What's new

Why did Pakistan fail to win the 1st Test against Australia?

There is one reason and one reason only for Pakistan's loss:

They succumb under pressure.

That has always been the case with PCT and this current bunch of youngsters are complete mental midgets.
 
I don't get this obsession of Pakistani captains not to enforce the follow-on.

You have the opposition on the ropes and instead of hammering home the advantage, you bat again, lose a few early wickets and help to lift the opposition's morale.

Honestly speaking, I think it was the right decision not to enforce the follow on. We enforced the follow on against Ireland and we nearly bottled that. Let's not forget UAE is hot and must be hard work for the bowlers/fielders. We simply didn't bowl good enough in the 4th innings. Can't start blaming things such as not enforcing the follow on, just cos we didn't win. If we won, no one would even bring this up.
 
Bowling choices/changes?

Arthur conceded skipper Sarfraz Ahmed should have started with Abbas on the fifth morning, after the seamer jolted Australia with three wickets the evening before.

"I told Sarfraz that we should have gone with Abbas and Yasir but he had spoken to some senior players and they told him to bowl with Wahab Riaz.

"The reasoning they gave was that Wahab was supposed to bring that reverse swing into play and that there were some patches, but I think our best bowlers (Yasir and Abbas) should have been bowling early on," said Arthur.
 
Bowling choices/changes?

Arthur conceded skipper Sarfraz Ahmed should have started with Abbas on the fifth morning, after the seamer jolted Australia with three wickets the evening before.

"I told Sarfraz that we should have gone with Abbas and Yasir but he had spoken to some senior players and they told him to bowl with Wahab Riaz.

"The reasoning they gave was that Wahab was supposed to bring that reverse swing into play and that there were some patches, but I think our best bowlers (Yasir and Abbas) should have been bowling early on," said Arthur.

Hafeez must be one of those seniors.
 
Honestly speaking, I think it was the right decision not to enforce the follow on. We enforced the follow on against Ireland and we nearly bottled that. Let's not forget UAE is hot and must be hard work for the bowlers/fielders. We simply didn't bowl good enough in the 4th innings. Can't start blaming things such as not enforcing the follow on, just cos we didn't win. If we won, no one would even bring this up.

The not enforcing the follow-on tactic has been a risky one for a while now.

Pakistan nearly came unstuck a few times by not enforcing the follow-on and it was only going to be a matter of time before they were left with egg on their faces because of this.
 
The not enforcing the follow-on tactic has been a risky one for a while now.

Pakistan nearly came unstuck a few times by not enforcing the follow-on and it was only going to be a matter of time before they were left with egg on their faces because of this.

Well Australia may have batted well which they showed they are capable of. I wouldn't back Pakistan to chase down much over 100 in a 4th innings so enforcing the follow-on could have been worse!
 
Well Australia may have batted well which they showed they are capable of. I wouldn't back Pakistan to chase down much over 100 in a 4th innings so enforcing the follow-on could have been worse!

Huge first innings lead.
Only bowled 83 overs.
Opposition on the ropes.
Opposition batting looking clueless.

I know what I would have done.
 
Huge first innings lead.
Only bowled 83 overs.
Opposition on the ropes.
Opposition batting looking clueless.

I know what I would have done.

What if Pak ended up with 170 to chase .... Would they have won or lost or gone for a draw
 
Hafeez must be one of those seniors.

Hafeez might be an avg batsman but he has proven to be a decent on field captain. I doubt he would give such a suggestion to sarfaraz. This is Arthur passing the buck around
 
There is one reason and one reason only for Pakistan's loss:

They succumb under pressure.

That has always been the case with PCT and this current bunch of youngsters are complete mental midgets.

I don’t know how you can draw a conclusion on the entire history of the Pakistan Cricket Team and it’s character with one DRAW.
 
Huge first innings lead.
Only bowled 83 overs.
Opposition on the ropes.
Opposition batting looking clueless.

I know what I would have done.

A curious argument to make in hindsight, since we know that Aussie batting was not in fact clueless, that Asif had a lucky day with the Aussies playing risky shots against him. And that the recipe for winning in the UAE for Pakistan has been to bowl against the opposition in the last innings. A day and a half should be long enough to get the job done on a spinning track. At the end of the day we have to be honest and admit the available bowling just wasnt good enough.
 
A curious argument to make in hindsight, since we know that Aussie batting was not in fact clueless, that Asif had a lucky day with the Aussies playing risky shots against him. And that the recipe for winning in the UAE for Pakistan has been to bowl against the opposition in the last innings. A day and a half should be long enough to get the job done on a spinning track. At the end of the day we have to be honest and admit the available bowling just wasnt good enough.

I disagree.

In my opinion a more attacking approach would have been to get the Aussies batting again after they had been skittled in their first innings and were still in turmoil and under pressure.
 
What if Pak ended up with 170 to chase .... Would they have won or lost or gone for a draw

No idea.

But I think what would an attacking captain have done and a captain who had more belief in his team.
 
Bowling choices/changes?

Arthur conceded skipper Sarfraz Ahmed should have started with Abbas on the fifth morning, after the seamer jolted Australia with three wickets the evening before.

"I told Sarfraz that we should have gone with Abbas and Yasir but he had spoken to some senior players and they told him to bowl with Wahab Riaz.

"The reasoning they gave was that Wahab was supposed to bring that reverse swing into play and that there were some patches, but I think our best bowlers (Yasir and Abbas) should have been bowling early on," said Arthur.
This is nonsense from Arthur throwing everyone but himself under the bus. What a meltdown :facepalm:
 
I'd have to say

Selection
Pitch
Bowling
Captaincy

Poor use of DRS is not a problem if bowlers create enough chances.
Which clearly didn't happen. We did not see three oh-ah's every over.

Captaincy was poor, put I am unconvinced that simply putting more men around the bat would have worked. How many "I wish a third slip had been in place" moments did we see?

Bowling was poor, this has to be said, apart from Abbas. We were lucky that the Aussies played risky shots far outside off against Asif on the first day, but they learned their lesson fast enough. Doubtful whether he should start in the next game, but I suspect he will, because no better alternative is traveling with the squad. And his likely one off performance covered over the fact that we were lucky to get Aus out for so little in the second innings. Clearly the pitch got worse, but much worse?

Which leaves the question of selection. Could the bowling have been better? Well, that is quite clear. Yasir has had poor domestic form but has Pakistan's only Test match winner in recent years, until the emergence of Abbas. He could not be left out. And we see how poor we become when he does not perform.

Wahab is another matter. A complete dud in the match, and it could have been expected. He was never one to run through sides and has looked poor in recent games. If he had one function it was to pry out at least one or two wickets with a wearing ball, but Abbas was better at getting the ball to reverse.

And then, why no second specialist spinner? I was tearing my hair out looking at Bhatti's stats during the Test. He has incredibly domestic numbers is in superb form right now and should have been a shoe-in for selection. India is playing three specialist spinners in Hyderabad, Pakistan plays one in the UAE. Mickey really doesn't learn it seems.

Bowling was poor but the debutant Bilal Asif picked up a 6for? You mentioned Abbas bowling well, which he definitely did, so 50% of the bowlers looked world class. Riaz was a mess but Shah certainly bowled well and looked very very good at times but sometimes wickets don't come along.

People are acting like Khawaja did not just play one of the truly great Asian innings by a non Asian (in terms of experience, representation etc because I know UK is asian lol) batsman in Asia.
 
This is not a strong Pakistan team and the services of Younis Khan is missing. He was unbelievable in Asia and if he was there, Pakistan won't have lost to SL and this match won't have been drawn either.

He batted at a great pace in UAE at a SR around 60 and scored plenty of runs there.

Pakistani fans deserve this humiliation now because they bashed such a legendary player for years, who made sure their team don't lose a single series at adopted home and also does well in England, New Zealand, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Zimbabwe.
 
Bowling was poor but the debutant Bilal Asif picked up a 6for? You mentioned Abbas bowling well, which he definitely did, so 50% of the bowlers looked world class. Riaz was a mess but Shah certainly bowled well and looked very very good at times but sometimes wickets don't come along.

People are acting like Khawaja did not just play one of the truly great Asian innings by a non Asian (in terms of experience, representation etc because I know UK is asian lol) batsman in Asia.

All credit to Khawaja, but bowling on the fourth and fifth day in the UAE with that lead we should still have won. And with just two wickets to go, the result was close enough to suggest that some changes could have made a difference. Selection wasn't the only problem, I am not saying that, but I think it was more important than captaincy. In the end it is the bowlers who have to take wickets. If you look at the two innings, only two bowlers clicked in either of them; Bilal got lucky in the first, and Shah finally came into his own in the last, albeit belatedly. Which happens in the test matches. But it begs precisely the question, was it a well judged decision, to pick Wahab and only one specialist spinner? I don't think so, not judging by what the alternatives were; in the end, just two more wickets from two better bowlers would have made all the difference in that last innings.
 
Extremely poor captaincy. I think the decision to give Wahab the first spell on the 5th morning was made out of complacency. The team expected they would win easily and they thought let's do an old friend a favor and give him a chance to redeem his career. Sarfaraz started his tenure as an aggressive captain with a good feel for the game. But I think the pressure caused by the weight of expectation after the CT win along with his own poor form and the fact that we hadn't played serious competition in awhile till the Asia Cup, have caused him to lose his feel of game. His decision making in the Asia Cup and in this first test has been extremely questionable. In my view he should be dropped for NZ test series and he should just focus on white ball cricket.
 
Huge first innings lead.
Only bowled 83 overs.
Opposition on the ropes.
Opposition batting looking clueless.

I know what I would have done.

Easy to say in hindsight but we had more than enough time to bowl Australia out. I think we wanted them to bat last as that's when the pitch should start spinning. It's been our tried and tested formula over UAE in recent times. Let's not forget how hot it is in the middle East, fielding isn't easy. I do agree with you about the Australians being on the ropes and under pressure, but overall I do feel that not enforcing the follow on was the right decision, we just couldn't back it up as our bowling was nothing special.
 
Easy to say in hindsight but we had more than enough time to bowl Australia out. I think we wanted them to bat last as that's when the pitch should start spinning. It's been our tried and tested formula over UAE in recent times. Let's not forget how hot it is in the middle East, fielding isn't easy. I do agree with you about the Australians being on the ropes and under pressure, but overall I do feel that not enforcing the follow on was the right decision, we just couldn't back it up as our bowling was nothing special.

Everything is easy to say in hindsight.

Just because something is 'tried and tested' and they have got home by the skin of their teeth a couple of times should not mean that they have to keep trying it.

These guys need to be positive, think out of the box and not keep trying the same things again and again.
 
Everything is easy to say in hindsight.

Just because something is 'tried and tested' and they have got home by the skin of their teeth a couple of times should not mean that they have to keep trying it.

These guys need to be positive, think out of the box and not keep trying the same things again and again.

Another reason I think Pakistan were right to bat again was it can really demoralise Australia, if you bat well and take a lead and bat them out of the game. I play cricket myself, and when you've been fielding for a long time, walking off the field knowing you have been batted out of the game really is demoralising and has a knock on effect when it comes to batting. I also think with batting again, it allowed our bowlers to put their feet up so they could bowl in the 4th innings with more energy, less fatigue etc, especially in the heat of UAE. When we batted in the third innings, our lead batted Australia out of the game and they would have been very demoralised knowing that only a draw is the best result for them, no chances of a win realistically, shifting them into a negative mindset. We really should have won, and having someone useless like Riaz didn't help our cause. If we were good at taking reviews, Australia would have lost some of their wickets a lot earlier and most likely Pakistan should have won.
 
Another reason I think Pakistan were right to bat again was it can really demoralise Australia, if you bat well and take a lead and bat them out of the game. I play cricket myself, and when you've been fielding for a long time, walking off the field knowing you have been batted out of the game really is demoralising and has a knock on effect when it comes to batting. I also think with batting again, it allowed our bowlers to put their feet up so they could bowl in the 4th innings with more energy, less fatigue etc, especially in the heat of UAE. When we batted in the third innings, our lead batted Australia out of the game and they would have been very demoralised knowing that only a draw is the best result for them, no chances of a win realistically, shifting them into a negative mindset. We really should have won, and having someone useless like Riaz didn't help our cause. If we were good at taking reviews, Australia would have lost some of their wickets a lot earlier and most likely Pakistan should have won.

Ifs, maybes and buts are all speculation.

By batting again and losing early wickets, Pakistan lifted the morale of the Aussies. At the end of the first innings the Aussies were out of it mentally. But, when Pakistan were 45/3 in their second innings, the Aussie must have thought it was Christmas.

Instead of taking the bull by the horns and being proactive, Sarfaraz and co. gave the initiative and a lifeline to the Aussies by crawling to 181 for 6 in nearly 60 overs.
 
For me the blame lies squarely with Sarfaraz. I have no doubt that he wants to do his best with his resources...but he's not a test standard captain.

In T20s he can get away with it...ODI's are touch and go and depends on the rub of the green. Test matches though are a different kettle of fish. He may win the odd game..but generally his captaincy is poor for the 5 day game. It doesn't matter who the opposition is...if you can't win from that position in your home conditions then something is seriously wrong.

His fields weren't great...needed to have attacked more..bowling changes weren't ahead of the game but behind it.

One of the most important things is his inability to consistently judge a good review. As a wicket keeper he should be best placed and as captain he should be strong enough to not just call for a review for the hell of it. Yes he may get the odd one in his favour but that's more probability than judgement.
 
MIKE Hussey has hailed Usman Khawaja for his “incredible” innings against Pakistan and praised Australia’s performance in the first Test as typifying coach Justin Langer’s “never-say-die attitude”.

Playing its first Test since March’s spiteful tour of South Africa that was rocked by the Cape Town ball-tampering scandal, Australia battled to the most remarkable of draws in Dubai. Set an improbable target of 462 to win across the final day and a half, Australia saw out 139.5 overs to survive with two wickets in hand.

“They had a mountain to climb,” Hussey told foxsports.com.au. “They showed amazing resilience and spirit to fight their way through that last day and lot of credit has to go to the players

“This Australian team wants to earn respect back on the world stage through their behaviour and their spirit and the way they play the game, but also with their results and their skill.


“They went a long way to earning back some respect through day five’s performance.”


The Dubai Test was the first under the leadership duo of captain Tim Paine and coach Justin Langer, and Langer compared the performance to Australia’s famous win over Pakistan in 1999. That Test saw Langer make 127 in a 238-run stand that saw the hosts chase down 369. Hussey, who played alongside Langer at Western Australia, said the coach’s fingertips were all over last week’s performance.

“It typifies the character of a Justin Langer,” he said. “He was quite often a back-to-the-wall type of player. Tough and uncompromising with a never-give-up attitude and that’s the way the team played in the back half of this game.”

MACGILL: The ‘landmark moment’ that will change Australian cricket

No player exemplified that attitude more than Khawaja. Taking a Test average of 14.62 in Asia into the match, Khawaja notched his first ever half-century on the continent in the first innings (85) before making 141 in the game’s final chapter to help secure the draw. The left-hander spent roughly 27 hours in the field in a week where temperatures hovered at 38 degrees Celsius. It’s an effort Hussey – who one faced 276 deliveries in a Test in Bengaluru – has described as “incredible.”

“When you’re tired that’s when errors start to happen, mental errors and skill errors,” Hussey said. “He was able to keep his concentration levels up extremely high throughout the whole Test match really which is an incredible effort really and takes great mental strength.”

One of Australia’s finest ever players of spin, Hussey was particularly impressed by Khawaja’s handling of Yasir Shah and believes the 31-year-old found a level of self-assuredness that had not been there on previous tours of Asia.

“He looks more in control, more composed and calmer at the crease. In the past he’s looked a bit hurried, a bit flustered and a bit tense, which is not really his personality, he’s normally a really relaxed guy.

“In both innings he just looked in control, never hurried, never rushed. The way he played Yasir was a real standout. Yasir Shah is one of the best bowlers in the world and he had no answers (for Khawaja) for long periods of time.”

Khawaja was not the only man to impress in the second innings, with Travis Head and Tim Paine both scoring crucial half-centuries. Both men misfired in Australia’s first dig, in which the tourists lost ten for 60 after a 142-run opening stand between Khawaja and Aaron Finch. That collapse culminated in Langer taking his left-hander’s out for a pitch side debrief after day three.

Hussey believes the success Australia’s middle-order had in the second-innings was as much down to mindset as it was technique.

“They were just a bit tighter. Pakistan was looking for errors and Australia fell into that trap in the first innings. In the second they were much more patient, much more disciplined. They had some luck along the way, which you have to have, but they certainly played more high percentage shots.”


Two men who didn’t enjoy such luck were Marsh brothers Shaun and Mitchell. The senior Marsh brother paid the price for chasing a ball outside off in the first innings to fall for seven, before a brilliant bit of reverse swing knocked him over for a duck in the second. Mitch Marsh meanwhile was trapped lbw in both innings (12 and 0).

Hussey says it is not time to start panicking over their performances.

“It’s just the way it goes on the subcontinent, there are going to be days where you miss out. It’s really hard to start and unfortunately there are going to be players that get out cheaply. You see it all the time. Even the other guys that did score runs, they might have had a little bit of luck early in their innings and happened to get away with it.

“As long as Mitch and Shaun continue to stick to their plans and they keep backing themselves than I have no doubt that they will be fine.”

https://www.foxsports.com.au/cricke...d/news-story/dc77237aa010a58217838a1141d2680a
 
We need good old tests back.

Temas like West indies, Pakistan , SriLanka , Zimbabwe, have gone badly in quality.

i say - Tailored pitches and invent of T20 **** leagues.

Only team that has stood time is England. Good old swing bowling + Batting.

Its bcoz of dip in quality of others- team like India and Bangladesh are tasting success. Otherwise we know their level in Seaming conditions in England.

Time when Shoaib vs Slater, Steyn vs Sachin, Lee vs Inzamam, Bond Vs Ponting , Zaheer vs Greame smith, Mulali vs Ganguly , Flintoff vs Hayden and Murali vs Fleming was treat to watch, i am sure that session to session, over per over, ball per ball drama is being missed.
 
Ifs, maybes and buts are all speculation.

By batting again and losing early wickets, Pakistan lifted the morale of the Aussies. At the end of the first innings the Aussies were out of it mentally. But, when Pakistan were 45/3 in their second innings, the Aussie must have thought it was Christmas.

Instead of taking the bull by the horns and being proactive, Sarfaraz and co. gave the initiative and a lifeline to the Aussies by crawling to 181 for 6 in nearly 60 overs.

Even then, Pakistan had already batted Australia out of the game. The lead was already big enough that Australia were chasing the game even from then. 181-6 had put the game well beyond their reach so Australia would have been in a negative mindset if they knew a win wasn't going to be possible. Let's see what happens if Pakistan get a 200 run first innings lead (and therefore are allowed to enforce the follow on) in the next match.
 
We need good old tests back.

Temas like West indies, Pakistan , SriLanka , Zimbabwe, have gone badly in quality.

i say - Tailored pitches and invent of T20 **** leagues.

Only team that has stood time is England. Good old swing bowling + Batting.

Its bcoz of dip in quality of others- team like India and Bangladesh are tasting success. Otherwise we know their level in Seaming conditions in England.

Time when Shoaib vs Slater, Steyn vs Sachin, Lee vs Inzamam, Bond Vs Ponting , Zaheer vs Greame smith, Mulali vs Ganguly , Flintoff vs Hayden and Murali vs Fleming was treat to watch, i am sure that session to session, over per over, ball per ball drama is being missed.

I think you forgot England's last winter tours.
 
I remember , but it was more like 1 man against Anderson/Broad. Worst part is loosing wickets to Mooen Ali.

Feeling must be similar to what PP fans would have felt loosing to Kedar Jadhav
 
I don’t know how you can draw a conclusion on the entire history of the Pakistan Cricket Team and it’s character with one DRAW.

I apologise for my earlier. I think I came on too strong.

But I do think that PCT has a history of buckling under pressure. It's the same reason why they keep losing to India in WCs.

You look at the two big wins PCT has had - the 92 WC and '17 CT. On both those occasions, there was no expectations on the team and they had nothing to lose. That's when they played their best cricket.

As soon as people started having expectations from the team again, you saw what happened post CT.
 
All credit to Khawaja, but bowling on the fourth and fifth day in the UAE with that lead we should still have won. And with just two wickets to go, the result was close enough to suggest that some changes could have made a difference. Selection wasn't the only problem, I am not saying that, but I think it was more important than captaincy. In the end it is the bowlers who have to take wickets. If you look at the two innings, only two bowlers clicked in either of them; Bilal got lucky in the first, and Shah finally came into his own in the last, albeit belatedly. Which happens in the test matches. But it begs precisely the question, was it a well judged decision, to pick Wahab and only one specialist spinner? I don't think so, not judging by what the alternatives were; in the end, just two more wickets from two better bowlers would have made all the difference in that last innings.

How did only two bowlers click, when Abbas bowled well throughout? That is 3 bowlers out of 4. Exclude Riaz, bring in Hasan or someone else and the unit is better. If Shadab is fit, we can even have a 5th bowler.

My point is, Pakistan played well enough throughout, Australia did not but one of their batsmen rose to a higher level. It happens, no need to be pointlessly negative.
 
How did only two bowlers click, when Abbas bowled well throughout? That is 3 bowlers out of 4. Exclude Riaz, bring in Hasan or someone else and the unit is better. If Shadab is fit, we can even have a 5th bowler.

My point is, Pakistan played well enough throughout, Australia did not but one of their batsmen rose to a higher level. It happens, no need to be pointlessly negative.

Two bowlers clicked in each innings; Bilal and Abbas in the first, Abbas and Yasir, sort of, in the second. But many have argued that Bilal got lucky, with Aus playing risky shots against some pretty undisciplined bowling.They played him out relatively safely in the second innings. Which, if true, would mean that only two out of the specialist bowlers selected stand a chance of contributing in the second Test. For Aus it wasn't just Khawaja who batted well, Finch and Paine also had little trouble for much of their innings. Meanwhile, one can only hope Yasir continues to retrieve his groove, because otherwise it is just up to Abbas. I certainly agree on leaving out Riaz, but I suspect Bilal will continue to be a liability.
 
Back
Top