Should Babar Azam have slowed down to allow Imam-ul-Haq to get to his century?

[Obsessed_in_a_good_way]

Disclaimer: I love stats, and feel some pride when Pakistani players break records or reach milestones. Not, of course, at the cost of a team victory. So, with that being said ...

The ODI record for most consecutive hundreds is 4 (Sangakkara). Ten players have scored three, including Zaheer Abbas, Saeed Anwar and Babar Azam. (List: https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/content/records/282969.html )

Imam scored hundreds in the first two ODI's. In the 3rd, when Pakistan was chasing 210, Fakhr got out after scoring 17. When Imam and Babar took it to 150+, with one down, with absolutely no threats from the Aussie bowlers, and RRR down to under 2.5, should Babar have slowed down, and allowed Imam more opportunities to score runs?

Imam's hundred would have added him to this list, and would have given him a chance to continue this streak.

I didn't watch the batting, and don't know if BA tried, or if he played his normal game, and managed to reach his own milestone (16th hundred).

You play to win, of course, but records are important as well. Right?

 

[Babeikh]

No

 

[The_KING]

Absolutely not!

 

[Justcrazy]

Babar has two consecutive hundreds , he also has opportunity to break those records.

 

[Oneking]

Imam fault for not realizing, Babar can’t be responsible

 

[Obsessed_in_a_good_way]

Wow! Rather surprised to see the comments ... "Absolutely not!" and that Imam should have realized, and that Babar can now pursue the same record, with this 2nd consecutive century.

It's a competitive game, but you don't compete with your own teammates on chasing the same record, right? Or am I the only one who thinks along these lines?

 

[Zaz]

Nope You win the game as quickly as possible

Pakistani players needs to get out of this habit of playing for personal records n play just for the team

 

[Mobashir]

If both were around 90 with 15 runs remaining it could make sense.
But babar was way ahead in the scoring from the start. You can't wait 5 overs for your partner.

 

[angrypathan]

No.

 

[PakPremi]

If both were around 90 with 15 runs remaining it could make sense.
But babar was way ahead in the scoring from the start. You can't wait 5 overs for your partner.

That is what I was going to write.

 

[shaz619]

If it was possible he would have am sure but it didn’t make sense for him to go out of his way to, main thing is to get the team a win - you guys are too obsessed with your favourites lol

 

[wrongun]

No.

If Imam wants the hundred he should hurry up. Earn it that way and fully deserve it, not have it handed to you.

 

[moghul]

What kind of question is this ? Yes, Babar should have "donated" some of his extra runs to Imam.
Some threads are just-------------- very non-cricketing , like this one.

 

[Colorblind Genius]

No but Baber should’ve clearly instructed the PCB that man of the series award goes to Imam.
But instead, he set a very, very poor example and indicated to be a clueless team leader who does not understand the concept of giving empowerment, encouragement, confidence and reward for good work.

 

[Mobashir]

No but Baber should’ve clearly instructed the PCB that man of the series award goes to Imam.
But instead, he set a very, very poor example and indicated to be a clueless team leader who does not understand the concept of giving empowerment, encouragement, confidence and reward for good work.

PCB decides who the man of series is?
We really learn new things every day - thanks bro.

 

[Usman]

No but Baber should’ve clearly instructed the PCB that man of the series award goes to Imam.
But instead, he set a very, very poor example and indicated to be a clueless team leader who does not understand the concept of giving empowerment, encouragement, confidence and reward for good work.

Sounds like you’re feeling the fast bro!

Be proud of what Barbar and Imam both achieved and don’t find find negatives even where the story is all positive! It is not up to Barbar to dictate who gets Man of the Series and to be honest, this probably matters a lot more to you than it does to Barbar and Imam. Yes I am sure Imam would have loved to have received Man of the Series, but what matters more is that Imam has earned the respect of his teammates and the fans, and that he has contributed massively to Pakistan’s win. I am sure Imam is a happy boy!

 

[arif_2021]

Sounds like you’re feeling the fast bro!

Be proud of what Barbar and Imam both achieved and don’t find find negatives even where the story is all positive! It is not up to Barbar to dictate who gets Man of the Series and to be honest, this probably matters a lot more to you than it does to Barbar and Imam. Yes I am sure Imam would have loved to have received Man of the Series, but what matters more is that Imam has earned the respect of his teammates and the fans, and that he has contributed massively to Pakistan’s win. I am sure Imam is a happy boy!

Its Babar...not BaRbar...

This is what white supremacists say about blacks..."you're awesome as long as you stay within limits and do your job, but don't ask for recognition or equal rights"

To me, what happened was professional discrimination and not recognizing an important contribution.

Babar should have recognized Imam's contribution - there is still time.

Inverex should gift him an SUV also since there is no cash prize that could be split.

True man of the series was Imam...

 

[silentkiller187]

Imam should have sped up himself, sensed the oppurtunity and competed with his captain to see who could get the century. That is the culture we need to promote , rather than this charitable one.

 

[Sherlock]

Pak fans in the span of a week - "Babar played too slow, he needs to play quicker and not get bogged down"

Pak fans now "Shouldn't Babar have slowed down to let another player get his hundred?"

The dichotomy of a fan

 

[Colorblind Genius]

PCB decides who the man of series is?
We really learn new things every day - thanks bro.

Assuming that it were match officials which are almost all of them, part of PCB. But that doesn’t matter. Whoever was the in charge of this, Baber could’ve asked them that he would like it to be awarded to Imam as he himself is voluntarily does not want it.

It was a close race with Imam having the upper hand, and the captain should’ve not put down one of his own.

 

[Maher96]

Imam should have sped up himself, sensed the oppurtunity and competed with his captain to see who could get the century. That is the culture we need to promote , rather than this charitable one.

Totally agree with this, Babar steered the team to a win while Imam played a helping hand.

They lucky either of them got a hundred due to Abbot slogging at the end.

 

[Manunited18]

In a team environment personal Goals should always be a secondary. Century or not, Imam has had great success in both Formats.

 

[mmkextreme_1]

This thread is useless.

Then everyone cries "oh our team is full of stat-padding players"

What kind of questions is this?

 

[Mobashir]

Assuming that it were match officials which are almost all of them, part of PCB. But that doesn’t matter. Whoever was the in charge of this, Baber could’ve asked them that he would like it to be awarded to Imam as he himself is voluntarily does not want it.

It was a close race with Imam having the upper hand, and the captain should’ve not put down one of his own.

Yes maybe he should still ask ICC if he can give it to Imam?

I mean from where do you guys come with theses kinds of posts? Have you already seen something like this happen?
It's international cricket not playing with friends in the street.

 

[Obsessed_in_a_good_way]

As the OP of this "useless post", I get what everyone has said, but am surprised. Surprised at the notion that every person is there for their own interest, and if Imam had wanted this century, he should have raced against Babar to get there sooner.

I was coming at it purely from the sporting perspective - it's completely optional. Nobody would fault you for NOT offering this gesture, but if you do, you'd be remembered for it.

Some examples. Is it fair to assume that no one who responded above would do either of the following?

1) 1978-79. India visited Pakistan after 24 years. First test in Faisalabad. Zaheer scores 176 in first innings. Is batting at 96 in the second. To "help" him get to his hundred, Bedi gives the ball to Gavaskar for his friendly offspinners. Zaheer charges down but mistimes it and is caught by Chauhan. Out for 96. Gavaskar's only test wicket.

2) 1979-80. Australia chasing English total. Almost got there. Botham was bowling. Greg Chappell on strike, batting at 94. Australia needed 4 to win. Botham bowled him a slow half-volley so Chappell (his arch nemesis, mind you!) could get to his hundred. Unfortunately, he mistimed it and it went one-bounce for a boundary. He finished at 98 not out.

3) 1987 world cup. Pakistan vs West Indies. West scored 200+. Pakistan came close but started faultering. Last over, 14 to win. Pakistan 9-down. Courteny Walsh was bowling. Abdul Qadir and Saleem Jaffer were batting. First four balls got 6 runs. Two balls left, 8 to win. Qadir somehow miraculously connects the next ball and it goes for a six. Last call, two to win. Walsh comes running but stops. Saleem was several yards down the pitch. He could have "mankaded" him, and won the game. But he didn't. Gave a warning. Bowled again, and Qadir hits the ball for two. Walsh's gesture cost his team the match.


Thanks for chiming in, everyone. This has been educational - that I am a lone voice on this subject.

 

[cricketAXEpert]

Disclaimer: I love stats, and feel some pride when Pakistani players break records or reach milestones. Not, of course, at the cost of a team victory. So, with that being said ...

The ODI record for most consecutive hundreds is 4 (Sangakkara). Ten players have scored three, including Zaheer Abbas, Saeed Anwar and Babar Azam. (List: https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/content/records/282969.html )

Imam scored hundreds in the first two ODI's. In the 3rd, when Pakistan was chasing 210, Fakhr got out after scoring 17. When Imam and Babar took it to 150+, with one down, with absolutely no threats from the Aussie bowlers, and RRR down to under 2.5, should Babar have slowed down, and allowed Imam more opportunities to score runs?

Imam's hundred would have added him to this list, and would have given him a chance to continue this streak.

I didn't watch the batting, and don't know if BA tried, or if he played his normal game, and managed to reach his own milestone (16th hundred).

You play to win, of course, but records are important as well. Right?

Imam was too far behind for Babar to slow down. thinking about a hundred when you are in 60s is not a good idea. Plus it makes no sense for Babar to sacrifice his own ton for Imam. Some records are special like 700 test wickets or 400 in a test innings (by Brian Lara) others are not especially odi & T20 records they just get bettered with regularity.

 

[cricketAXEpert]

As the OP of this "useless post", I get what everyone has said, but am surprised. Surprised at the notion that every person is there for their own interest, and if Imam had wanted this century, he should have raced against Babar to get there sooner.

I was coming at it purely from the sporting perspective - it's completely optional. Nobody would fault you for NOT offering this gesture, but if you do, you'd be remembered for it.

Some examples. Is it fair to assume that no one who responded above would do either of the following?

1) 1978-79. India visited Pakistan after 24 years. First test in Faisalabad. Zaheer scores 176 in first innings. Is batting at 96 in the second. To "help" him get to his hundred, Bedi gives the ball to Gavaskar for his friendly offspinners. Zaheer charges down but mistimes it and is caught by Chauhan. Out for 96. Gavaskar's only test wicket.

2) 1979-80. Australia chasing English total. Almost got there. Botham was bowling. Greg Chappell on strike, batting at 94. Australia needed 4 to win. Botham bowled him a slow half-volley so Chappell (his arch nemesis, mind you!) could get to his hundred. Unfortunately, he mistimed it and it went one-bounce for a boundary. He finished at 98 not out.

3) 1987 world cup. Pakistan vs West Indies. West scored 200+. Pakistan came close but started faultering. Last over, 14 to win. Pakistan 9-down. Courteny Walsh was bowling. Abdul Qadir and Saleem Jaffer were batting. First four balls got 6 runs. Two balls left, 8 to win. Qadir somehow miraculously connects the next ball and it goes for a six. Last call, two to win. Walsh comes running but stops. Saleem was several yards down the pitch. He could have "mankaded" him, and won the game. But he didn't. Gave a warning. Bowled again, and Qadir hits the ball for two. Walsh's gesture cost his team the match.


Thanks for chiming in, everyone. This has been educational - that I am a lone voice on this subject.

Last example is about 'Mankading' which has been considered as unfair play for a very long time. The proper way to Mankad someone is first to give a warning which Walsh did. Here the whole Match was on the line not some record. It ended being more consequential for West indies than just a Match. This is not about letting someone get a record.

 

[Monsee]

In one thread, OP and another user, managed to post 3 amazingly mind boggling ideas...maybe next time, Pak team should poll whether: Winning the game is a better choice or allowing the opposition to win is better in the larger interest. This way, if Pak team allows Aussies to win, then the bhai-chara feeling our team generated, will make the Aussies share their prize money with Pak team. Everyone lives happily ever after.

Next idea: maybe we should investigate Bradman for hogging the batting too much in not letting other batsmen score lots of runs. No wonder he averaged 99.94.

Also, the bowler who bowled him for a duck in his last innings, will be hanged (after being dug up from grave) for his crimes against humanity

 

[arif_2021]

In one thread, OP and another user, managed to post 3 amazingly mind boggling ideas...maybe next time, Pak team should poll whether: Winning the game is a better choice or allowing the opposition to win is better in the larger interest. This way, if Pak team allows Aussies to win, then the bhai-chara feeling our team generated, will make the Aussies share their prize money with Pak team. Everyone lives happily ever after.

Next idea: maybe we should investigate Bradman for hogging the batting too much in not letting other batsmen score lots of runs. No wonder he averaged 99.94.

Also, the bowler who bowled him for a duck in his last innings, will be hanged (after being dug up from grave) for his crimes against humanity

i posted the other thread.

your examples are making irrelevant comparison in wrong situation. it is unintelligent.
bradman example is irrelevant because the bowler was engaged actively getting him out without any concern of his average. here pakistan needed 50 runs with 9 wickets at hand and it was impossible to loose, and it was totally up to the two players to see who could have gotten the century. it would have been a nice gesture by babar to let imam go for it.
thats all.

you seem to have not understood the issue. please go back and read the posts again before dismissing them. clearly there is a substantial reason why it was brought up twice.

 

[sali]

Both were looking at the red SUV an knew who scored 100 will get it. At one point they both had same score...between 30-40! Imam could have picked up his speed or played more balls... why ask Babar to slow down?