What's new

Was it the right decision for Pakistan to bat first in the 2nd Test match against England at Leeds?

UN talkz

UN talkz

First Class Star
Joined
Dec 24, 2016
Runs
4,138
Commies saying it is a good decision but pitch telling a different story so far
 
Last edited:
5 overs gone and the wrist slitting has started :mv
 
There is nothing wrong with the pitch and there isn't a cloud in the sky. If you're not batting first in these conditions then when would you ?

England are bowling a tight new ball spell. See it out for the first hour.
 
The pitch is good for batting. This is day 1 session 1 of a test match in England u expect it to be swinging and seaming its all about getting over this period then cashing in later in the day.
 
Time will tell, but I was surprised based on 3 reasons:

1. Pakistan's bowling is its strength
2. It's humid and overcast
3. England's batting is struggling
 
Markhor said:
There is nothing wrong with the pitch and there isn't a cloud in the sky. If you're not batting first in these conditions then when would you ?

England are bowling a tight new ball spell. See it out for the first hour.
Click to expand...

Exactly
 
Both dismissals so far have been batsmen trying to drive

Should have given the first hour to England
 
Pakistan should follow Misbah's way: Always bowl first, Try to bat only once :misbah
 
Should have bowled first bcz eng batting was under pressure.
 
1The decision to pick 5 batsmen again should also be under scrutiny
 
Surprised to see them electing to bat but positive move though.

Going with 5 bowlers, another positive move.
 
Amjid Javed said:
1The decision to pick 5 batsmen again should also be under scrutiny
Click to expand...

I don’t agree with that. One extra batsman in place of an all rounder wouldn’t have done anything. We just need a partnership. Bowling becomes to weak if you replace an all rounder with a specialist batsman.
 
It's early summer, first innings is more important than last... Both think tank made same mistake...

Wickets look normal but conditions are not of July/ August, there is moisture and zip in the wicket... Ball has done more than one would expect from pitch, month from now, you would not be 4 down by lunch...You will be behind through out the test... Bad decision ☝🏼☝🏼☝🏼
 
The wicket is dry and batting last on this would have meant danger for Pakistan. The onus is on England to up their game and they will have to do well in the last innings to chase down whatever Pakistan manage to put up. Ofcourse thats all useless if Pakistan gets shot out for a below par score and England get a huge 1st innings lead.
 
Remember though it's only the first innings, and Pakistan bowling is strong as well. If we can get to 250 that would be compete rice but I hope we can manage 300.

Hopefully Salah uddin and sarfraz can make a big partnership, then shadab faheem and Hasan Ali can chip in like last time.
 
I would usually back any captain who chooses to bat first. It is the more attacking thing to do, and even on an absolute grubber it is still the other team that will have to bat last.

These conditions would provoke most captains to bat first I think.

England have bowled very well so far and have deservedly picked up the four wickets, but a Test match generally lasts for at least ten sessions, and we have only had one session so far.

In summary - too early to say.
 
It was the right decision.

England bowled very well. Especally Broad was unplayable honestly Credit where credit is due.
 
aloo paratha said:
Remember though it's only the first innings, and Pakistan bowling is strong as well. If we can get to 250 that would be compete rice but I hope we can manage 300.

Hopefully Salah uddin and sarfraz can make a big partnership, then shadab faheem and Hasan Ali can chip in like last time.
Click to expand...

250? :))) we will be lucky to get 150!
 
The pitch is fine for batting so if you bowl first you are betting that the ball will swing more this morning than it will the rest of the game and that's not a bet you'd take with the sun coming out.

England have bowled well, Pakistan have batted poorly.
 
Massive blunder from Sarfraz/Mickey. It will probably cost them the match but it happens. I think they wanted Shadab to have a major role in the test by bowling in the last innings of the game.

Also there is no guarantee that Pak would not have collapsed batting in the second innings either. England got it right this time with their lengths. But yea bowling first would have been more comfortable and would have given us more perspective.
 
Not a bad pitch by any means.

Headingley is one of those ground's where you battle for the first hour, and then set the course for the rest of the test.

In many ways, its the same as Lords - batting first was probably still the right decision, but England applied themselves poorly. Pakistan doing the same here. Poor shot selection has cost us more than anything from the pitch.

At the same time, credit to England for bowling well. Looking a much better unit compared to last week.
 
No. It made more sense to attack with your bowling and keep the pressure on England from last match.

England has this match in bag now. You don't win a test with such a poor score in the first inning. They needed at least 200 in the first inning.
 
Even a blind man can say play to your strength, Bowling is our strength. Overcast condition moist in the air only dump could have opted to bat first. In the north of England never go by surface it's always deceiving. Very very poor decision to bat first that has cost us the match and the series.
 
The way England have bowled and given some of our shot selection we'd probably collapsed batting second.

The key was to survive that first session without too much damage.
 
Wasn't the best decision. The think tank either misread the conditions (not to take anything away from the English bowlers who have been fantastic and consistently tested Pakistani batsmen with full bowling) or they have no idea about their own batting capabilities. With the batting line we had today (mostly defensive bats) there is no way we can bat first and impose. That strategy can work in Asia but certainly not in England. The only way was if the top 3 saw off the first session and even then we would've not had any advantage, in fact given the style of our top 4 we would've given up the psychological advantage from the last game.

On the contrary, following the demoralizing defeat in the last game and with a new opener at the top, and Malan struggling, bowling first and utilizing the conditions could've consolidated the gains from last game. As of now, we have lost whatever edge we had. It will be a big achievement if we save this one.
 
amvbfm said:
Wasn't the best decision. The think tank either misread the conditions (not to take anything away from the English bowlers who have been fantastic and consistently tested Pakistani batsmen with full bowling) or they have no idea about their own batting capabilities. With the batting line we had today (mostly defensive bats) there is no way we can bat first and impose. That strategy can work in Asia but certainly not in England. The only way was if the top 3 saw off the first session and even then we would've not had any advantage, in fact given the style of our top 4 we would've given up the psychological advantage from the last game.

On the contrary, following the demoralizing defeat in the last game and with a new opener at the top, and Malan struggling, bowling first and utilizing the conditions could've consolidated the gains from last game. As of now, we have lost whatever edge we had. It will be a big achievement if we save this one.
Click to expand...

Agree with you
 
Haven't watched much of the cricket today, but at 113/8 you would assume the ball must be doing a fair bit. Surely they can't have batted that badly that they threw the wickets on a flat pitch?
 
I think both captains have underestimated the conditions related to toss. Its backfired winning a toss in both games. This game will be a one sided defeat for Pakistan... Everyone was overhyping our victory in the first game, there were some worrying signs in the first game too. We are just too inexperienced as a team, and the victory definitely got to our head.
 
Don't blame the toss or the conditions. Pakistan would have collapsed as badly tomorrow as they have today. They are great underdogs but don't know how to be front-runners.
 
shane said:
Don't blame the toss or the conditions. Pakistan would have collapsed as badly tomorrow as they have today. They are great underdogs but don't know how to be front-runners.
Click to expand...

Absolutely spot on. They can perform when there is no pressure.first test they were a big underdog, this one not that much. Wilting under pressure as expected.
 
No it wasn't the wisest decision by team think tank. Doesn't matter if Pakistan bowls out England for even less. It still wasn't the right decision.

It is going to be good weather for rest of remaining days.
 
cricketworm said:
No it wasn't the wisest decision by team think tank. Doesn't matter if Pakistan bowls out England for even less. It still wasn't the right decision.

It is going to be good weather for rest of remaining days.
Click to expand...

BBC weather saying rain tomorrow and cloudy on Sunday...
 
It's a 2 innings game, therefore no decision can be called poor if players can respond. Looks like a drier than usual wicket, which brings Shadab in the game in both innings, may be a bit reverse as well. I think, bowling 1st was a safe option as no one would have questioned, but I rarely criticize batting first option in Test - if batsmen can bat well in 2nd innings, why not?

PAK shouldn't allow that call (batting first) to hurt the moral too much - it can't be changed now, but there are 3 more innings to fix it. Poms are not going to chase much more than 200 here.
 
Terrible decision from Sarfraz. The weather forecast was well known. Pakistan's strong suit is bowling. England confidence creaking. Pathetic decision on so many levels to bat
 
NeVerMind said:
BBC weather saying rain tomorrow and cloudy on Sunday...
Click to expand...

oh okay. I might be wrong, just checked weather, today and tomorrow more cloudy than other remaining days, my point still stand corrected.
 
At the moment this is just looking like a carbon copy of the first Test but with the teams swapped around.
 
When I said that today morning in the Match thread, everyone attacked me saying the pitch is fine.

The pitch isn't everything a captain should look at whilst making a toss decision, and even then all of us knew it would swing around for the first 30 overs. Had Pakistan taken 3/4 wickets for 100 odd in those 30 overs it would have been a completely different game.

Batting tomorrow will be so easy I expect England to score 350+
 
Even Roots said he would have batted if he had won the toss today. The issue is poor shot selection from Pakistan batsmen and no patience apart from Shadab who has matured as a batsman.
 
In England always look up not down. Headingley pitches have been flat and straw coloured for yonks now. What does affect swing are cloudy / humid conditions. I don't know what the weather was like when Sarfraz won the toss but evidently it was the wrong decision.
 
Forget pitches, clouds, rain, humidity.

England's batting has been criticized heavily after the first test. Our bowling was massively praised. Why not test the England batsmen confidence instead of exposing our batting lineup which can collapse at any moment? Completely stupid decision. Not sure why we always overcomplicate things.
 
It might not be such a bad decision in the end. If Pak can take the game to the 4th day.
If England are chasing anything above 150, they'll be shivering..and I'll back Pak to bowl them out.
 
In hindsight obviously no.

With foresight (cloud cover etc), possibly.

If the top order had survived 40-50 overs with at max 4 down, they could still have made a 250+ score.

As things stand, Pakistan are still just about in the game and with Eng propensity to collapse rivaling Pak, this may yet be a classic nail biter.
 
Last edited:
Batting first at Headingly, on the 1st June, when it's cloudy and humid? Headingly, where the ball swings and seams in these conditions as if it's a drone being remote controlled by the bowler. And Pakistan decided to bat first? Root must have been laughing all the way back to the pavillion.
 
If Pakistan can restrict England's lead to 100 - which obviously is going to be a mission but not beyond them and then capitalise in the best batting conditions and score say 400+, it would be Pakistan's game to lose because batting in Headingly during the 4th innings more often that not is a nightmare!

I know WI won managing to chase down a big total against England here on the final day last year and perhaps it was easier to bat on then expected, but take nothing away from WI especially Shai Hope for that ATG knock.
 
Just look at the history of the ground, the ball moves around first 2 sessions. Remember Australia got rolled out for under 90 on this same ground by Pakistan in 2010.

They should have been brave and bowled first in my opinion.

But anyway I won’t blame them too much on batting first, just the top order couldn’t cope with the excessive movement and played some dodgy shots or got exposed by shoddy techniques.
 
The_Odd_One said:
No. It made more sense to attack with your bowling and keep the pressure on England from last match.

England has this match in bag now. You don't win a test with such a poor score in the first inning. They needed at least 200 in the first inning.
Click to expand...

Yeah at least 200, 174 is 26 runs away, that's not a whole lot, making it sound like it's a HUGE difference, please.
 
Should've kept the pressure on England by sending them into bat. Now they've regained their morale
 
aliasad1998 said:
I don’t agree with that. One extra batsman in place of an all rounder wouldn’t have done anything. We just need a partnership. Bowling becomes to weak if you replace an all rounder with a specialist batsman.
Click to expand...

And shady is as good as a bet to get as many runs as any body else
 
Yossarian said:
Batting first at Headingly, on the 1st June, when it's cloudy and humid? Headingly, where the ball swings and seams in these conditions as if it's a drone being remote controlled by the bowler. And Pakistan decided to bat first? Root must have been laughing all the way back to the pavillion.
Click to expand...

Root wanted to bat too
 
Lot of hindsight geniuses only opening their mouths once it was clear the decision backfired. Where were you at 10am yesterday ?

You lot are telling me you'd have bowled first when the sun was out faced with a flat deck ?! The clouds only came later so its worth paying attention to a cricket match before commenting on it.

If Sarfraz had opted to bowl first and England racked up 400+ I shudder to imagine what the reaction will have been. We bowled first at Edgbaston in 2016 and lost in case folks have already forgotten.

All you have to do at Headingley is bat conservatively for the first session, minimise loss of wickets, and then sessions 2 and 3 as we saw would've been easier for batting. Instead we lost wickets playing around our front pads and playing big booming drives.

The toss decision statistically doesn't make much difference either to the outcome of a result. You have to perform well either way, and we didn't thanks to a combination of poor shots and quality bowling from Broad/Woakes.
 
UN talkz said:
Commies saying it is a good decision but pitch telling a different story so far
Click to expand...

Of course not. Maybe everyone was high but never bat first in a test in England, especially not during these months.

i mean batting first during a day nighter, starting in the afternoon is fine but in a test, featuring broad and anderson? Come off it.
 
Also spare me this argument that we should have tested England's batting first up - they were never going to bat as badly as they did at Lord's. This is not some gully mohalla team we're facing.
 
Yossarian said:
Batting first at Headingly, on the 1st June, when it's cloudy and humid? Headingly, where the ball swings and seams in these conditions as if it's a drone being remote controlled by the bowler. And Pakistan decided to bat first? Root must have been laughing all the way back to the pavillion.
Click to expand...

90MPH said:
Just look at the history of the ground, the ball moves around first 2 sessions. Remember Australia got rolled out for under 90 on this same ground by Pakistan in 2010.

They should have been brave and bowled first in my opinion.

But anyway I won’t blame them too much on batting first, just the top order couldn’t cope with the excessive movement and played some dodgy shots or got exposed by shoddy techniques.
Click to expand...

Let's run through the last few Tests at Headingley - ALL of which were early season Tests:

Sri Lanka chose to bowl first against England in 2016 and LOST.
England chose to bowl first against New Zealand in 2015 and LOST.
England bowled first against Sri Lanka in 2014 and LOST.
England opted to bat first against New Zealand in 2013 and WON.

Yes. It was such a clear cut decision....
 
Markhor said:
Lot of hindsight geniuses only opening their mouths once it was clear the decision backfired. Where were you at 10am yesterday ?

You lot are telling me you'd have bowled first when the sun was out faced with a flat deck ?! The clouds only came later so its worth paying attention to a cricket match before commenting on it.

If Sarfraz had opted to bowl first and England racked up 400+ I shudder to imagine what the reaction will have been. We bowled first at Edgbaston in 2016 and lost in case folks have already forgotten.

All you have to do at Headingley is bat conservatively for the first session, minimise loss of wickets, and then sessions 2 and 3 as we saw would've been easier for batting. Instead we lost wickets playing around our front pads and playing big booming drives.

The toss decision statistically doesn't make much difference either to the outcome of a result. You have to perform well either way, and we didn't thanks to a combination of poor shots and quality bowling from Broad/Woakes.
Click to expand...

Markhor said:
Also spare me this argument that we should have tested England's batting first up - they were never going to bat as badly as they did at Lord's. This is not some gully mohalla team we're facing.
Click to expand...

Markhor said:
Let's run through the last few Tests at Headingley - ALL of which were early season Tests:

Sri Lanka chose to bowl first against England in 2016 and LOST.
England chose to bowl first against New Zealand in 2015 and LOST.
England bowled first against Sri Lanka in 2014 and LOST.
England opted to bat first against New Zealand in 2013 and WON.

Yes. It was such a clear cut decision....
Click to expand...

Bang on target as usual.
 
Last edited:
Markhor said:
Lot of hindsight geniuses only opening their mouths once it was clear the decision backfired. Where were you at 10am yesterday ?

You lot are telling me you'd have bowled first when the sun was out faced with a flat deck ?! The clouds only came later so its worth paying attention to a cricket match before commenting on it.

If Sarfraz had opted to bowl first and England racked up 400+ I shudder to imagine what the reaction will have been. We bowled first at Edgbaston in 2016 and lost in case folks have already forgotten.

All you have to do at Headingley is bat conservatively for the first session, minimise loss of wickets, and then sessions 2 and 3 as we saw would've been easier for batting. Instead we lost wickets playing around our front pads and playing big booming drives.

The toss decision statistically doesn't make much difference either to the outcome of a result. You have to perform well either way, and we didn't thanks to a combination of poor shots and quality bowling from Broad/Woakes.
Click to expand...

Agree with you 100%. We played poorly, simple as that. Can't put that down to the toss.
 
What is the point of going out for toss then if you're going to be so useless at calling it and then making wrong decision on batting vs bowling to compound matters ?

Useless captain. Useless 'think tank'
 
s28 said:
What is the point of going out for toss then if you're going to be so useless at calling it and then making wrong decision on batting vs bowling to compound matters ?

Useless captain. Useless 'think tank'
Click to expand...

All experts say it was the right decision
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

FearlessRoar
Did Pakistan's decision to avoid a specialist spinner cost them the 2024-25 Test series against South Africa?
Replies
33
Views
765
Abdullah
A
hassan918
Historic first Test: Pakistan vs West Indies sets record as shortest completed match in Pakistan
Replies
43
Views
615
BouncerGuy
BouncerGuy
The Bald Eagle
  • Poll Poll
Will the batting-friendly pitch in Multan become the worst rank turner for batters in Pakistan's second innings against England in the first Test?
Replies
55
Views
2K
SamNJ
S
B
Was the pitch for the 5th Test between Australia and India in Sydney fair for Test match cricket?
Replies
23
Views
495
deltexas
D
BouncerGuy
  • Poll Poll
Concussion substitute controversy: Did India Exploit the rules with Harshit Rana's debut in the 4th T20I against England?
2
Replies
98
Views
2K
FearlessRoar
FearlessRoar
Back
Top