Why Pakistan's openers are to be blamed the most for the loss to Australia

[srh]

Opening with 2 slow openers was the main reason why Pakistan lost this match. Pakistan's score was below par. Even that score was only achieved when Fakhar put them on his back otherwise Pakistan would have scored around 140 and Australia would have won by 14th over.

I hope my below facts open eyes of some Pakistani fans who are literally acting like sheep and not realizing the openers problem.

First here is some logic about openers usage in T20s:

• In T20 teams the logic is to open with 2 aggressive openers so that even 1 of them clicked then the team score will be challenging.
• The first 6 overs are easier to take advantage of as there are only 2 fielders outside of circle. So those overs are used by aggressive openers to score heavily and get set.
• Once set the aggressive openers can still score heavily even after first 6 overs are finished until they get out or carry the bat.

Now compare Pakistan and Australia.

* Pakistan open with 2 slow openers Babar and Rizwan.
* Australia open with 2 aggressive openers Finch and Warner.

Overs 1-6 (PP overs):

* In overs 1-6, Pakistan scored 47 runs with no wickets. 7.83 Run Rate. Good.
* In overs 1-6, Australia scored 52 runs with 1 wicket. 8.66 Run Rate. Great.
Advantage: Australia

So after PP overs Pakistan still has both slow openers (Babar and Rizwan) who are now set while Australia has 1 aggressive opener (Warner) who is now set.

* In overs 1-6, Babar scored 24 runs on 18 balls with 133 strike. Good.
* In overs 1-6, Rizwan scored 21 runs on 18 balls with 117 strike. Bad.
* In overs 1-6, Warner scored 23 runs on 16 balls with 144 strike. Great.
Advantage: Australia

Now Pakistan lost their 1st set opener Babar on last ball of 10th over while Australia lost their only set opener Warner on 1st ball of 11th over. So lets compare the overs 7-10 after which the openers comparison is finished.

Overs 7-10:

* In overs 7-10, Pakistan scored 24 runs with 1 wicket. 6 Run Rate. Very bad.
* In overs 7-10, Australia scored 37 runs with 2 wickets. 9.25 Run Rate. Great.
Advantage: Australia

* In overs 7-10, Babar scored 15 runs on 16 balls with 94 strike rate. Very Bad.
* In overs 7-10, Rizwan scored 7 runs on 8 balls with 88 strike rate. Very Bad.
* In overs 7-10, Warner scored 26 runs on 14 balls with 186 strike rate. Great.
Advantage: Australia



Australia scored a whooping 18 runs more than Pakistan in same overs:
* At the end of 10 overs Pakistan has scored 71 runs for loss of 1 wicket with 7.10 run rate.
* At the end of 10 overs Australia has scored 89 runs for loss of 3 wickets with 8.80 run rate.
Advantage: Australia






It all boils down to Pakistan choosing slow openers while Australia choosing aggressive openers.

1. In PP overs Australia with its only 1 aggressive opener (Warner as Finch get out on 0) was able to score more runs than Pakistan with its 2 slow openers.
   Fact: An aggressive opener will score more runs than a slow opener in PP overs.
2. In overs 7-10, Australia was able to reap benefit of only 1 remaining aggressive opener who is set while Pakistan could not take advantage of its both slow openers who are also set.
   Fact: An aggressive opener after he is set will score more runs than a slow opener after he is set, in non-PP overs.

 

[YousafTheBeast]

The reason why we went with Babar and Rizwan at the top was because the management had zero faith in the middle order. They chose a defensive strategy over an attacking one.

We’re at the same stage where England were a couple of years ago when Joe Root was opening in T20’s for England. Babar and Rizwan are our Joe Root.

I promise you if any other country had batsmen like Fakhar and Sharjeel, they’d be opening every single game and backed until they performed.

With Babar and Rizwan, we could be 70-0 after 10 overs, but the problem is that they can’t change gears. They’ll get stuck and as a fan, you start to hope that one of them gets out before they eat too many balls. When Babar got out I was happy, because we had 3-4 other batsmen that had the ability to take the game away from Australia.

With Sharjeel and Fakhar opening, we could’ve been 70-0 after 7 overs or 10-2 in 2 overs. When you have Babar at 3, Rizwan at 4, Hafeez, Malik and Asif Ali yet to come in, then can’t we still recover after being 2 down in the pp? We have a deep batting line up, we should be able to take risks at the top because we know we have batsmen who are capable of winning us games in the middle and lower order.

Posters here say “rather be 70-0 after 10 than 10-2 after 2”. Australia lost a wicket in the first over, yet they still managed to win

 

[TNAmarkFromIndia]

Pakistan should drop Babar and Rizwan.

 

[sweep_shot]

Pakistan should drop Babar and Rizwan.

What? LOL.

Who should replace them?

 

[srh]

Pakistan should drop Babar and Rizwan.

No way. Both make team on merit. They should not be openers though.

 

[Concerned]

Babar and Rizwan is the best possible option. Pakistan are not spoilt with reliable opening batsmen.

However, when setting scores ideally need to be one down after 9/10 overs.

 

[ritzy_123]

Please yaar stop comparing first innings to second innings in these conditions plus it was a semi final. Team like England had a tough time as well when they had to bat first.

This is our best batting combination let's hope they learn more and perform well for Pakistan.

 

[srh]

Babar and Rizwan is the best possible option. Pakistan are not spoilt with reliable opening batsmen.

However, when setting scores ideally need to be one down after 9/10 overs.

Did you read the opening post? I proved to you Babar and Rizwan as openers are the worst possible option and you are still saying they are best option?

 

[Abdurmirr]

After 15 overs Pakistan were 117/1 and Australia were 115/5.

Australia lost their 5th wicket at 12.2 overs and at that point where 96/5. Right after that ball Stonis slogged Shadab for six and if Fakhar had been in position Stonis would have been gone, 96/6.

Two run out chances where missed right before the second Shaheen over. A catch was dropped before Wade's three sixes.

All these mistakes cost us the game, not Babar and Rizwan's batting.

England had Butler and Bairstow both opening for them, two destructive batsmen and yet they are out of the tournament. New Zealand have a top order similar to that of Pakistan with accumulators like Mitchell and Willamson up top and look where they are now.

See I feel as though a vast majority of "fans" are really happy with yesterdays loss as now they can push whatever agenda they like

 

[Abdurmirr]

The reason why we went with Babar and Rizwan at the top was because the management had zero faith in the middle order. They chose a defensive strategy over an attacking one.

We’re at the same stage where England were a couple of years ago when Joe Root was opening in T20’s for England. Babar and Rizwan are our Joe Root.

I promise you if any other country had batsmen like Fakhar and Sharjeel, they’d be opening every single game and backed until they performed.

With Babar and Rizwan, we could be 70-0 after 10 overs, but the problem is that they can’t change gears. They’ll get stuck and as a fan, you start to hope that one of them gets out before they eat too many balls. When Babar got out I was happy, because we had 3-4 other batsmen that had the ability to take the game away from Australia.

With Sharjeel and Fakhar opening, we could’ve been 70-0 after 7 overs or 10-2 in 2 overs. When you have Babar at 3, Rizwan at 4, Hafeez, Malik and Asif Ali yet to come in, then can’t we still recover after being 2 down in the pp? We have a deep batting line up, we should be able to take risks at the top because we know we have batsmen who are capable of winning us games in the middle and lower order.

Posters here say “rather be 70-0 after 10 than 10-2 after 2”. Australia lost a wicket in the first over, yet they still managed to win��

We did take that "risk" in the 2016 world cup. A line u0 with "great" hitters like Sharjeel, Akmal and Afridi would have satisfied most of the hack enjoyers here and what was the result? A group stage exist in the sub continent

Before 2018 we had zero 200+ totals. After 2018 with Babar beginning to open we have scored 4 totals of 200+ and 2 of them on the back of 150 stands between Babar and Rizwan.

So yeah I would honestly be 70-0 rather than 10-2. Evidence shows it works best for us

 

[UsmanhailsAfridi]

Honestly you guys should stop watching cricket because you know 0 about it

Absolute bonkers suggestions

 

[UsmanhailsAfridi]

We did take that "risk" in the 2016 world cup. A line u0 with "great" hitters like Sharjeel, Akmal and Afridi would have satisfied most of the hack enjoyers here and what was the result? A group stage exist in the sub continent

Before 2018 we had zero 200+ totals. After 2018 with Babar beginning to open we have scored 4 totals of 200+ and 2 of them on the back of 150 stands between Babar and Rizwan.

So yeah I would honestly be 70-0 rather than 10-2. Evidence shows it works best for us

This

We can either be a Afridi type team that scores once in a while or a team in current state that always gives themselves a shot

Great teams are built on solid foundations not 6 and out nonsense

 

[Ashmal]

I hope Babar and Rizwan take a break for a couple of series....so that some people can get a much-needed reality check.

Babar-Rizwan may not be the best openers in world but they are certainly best that Pakistan have got.

Those who think that an unfit Sharjeel or some other imaginary hitter can outperform them are delusional.

 

[UsmanhailsAfridi]

I hope Babar and Rizwan take a break for a couple of series....so that some people can get a much-needed reality check.

Babar-Rizwan may not be the best openers in world but they are certainly best that Pakistan have got.

Those who think that an unfit Sharjeel or some other imaginary hitter can outperform them are delusional.

Looks like we want to go back to 20 for 4 type scores in every other match SMH

 

[srh]

Even with all the proof in the opening post, some people are still delusional and not opening their eyes what can we say, we can just hope these guys get the wisdom to understand the issue

 

[Itachi]

Whether I agree or not, it's definitely potw material for the sheer efforts that have been put in to.

I disagree with overall post though. Because playing first and chasing are two different aspects.

Aus knew the target and they could adjust their attack/defense accordingly. A privilege which Pakistan didn't have.

Batting first has been a curse through out this tournament. And Pakistan was at a disadvantage when they were batting first.

 

[Itachi]

Honestly you guys should stop watching cricket because you know 0 about it

Absolute bonkers suggestions

When a bowlers steps over the line, is it a wide ball or no ball though? It always confuses me.

 

[Abdurmirr]

Even with all the proof in the opening post, some people are still delusional and not opening their eyes what can we say, we can just hope these guys get the wisdom to understand the issue

The only people living in delusion are those who think Ramiz is going to let Sharjeel back in the team.

Also you have been provided evidence against your claim, at least try to counter it instead of backing an absolute disgrace of a cricketer

 

[Ashmal]

Even with all the proof in the opening post, some people are still delusional and not opening their eyes what can we say, we can just hope these guys get the wisdom to understand the issue

I got your point and agree that the openers slowed down in overs 7-10...something they need to look upon and improve in future.

But the talk about replacing them with some imaginary hitters is beyond me....as if Pakistan has a Warner/Butler sitting on the bench.

 

[cricketerB94]

Even with all the proof in the opening post, some people are still delusional and not opening their eyes what can we say, we can just hope these guys get the wisdom to understand the issue

What was Australia's score in powerplay and overall when they had to bat first against England on the same Dubai ground? I guess their "aggressive" batters were sleeping then?

You need solid batsmen upfront, not the inconsistent hacks who perform in 1 match and go missing in next 5. Babar and Rizwan are doing a fine job, they just need to show more intent.

 

[shamaan]

Did you read the opening post? I proved to you Babar and Rizwan as openers are the worst possible option and you are still saying they are best option?

They are the best option. You are comparing first innings to second innings were Pakistan needed to set a score and Australia needed to chase the score.

 

[MenInG]

Of all the other sides which used this aggressive strategy, how many teams made to the semis?

 

[BunnyRabbit]

Yes bring back Sharjeel and Shahzaib Hasan. We'll be scoring 220 every match.

 

[transparent opacity]

This is the best opening pair among all the Pakistani openers. This pair chased 200 in South Africa, which proves that they can go at a higher run rate when the conditions are better.

On UAE sluggish pitches it can not be done very often. Don't forget 176 in a semi final is not a bad total in any conditions let alone UAE.