacer is now a thing of the past. While not so long ago India were picking guys like Madan Lal and Roger Binny. I can't say the elite old guys were slow, but I think it's accurate to suggest that serious pace bowlers were rare in previous eras. Even India and Sri Lanka have 90mph bowlers these days.
 
Great post

Athletics and aerobic sports have seen advances because of "sports science", which is just a euphemism for doping. If anybody has any doubt, they need only look up all the recent news around Team Sky in Pro cycling; a doping scandal surrounding that team emerged this year and it is no longer a mystery how Sky's team leaders have managed to put out objectively superior performances than past greats in the sport such as Lance Armstrong. It certainly isn't because of advances made in technique, tactics, or any other legit measures.

Regarding cricket I do think you overrate previous generations, however I agree with you that it is fallacious to use other sports as a yardstick to claim that cricket too of necessity must also have advanced.

The only thing we know for certain is that fielding standards in terms of outfield catches, run outs, and ground fielding have massively improved. Slips catching is probably no better. Modem fielding units probably save 50 runs a day compared to an equivalent '50s era fielding unit.

With bowling it's like there are a lot more bowlers around nowadays that can bowl serious pace; the medium pacer is now a thing of the past. While not so long ago India were picking guys like Madan Lal and Roger Binny. I can't say the elite old guys were slow, but I think it's accurate to suggest that serious pace bowlers were rare in previous eras. Even India and Sri Lanka have 90mph bowlers these days.
I completely agree.

And Binny and Madan Lal were slow - around 115-120K while Kapil Dev was around 125-135K!
 
Normally, I come to the forum to witness some unwarranted wrist slitting. Today is not one of those days. Today, it is warranted and completely justified.

Even after first test I was backing Pak to win the series. <b>This Aus team is a joke. They are ripe for a beating at home.</b> How did you manage to lose to them like this ? Beyond belief.

When I watched the Aussie bowlers fruitlessly toiling away in the first innings as Pakistan piled on 443, I thought "this Aussie bowling is the worst I have ever seen, this would be the time for India to go there and win a series". However the turnaround on the 5th day seemed incredible, either the Aussie bowling improved or the Pakistani batting got worse. Most likely the latter.
 
Marshall in some ways was like a more skilled and rounded Waqar.

If you only saw footage of Waqar in 1998-2002 you'd think that he was a 133-143K bowler, like on the Hobart'99 footage.

But he had lost 10-15K from earlier in his career.

The problem with assessing Marshall is that most of the surviving footage is from England, where he used to cut back his pace to get more swing.

The problem here is that most of the Marshall legend is made in England. The English press has a big say on these things. So for you to claim that Marshall did not bowl fast in England is not correct.

And there is plenty of Marshall footage from Aus and NZ to watch. Watching that it is pretty clear that he had no extraordinary pace like you say.


You think that people who played against Dennis Lillee, Jeff Thomson, Andy Roberts, Michael Holding, Richard Hadlee, Imran Khan and Mike Procter would find Starc and Hazlewood harder? Seriously?

We have had this discussion many many times before and I even posted a clip that accurately showed you how far the slips stood when Thomson was bowling at his pre-injury fastest best. I also have analyzed Boycott's footwork (lack of it) against Holding. But what you cant realize is that the big names got their "Certificates" by bowling to batsmen who were not used to regularly facing hi-speed fast bowling. For example why would Boycott admit that his footwork was non-existent when Holding cleaned him up in that now infamous over ? Instead its always a better idea to hype Michael Holding as an unplayable fast bowler as that will actually enhance Boycott's own stature (As he had to face all these great fast bowlers ). A win-win situation. The truth is that Boycott would give his arm to play like Warner , Sehwag , Hayden who can hit genuine fast bowlers (who were much much faster than Holding) back over their heads.

There is very little authentic evidence to suggest that bowlers regularly bowled at those high speeds. ( Please don't bring in the written accounts from past players. I don't trust them Sorry !).

Now this is not to mean that these guys could never bowl above 140K's . Iam not saying that at all. Just that it was very rare and certainly not sustained over a long period of time. And most certainly not over 145-150K range to be considered express. That just soo did not happen..
 
If you understand the nature of progress in sports, the new training methods and professionalism, you would agree.

I will give some simple examples of un-professional behavior from the past .... I read the other day that Jeff Thompson played his first test with a broken foot (Could very well be exaggeration but certainly he was no where fit) . Plenty of reports that claim that the likes of Sobers, Botham et.al would party till early hours (and then open boast about it ) on the day of a test match and come with a hang over to play. Just un-likely that these things will happen today. You will certainly end your career if you dreink and party on the day of test match.


We tend to evaluate past generations highly due to nostalgia.

Spot on. As some wise man once said ... the quality and rating of a player increases dramatically after he stops playing without ever playing a single competitive match. Nostalgia at its very best. Thirty years from now the current set of players will go thru the same thing (But not now). Such is life.
 
Normally, I come to the forum to witness some unwarranted wrist slitting. Today is not one of those days. Today, it is warranted and completely justified.

Even after first test I was backing Pak to win the series. This Aus team is a joke. They are ripe for a beating at home. How did you manage to lose to them like this ? Beyond belief.

Looks like you have been sleeping for the last 7 years. This is a Pakistani team with Misbah ul Haq in it, let alone being captained by him.
 
It's the same for India in many ways. We played a lot of cricket in the UAE in 2014/2015 and now the Indians have had a lot of home series getting them that nr 1 spot as well.

In the end it's worse for Misbah as these are his last matches. He deserved a better farewell, but then again he should have known when to quit instead of doing the PCB a favour.

Not at all. He was going to milk it as much as possible and i am glad that justice has prevailed and that Misbah's captaincy and overall quality as a player has been exposed.
 
I think whoever played in place of Misbah and Younis we would have lost the series anyway but I think younger batters may have contributed more. It's like we're playing with 2 less batters with them in the team in overseas conditions. Both are past there prime and should retire after the next test.
 
Pakistani team is still emotionally driven, which is bad for professional team. We should have drawn three of those test, one each in England, NZ and Australia. All this supporting staff is not helping us fix basis emotional issues. One hour of reverse swing in England, one runout and poor defense of YK and Shafiq in NZ, now one session of Warner was good enough to emotionally desimate Pakistan....

One thing is interesting in all those instances, when those things happen in Asia, Misbah and Younis were able to help because of their experience and superior skill against spin, but in west, slow reflexes and weak defense against pace, does the opposite. Many of us here on PP were against investing in these two for same reason. In these tours, Azhar and Shafiq shine, if Babar, Sami and one more young or even middle age player would have been invested 2 years before these series, we would have avoided some of those situations. Too many collapses despite seeing off new ball is crime for team like Pakistan. This time we were lucky to have Azhar and Sami who blunted new ball, if they have not done that, rather than heart breaking last minute looses we would have heavy defeats. Weather fans like it or not, those are worse than these.

Secondly, biggest issue we are facing right now is lack of fast bowlers, Pakistan is really struggling to put decent fast bowler on international stage. Lot of factors play a role, but one thing is clear (looking at domestic stats), pitches, ball, the whole enchilada in domestic is way off the base than what is required at international level, fast bowlers are completely gone, people don't have to bowl fast to get noticed, this whole situation gets worsed with constantly playing in UAE, which does not allow our team to be well rounded outfit, too one dimensional to build exciting players, low and slow players are mediocre outside their comfort zone... We are going nowhere with all this situation, it's not just team, whole eco system has to change for us to produce high quality cricketers.
 
Back
Top