Was it the right decision to award Mohammad Abbas the Man of the Match award in the second Test?

[mak36]

Hear me out.

Abbas was brilliant. Of course he was. He took a brilliant ten-for in this test and I can certainly see the merit in awarding him it. But I do think there was someone more deserving: Sarfaraz Ahmed.

It was Sarfaraz's captaincy that helped secure a big lead. It was Sarfaraz's second innings knock of 81 that ensured Australia were out of the game.

But ignore all of that. Close your eyes and ask yourselves: "what was the one moment that turned this test?" The answer: Sarfaraz's 94 in the first innings. Without a doubt.

It is very easy to forget Pakistan were 57-5 on day one. I repeat: 57-5. In a game Pakistan won by 373 runs. It was only because of that brilliant counter-attacking innings that Pakistan kept themselves in the game. The way Sarfaraz negated Australia's biggest threat in Lyon was a marvel.

To be clear, Abbas fully deserved the the Man of the Series award, but was he really theman of the match in this test? I'm not so sure...

 

[TalhaSyed]

Sarfraz's knock wasn't a match winning it knock. He batted brilliantly - specially in the 1st innings - however, he - along with Fakhar - aided Pakistan to a respectable total in the 1st innings. Not a match winning total.

Abbas, on the other hand, did bowl us to a Test match win.

If there was an award for most improved player - that would definitely go to Sarfraz.

 

[Fahdi]

Sarfraz was brilliant in this game but I think Abbas deserved that MoM.

Think of it this way: Abbas was so good in this match that even if you remove all of Sarfraz's runs( the highest scorer) Pakistan still wins thanks to Abbas. Infact we would still have a first innings lead if Sarfraz's 94 is subtracted

 

[mak36]

Think of it this way: Abbas was so good in this match that even if you remove all of Sarfraz's runs( the highest scorer) Pakistan still wins thanks to Abbas. Infact we would still have a first innings lead if Sarfraz's 94 is subtracted

That is not how cricket works.

 

[mak36]

Sarfraz's knock wasn't a match winning it knock. He batted brilliantly - specially in the 1st innings - however, he - along with Fakhar - aided Pakistan to a respectable total in the 1st innings. Not a match winning total.

Abbas, on the other hand, did bowl us to a Test match win.

If there was an award for most improved player - that would definitely go to Sarfraz.

Pakistan had 550 runs to defend and more than two whole days to bowl Australia out.

At a ground where the average 4th innings score is 145. Oh, and the highest successful chase is 45. Yes, 45.

 

[Fahdi]

That is not how cricket works.

I know but it does give you an idea of how good Abbas has been. Sarfraz played brilliantly but Abbas was a level above even that

 

[ARK Rafay]

Sarfraz was good but Abbas was too good. He deserves MOTM

 

[Fahdi]

Also no other bowler from either side came close to Abbas. Sarfraz on the other hand wasn't the highest scorer in either innings. Like I said Sarfraz was great but Abbas was just too good in this game

 

[WengerOut]

MOM in a team sport itself is rubbish. Giving to Abbas or Sarfaraz is fine. But people sitting in a chair judging an innings as match winning or not need to get their head checked

 

[mak36]

Also no other bowler from either side came close to Abbas. Sarfraz on the other hand wasn't the highest scorer in either innings. Like I said Sarfraz was great but Abbas was just too good in this game

Factually incorrect. Sarfi was the highest run scorer in the first innings (along with Fakhar).

Also, and as you have already conceded, Sarfi was Pakistan's highest run scorer in the match.

 

[mak36]

[MENTION=143023]SarfiBabarHaris[/MENTION]
[MENTION=141557]Chief Destroyer[/MENTION]
[MENTION=133760]Abdullah719[/MENTION]
[MENTION=53290]Markhor[/MENTION]

your views please.

 

[IAJ]

Sarfraz was good no doubt but you have to look at where we played. It wasn’t at an overcast Headingly, but flat pitch of Abu Dhabi. That Pakistan was 5 down for 50+ runs was down to our batsmen playing rubbish cricket.
Abbas was outstanding and richely deserved this, would have been unfair if it was given to any other.

 

[Fahdi]

Sarfraz's knock wasn't a match winning it knock. He batted brilliantly - specially in the 1st innings - however, he - along with Fakhar - aided Pakistan to a respectable total in the 1st innings. Not a match winning total.

Abbas, on the other hand, did bowl us to a Test match win.

If there was an award for most improved player - that would definitely go to Sarfraz.

No it was a match winning knock. If not for that partnership with Fakhar the match could have been really close. There can be more than one match winning knocks in a game. But Abbas was almost a one man Army. Deserved that MoM

 

[Abdullah719]

[MENTION=143023]SarfiBabarHaris[/MENTION]
[MENTION=141557]Chief Destroyer[/MENTION]
[MENTION=133760]Abdullah719[/MENTION]
[MENTION=53290]Markhor[/MENTION]

your views please.

MOM awards are often given based on the emotions at the time and currently Abbas is the standout performer but yeah, Sarfaraz and Fakhar's innings were probably the most crucial performances in context.

 

[mak36]

Sarfraz was good no doubt but you have to look at where we played. It wasn’t at an overcast Headingly, but flat pitch of Abu Dhabi. That Pakistan was 5 down for 50+ runs was down to our batsmen playing rubbish cricket.
Abbas was outstanding and richely deserved this, would have been unfair if it was given to any other.

Context is important. Whether it was because of good bowling or bad batting is kind of irrelevant. The fact is Pakistan were 57-5 when Sarfi walked in.

Also this was not your typical Abu Dhabi pitch. The pitch was turning from day one.

 

[Bhaag Viru Bhaag]

From 57/5 to 265 was a brilliant effort. I would have given it to both Sarfaraz and Abbas.

 

[Fahdi]

Factually incorrect. Sarfi was the highest run scorer in the first innings (along with Fakhar).

Also, and as you have already conceded, Sarfi was Pakistan's highest run scorer in the match.

I didn't concede that I stated that.

What I do concede is that I made a mistake in the first part. But my point is in both innings Sarfraz had a partner who scored just as much or more than him.

 

[mak36]

MOM awards are often given based on the emotions at the time and currently Abbas is the standout performer but yeah, Sarfaraz and Fakhar's innings were probably the most crucial performances in context.

Very valid point.

Had they awarded it to Sarfaraz I think people would have said "hang on..." but then reflected and realised it makes sense. Whereas with Abbas, the immediate reaction is "well, obviously" and then they don't give it any further thought.

 

[Titan24]

I agree the partnership of Sarfaraz and Fakhar was really cruicial but I guess a pacer getting a 10fer in dead tracks of UAE is something brilliant as well.

Dont remember last time a pacer from any sub continental teaming taking a 10 fer anywhere let alone in subcontinent.

Maybe the man of the match could have been shared but man of the series belonged to Abbas only.

 

[Mainul]

It was a right decision

 

[mak36]

I didn't concede that I stated that.

It was a concession in that it strengthened the opposing point of view.

 

[topspin]

Sarfraz was awesome but he was a close second because you have to think about that fact that Abbas bowled on a dead graveyard wicket when Pakistan had scored well below par in their first innings.

For a pace bowler to do that in UAE is special. We may never see a 10fer in the match from the quicker bowlers for years. Last time that happened was 12 years ago as well!

 

[Madplayer]

I dont think 280 was a great score in 1st innings. Ofcourse Sarfaraz batted brilliantly and got Pakistan to an okay score. Bowlers still had to bowl well and no Pakistani bowler looked as threatening as Abbas.

Deserving MOM.

 

[mak36]

As I have already said, I can certainly see the merit in awarding Abbas it.
My point is I think Sarfaraz deserved it more.

 

[SarfiBabarHaris]

[MENTION=143023]SarfiBabarHaris[/MENTION]
[MENTION=141557]Chief Destroyer[/MENTION]
[MENTION=133760]Abdullah719[/MENTION]
[MENTION=53290]Markhor[/MENTION]

your views please.

Sarfraz easily.
Its not just his score but the way he scored in 1st innings. We were 57/5 and he counter attacked and at a time was striking at 100+ which also gave Fakhar time to breath on the other end. Great counter attacking knock when the ball was spinning.

That being said I am happy for Abbas too. Almost everyone got some form except maybe Yasir and Azhar.

 

[Fahdi]

It was a concession in that it strengthened the opposing point of view.

Conceded Definition:

a)"admit or agree that something is true after first denying or resisting it."

b)"surrender or yield (a possession, right, or privilege)."

c)"to admit, often unwillingly, that something is true"

Saying conceded implies I contested that point in the first place whereas I stated it myself.

 

[mak36]

Conceded Definition:

a)"admit or agree that something is true after first denying or resisting it."

b)"surrender or yield (a possession, right, or privilege)."

c)"to admit, often unwillingly, that something is true"

Saying conceded implies I contested that point in the first place whereas I stated it myself.

concession(Compromise), noun acceptance, accord, acknowledgment, acquiescence, admission, admitting, agreement, allowance, assent, capitulation, concurrence, giving in, grant, granting, recognition, recognizance, reconciliation, relinquishment, settlement, submission, surrender, yielding

It implies no such thing. Without wasting anymore time on this, the manner in which I used the word is very common in formal debating etc. As stated earlier, it refers to the fact the point you made was a concession to the opposing point of view. It refers to the point rather than the person.

 

[Bilal7]

Sarfara was one of the match-winners of the second test. Everyone knows this. He does not need an award to prove it.

 

[Fahdi]

concession(Compromise), noun acceptance, accord, acknowledgment, acquiescence, admission, admitting, agreement, allowance, assent, capitulation, concurrence, giving in, grant, granting, recognition, recognizance, reconciliation, relinquishment, settlement, submission, surrender, yielding

It implies no such thing. Without wasting anymore time on this, the manner in which I used the word is very common in formal debating etc. As stated earlier, it refers to the fact the point you made was a concession to the opposing point of view. It refers to the point rather than the person.

But it wasn't a concession to the opposing point of view. Infact it was to mention that Abbas was so good that even if the runs of the highest scorer(whoever he may be) are subtracted (simple mathematical subtraction, I understand this isn't how cricket works) Australia still fall short.

OK. That will be the last post on that from my end.
______________________________________________________________________________

On topic yes Sarfraz was the best batsman and him winning the award would be justified (yes I'm making a concession ) Abbas deserved it more. Any argument you can make for Sarfraz you can make for Abbas:

We might have lost without Sarfraz's runs vs We probably would have lost without Abbas's wickets.

Sarfraz was the best batsman by far vs Abbas was lightyears ahead of the rest.

Sarfraz scored when the team needed him desperately vs Abbas got wickets when the team needed
him to.

 

[Darkrai]

But Abbas took a 10 fer in conditions that were not helpful to him. Look at Starc, Hamza, Sidle, and Wahab, and then look at Abbas-you will see why his performance is so impressive.

 

[srh]

Hear me out.

Abbas was brilliant. Of course he was. He took a brilliant ten-for in this test and I can certainly see the merit in awarding him it. But I do think there was someone more deserving: Sarfaraz Ahmed.

It was Sarfaraz's captaincy that helped secure a big lead. It was Sarfaraz's second innings knock of 81 that ensured Australia were out of the game.

But ignore all of that. Close your eyes and ask yourselves: "what was the one moment that turned this test?" The answer: Sarfaraz's 94 in the first innings. Without a doubt.

It is very easy to forget Pakistan were 57-5 on day one. I repeat: 57-5. In a game Pakistan won by 373 runs. It was only because of that brilliant counter-attacking innings that Pakistan kept themselves in the game. The way Sarfaraz negated Australia's biggest threat in Lyon was a marvel.

To be clear, Abbas fully deserved the the Man of the Series award, but was he really theman of the match in this test? I'm not so sure...

Sarfraz's horrible captaincy cancel out all his batting heroics.

 

[Amjid Javed]

Hear me out.

Abbas was brilliant. Of course he was. He took a brilliant ten-for in this test and I can certainly see the merit in awarding him it. But I do think there was someone more deserving: Sarfaraz Ahmed.

It was Sarfaraz's captaincy that helped secure a big lead. It was Sarfaraz's second innings knock of 81 that ensured Australia were out of the game.

But ignore all of that. Close your eyes and ask yourselves: "what was the one moment that turned this test?" The answer: Sarfaraz's 94 in the first innings. Without a doubt.

It is very easy to forget Pakistan were 57-5 on day one. I repeat: 57-5. In a game Pakistan won by 373 runs. It was only because of that brilliant counter-attacking innings that Pakistan kept themselves in the game. The way Sarfaraz negated Australia's biggest threat in Lyon was a marvel.

To be clear, Abbas fully deserved the the Man of the Series award, but was he really theman of the match in this test? I'm not so sure...

The wicket wasnt a green mamba on day 1, we shouldnt have even been 57/5 in 1st place (This was not karachi 2006), it was pathetic batting. On a surface which was ideal for batting Abbas has stood head and shoulders above anyone else in this game.

 

[TalhaSyed]

No it was a match winning knock. If not for that partnership with Fakhar the match could have been really close. There can be more than one match winning knocks in a game. But Abbas was almost a one man Army. Deserved that MoM

Pakistan had 550 runs to defend and more than two whole days to bowl Australia out.

At a ground where the average 4th innings score is 145. Oh, and the highest successful chase is 45. Yes, 45.

It was a match saving PARTNERSHIP - however, Sarfraz's inning was not a match winning knock. The PARTNERSHIP kept Pakistan in the match, however, Sarfraz's knock in isolation - or even the partnership for that matter - did not WIN the game for Pakistan. Despite's Sarfraz's inning, Australia were still very much in the game and could have gone on to the win the game if it wasn't for the bowlers & primarily Abbas.

Abbas single handedly picking up half of the Australian wickets in the match for only 95 runs is a match winning performance. Essentially what Abbas' performance meant was that Australia scored 95/10 in one of their innings. THAT is a match winning performance.

On top of that - let's make no mistakes - this was a batsmen pitch where players like Sarfraz and other batsmen were expected to perform well & conditions were tailor made for them. For a fast bowler to do what Abbas did in these conditions - now THAT is special.

 

[JibranAnsari]

He got 10 of the 19 wickets , destroyed their top order. Sarfraz played brilliantly but abbas was the best player of the match.

 

[Buffet]

Test was won by 10-fer here.

It's rare that anyone picking 10-fer doesn't get MOM. Some other player has to do far better. No other player in this match did better than Abbas.

 

[Syed1]

Abbas deserved it

 

[MMHS]

A 10 for with 5+5 in both innings is like a pair of hundreds. And, this game, PAK batted first. Sarfraz did well considering his personal struggle (& Arthur didn't help his cause either), but Fakhar's contribution was probably slightly better in this Test with bat - both bailed PAK out of trouble in first innings, but in 2nd Innings, Fakhar actually took the game away from AUS; Sarfraz & Babar ensured that it's a landslide. I did write that if Abbas doesn't get another 5for in 2nd innings, Sarfraz deserved to be MoM, but Abbas did get a 10for & Sarfraz didn't come to field on Day 4.

a 10 wicket match is the highest level achievement in Test cricket, even better if it's 5for+5for - couple of 50s by FZ or Sarfraz doesn't come close to it. Long back, I can recall at MCG, Mark Taylor scored like 101 & 76, he took 5-6 excellent catches as well and AUS won that Test - but MoM was Akram for his unbelievable bowling 6/62 & 5/98 ("I have never seen a bowler so many good balls in one Test" - Benaud). Considering the condition, Abbas's effort is similar to that & PAK won this Test.

 

[Savak]

A fast bowler getting 10 wickets in these conditions is unheard off. Richly deserved. He should have been awarded Boss of the Match.

 

[Hasan123]

Sarfraz counter attack to us a competitive 1st innings total.

Sarfraz for me.

 

[Chief Destroyer]

[MENTION=143023]SarfiBabarHaris[/MENTION]
[MENTION=141557]Chief Destroyer[/MENTION]
[MENTION=133760]Abdullah719[/MENTION]
[MENTION=53290]Markhor[/MENTION]

your views please.

They don't really mean anything to me. Both played well and the team made good progress. That's all that matters.

 

[Joseph Gomes]

I would go for Sarfraz. Had he gotten out cheaply, Pakistan might have lost, even if Abbas bowled well. Sarfraz basically turned a possible loss to a huge win, he was like Sam Curran in India series, game changer. Australia lost the match after Pak 1st innings, they were completely demoralized, just as Sam Curran demoralized India.

 

[Pak force]

As I have already said, I can certainly see the merit in awarding Abbas it.
My point is I think Sarfaraz deserved it more.

No sarfraz dont deserve it more. If u want to look at the batsmen then fakhar comes also in contention. He also made 2 fifties and that on debut, maybe sarfraz has 20 or 30 runs more than fakhar I dont know exactly. So u want to give it to sarfraz, because he scored 30 runs more than fakhar?

Abbas was just outstanding men 10 wickets on a dead rubber is something. Abbas was the only eye catcher in this series. The rest played just their parts.

 

[CricketDon]

Who else was you going to give it to,Hafeez?

 

[logicsupreme]

A pace bowler on this wicket getting 10 wickets! Compare Abbas's performance to the rest of the pacers and you can see he was outstanding. Sarfraz played brilliant but so did Fakhar, infact it was Fakhar who led the counter attack. Bowlers win you tests and this was a straightforward one!

 

[msb314]

Abbas was head and shoulders better than anyone else - well deserved

 

[SarfiBabarHaris]

Australia lost the match after Pak 1st innings, they were completely demoralized, just as Sam Curran demoralized India.

Key point here which many are missing. As soon as we were past 250 from 57/5, i knew we would win.

 

[Mamoon]

I despise him but I think Specialist Captain deserved it more.

 

[SensiblePakFan]

Sarfraz was good but Abbas was too good. He deserves MOTM

This.

 

[proud_pakistani]

Abbas deserved it because of his performance in the first innings. Had he not gotten a 5fer and helped to bowl out Australia for a paltry score of 145 and instead gotten say 250-300 it would have been much harder for Pakistan to win the game.

More importantly this was a wicket most fast bowlers failed which makes Abbas performance far more significant. Fact is we would not have won the game without Abbas.