As far as our bowling goes, somehow we need to get rid of Sami. PCB need to devise a plan to throw this leech out of this squad. Just send him to a place like kala pani and forget about him forever. As long as this freeloader will be part of the squad, just forget about winning. He is a big time liability on this team. Some commentator said about Indian crowd that with such a crowd supporting them, India is actually playing with 12 players. Someone should also point out that with Sami part of our squad, it looks like Pakistan play with 10 players. I cant even say that if am fed up of Sami or sick n tired. I have already gone past that stage and i dont even remember when.
Another problem is our spin department. Pakistan spinning section is not as effective as Indian. Kaneria is struggling, whereas Kumble and Harbhjan are kicking our butts big time. Some folks may not agree with me, but this squad desparately needed Afridi in this test series but God knows why he is not playing.
The only two possible results for this match after India's first innings were an Indian win or a draw. There was no realistic chance of Pakistan winning this one. They did the right thing by playing for a draw and not losing the series here and giving themselves a chance to draw it in the next match. Also, when was the last time a team scored 600+ in the first innings and lost the match?
fkhan2: a more relevant stat would be successful 300+ run chases on the last day and not merely in the final innings of a test because the two things are not the same.
345 off 82 overs at 4.20 RPO on a crumbling 5th day pitch is pretty stiff. Because of the many cracks and roughened areas in the pitch, the ball turns sharply and keeps low unexpectedly; and the uneven bounce makes life difficult for even the most experienced test batsmen.
The only way Pakistan could have gone for the target after tea is if they had preserved wickets and gone at a fairly reasonable rate of 3-3.5 RPO earlier. That would have left them around 170-195 runs to chase in 30 overs and a bit in the final session which is still a very tall order by modern standards. Going for the target any sooner would have been nothing but suicidal. Salman Butt was probably instructed by the team management to drop anchor and bat like that (we all know he can score quick runs). In retrospect his 11 off 91 balls used up precious overs and time. Losing all those early wickets (78/4) and the ever mounting RRR meant the remaining batsmen esp. the two Y's had no option but to go for safety play. Had one of them got out trying to accelerate, the tail would have been exposed quickly and barring Sami we all know what the rest can do!
Younis infact got his runs at a fairly healthy SR of 58.79 (107* off 182 balls). That's a RR of 3.52 and even if the other batsmen had matched that, it would still not have been enough! So the win was never really on and we should all be so grateful that our two most experienced batsmen dug us out of a really deep hole.
fkhan2: A more relevant stat would be successful 300+ run chases on the final day and not merely in the final innings of a test because the two are not the same.
.
i know and thats what I was hoping to find. I tried looking for it on cricinfo but couldn't find it. The only relevant thing is what I posted i.e. highest final innings total
Only 8 times in the history of test cricket a target of 340+ in the final innings was acheived
Series Test No Ground Chase Score
1984 ENG v WIN 2nd Lord's 342 1/344
1968-1969 NZL v WIN 1st Eden Park 345 5/348
2006-2007 SRL v SAF 2nd P Saravanamuttu Stad 352 9/352
1977-1978 WIN v AUS 3rd Bourda 359 7/362
1999-2000 AUS v PAK 2nd Bellerive Oval 369 6/369
1975-1976 WIN v IND 3rd Queen's Park 403 4/406
1948 ENG v AUS 4th Headingley 404 3/404
2002-2003 WIN v AUS 4th Antigua Rec Ground 418 7/418
^ what about number of overs consumed to reach these scores? In your previous post only a handful of winning innings were in less than 90 overs (final day's game).
^ what about number of overs consumed to reach these scores? In your previous post only a handful of winning innings were in less than 90 overs (final day's game).
I have added the overs and the run rate in bold in front of the matches
Series Test No Ground Chase Score
1984 ENG v WIN 2nd Lord's 342 1/344 **66.1 - 5.20**
1968-1969 NZL v WIN 1st Eden Park 345 5/348 **69.0 - 5.04**
2006-2007 SRL v SAF 2nd P Saravanamuttu Stad 352 9/352 **113.3 - 3.1**
1977-1978 WIN v AUS 3rd Bourda 359 7/362 **101.0 - 3.58**
1999-2000 AUS v PAK 2nd Bellerive Oval 369 6/369 **113.5 - 3.24**
1975-1976 WIN v IND 3rd Queen's Park 403 4/406 **113.1 - 3.57**
1948 ENG v AUS 4th Headingley 404 3/404 **147 - 2.76**
2002-2003 WIN v AUS 4th Antigua Rec Ground 418 7/418 **128.5 - 3.24**
after the test match is over, and although it seemed to me declaring at 340 was a bold move at that time, it seems kumble should have declared overnight...
edit - apparently moyo has said kumble declared too late and that pakistan wouldnt have even thought about chasing the overnight score!
seems like they had already made up their mind before the 5th day that they were not going to chase any score India would set...
Well, the test match is done and over with. These kinds of statistical post-mortems are interesting but not particularly useful. Pakistan is trailing the test series 0-1 going into the final test in Bangalore. Lets focus on the future now.
Well, the test match is done and over with. These kinds of statistical post-mortems are interesting but not particularly useful. Pakistan is trailing the test series 0-1 going into the final test in Bangalore. Lets focus on the future now.
Faisal bhai, I think I think it is necessary to atleast show these stats so that people can realize what they were hoping from Pakistan team.
I feel Pak should have gone for it.....but Butt/Younis simply downed the shutters when they were batting together. 10-20 overs of 5+ run rate would have created huge pressure on Indian bowling. Except for Kumble - Indian bowling in the 2nd innings was asking to be taken apart.
If stats are really that important, why don't we pull out stats for 3-test series, where a team trailing 0-1 going into the 3rd test, leveled the series! :)
Neat discussion thus far. Every post added to the main focus of this thread. Glad to see the participation level. :-)
Stats, stats and more stats; painted a great picture, but where does it leave us in this scheme of things? Why can't we be the pioneers in the field of modern cricket rather than follow the footsteps and examples that were already created? Has it become such an impossibility for us to expect something new, something different, something that could have us recognized as a strong unit and a force to reckon with? A great chance to level the series went begging. Let's all go to Bangalore and ride in on the fact that is now brushed under the carpet, that we refuse to accept that change is a part of life. When a change is implemented, all creations do not come to a screeching halt. The decision makers have to come forward and accept the responsibility. We continued the cycle of re-inventing the wheel all over again with a face-saving draw. Pakistan lost both tests, one in results column, the other in the moral victory column. What happened on Day 5 could hardly be described as a face-saving act. It was unworthy of being slapped with a phrase of a higher magnitude. How many can put their foot down and confirm that we entered the field with a mindset that didn't have any positiveness in it. We never wanted to chase any sort of a target even if the declaration had come overnight. Such is the state of things. To top off everything, Shoaib Malik does his part of the research before the start of matches and openly admits his decision to bat or bowl first based on matches that were played at that ground years ago. Stats, the source for all things, often times does not paint that adorable of a picture.
In summarized version, we should have put up a fight. I am in complete agreeance that it was unlikely to reach it within a day's time. Nothing is impossible. At least show some morale with a stroke or two, throw your guard up. It was just so unbelievable, the way it was handled. Never once it looked like we were even putting up a fight. That is all that was asked. Apparently, the face-saving face was given a higher face value than a possibility of going for it and making a match out of it. Win or lose, had the century come under the circumstances that involved putting the pressure on the opposition, it would have counted for something. Something as in a morale booster. Sadly, it did achieve what it was designed to do; increase the number at the end of an average column.
Neat discussion thus far. Every post added to the main focus of this thread. Glad to see the participation level. :-)
Stats, stats and more stats; painted a great picture, but where does it leave us in this scheme of things? Why can't we be the pioneers in the field of modern cricket rather than follow the footsteps and examples that were already created? Has it become such an impossibility for us to expect something new, something different, something that could have us recognized as a strong unit and a force to reckon with? A great chance to level the series went begging. Let's all go to Bangalore and ride in on the fact that is now brushed under the carpet, that we refuse to accept that change is a part of life. When a change is implemented, all creations do not come to a screeching halt. The decision makers have to come forward and accept the responsibility. We continued the cycle of re-inventing the wheel all over again with a face-saving draw. Pakistan lost both tests, one in results column, the other in the moral victory column. What happened on Day 5 could hardly be described as a face-saving act. It was unworthy of being slapped with a phrase of a higher magnitude. How many can put their foot down and confirm that we entered the field with a mindset that didn't have any positiveness in it. We never wanted to chase any sort of a target even if the declaration had come overnight. Such is the state of things. To top off everything, Shoaib Malik does his part of the research before the start of matches and openly admits his decision to bat or bowl first based on matches that were played at that ground years ago. Stats, the source for all things, often times does not paint that adorable of a picture.
In summarized version, we should have put up a fight. I am in complete agreeance that it was unlikely to reach it within a day's time. Nothing is impossible. At least show some morale with a stroke or two, throw your guard up. It was just so unbelievable, the way it was handled. Never once it looked like we were even putting up a fight. That is all that was asked. Apparently, the face-saving face was given a higher face value than a possibility of going for it and making a match out of it. Win or lose, had the century come under the circumstances that involved putting the pressure on the opposition, it would have counted for something. Something as in a morale booster. Sadly, it did achieve what it was designed to do; increase the number at the end of an average column.
Highly disappointed.
With players like Sami, Hameed, Faisal Iqbal and Tanvir in the side, you can forget about Pakistan being "pioneers" in the field of cricket.
Dhobi bhai… from idealistic point of view I agree Pakistan should’ve gone for the kill, but then idealistically we wouldn’t have players mentioned by the game (including Salman Butt, Kamran Akmal, Danish Kaneria) in the team.
In Test matches Salman Butt, Yasir Hameed, Kamran (esp when opening) cannot give you a blazing start. These guys can probably score at 4 RPO but then they wouldn’t last for more than 15-25 runs apiece… meaning a massive total of 75 runs score at 4 RPO with loss of 3 wickets… now do you want others to continue at same run rate?
The strategy to win this game would’ve required first 3 batsmen to give a stand of 100-150 at RPO of 5 so after that the rest of the batsmen just capitalize on it and take it home even with 3.5 RPO. But then we are asking Butt, Akmal, Hameed to score at 5 RPO
an average of 4.25 in 80 overs is no ordinary avg. in test matches. Do you guys remember the 2nd test against Saffies. Pakistan did try to chase the target in the final innings but were denied by negative line of Paul Harris for good 15-20 overs. Kumble does the same job when he starts bowling on the negative line. He could have gone for 30 straight overs on the same line, had Pakistan tried to go for the target.
The point is that dont compare such situtations with ordinary ODI situations and run rates required over there.
an average of 4.25 in 80 overs is no ordinary avg. in test matches. Do you guys remember the 2nd test against Saffies. Pakistan did try to chase the target in the final innings but were denied by negative line of Paul Harris for good 15-20 overs. Kumble does the same job when he starts bowling on the negative line. He could have gone for 30 straight overs on the same line, had Pakistan tried to go for the target.
The point is that dont compare such situtations with ordinary ODI situations and run rates required over there.
Choro yaar, they won't get it, these 20-20 mindset fans (or shmucks, whichever you prefer).
