Cricket

Why is Pakistan playing these new seamers? What happened to Gul and the other guy, who made the Indians shit their pants?
 
England beat NZ in the one dayers. This Root lad is looking like a real proper player. His game very much suits test cricket. He has an exceptional cricketing brain. He also seems to play the quickies or spinners equally well.
 
As expected, SA's bowlers once again ripping apart the Pak batting. It's not even a contest.

Surprising thing is that it wasn't Steyn or Philander who did the damage, it was the debutant who took 7 wickets for just 29 runs. It's just not fair with their bowling options :(
 
ha_rooney said:
As expected, SA's bowlers once again ripping apart the Pak batting. It's not even a contest.

Surprising thing is that it wasn't Steyn or Philander who did the damage, it was the debutant who took 7 wickets for just 29 runs. It's just not fair with their bowling options :(
Click to expand...

Well if it's any comfort you aren't going to be the only team who are bound to get raped by SA
 
ha_rooney said:
As expected, SA's bowlers once again ripping apart the Pak batting. It's not even a contest.

Surprising thing is that it wasn't Steyn or Philander who did the damage, it was the debutant who took 7 wickets for just 29 runs. It's just not fair with their bowling options :(
Click to expand...

:)

I was shocked to see Farhat opening. I has totally forgotten about him. \

Tough for batsmen without techniques to service in those conditions against a good bowling attack. Pakistan used to be the best subcontinental team in away conditions, due to their awesome bowling attacks and dogged batsman. Now they are similar to the other two teams.

I thought your bowling would do well but there are too many debuts it seems.

Release Amir from his ridiculous ban!
 
Well it took 3 days for SA to win.

Hopefully the ODIs and T20s are more of a contest.
 
Forevergiggs said:
:)

I was shocked to see Farhat opening. I has totally forgotten about him. \

Tough for batsmen without techniques to service in those conditions against a good bowling attack. Pakistan used to be the best subcontinental team in away conditions, due to their awesome bowling attacks and dogged batsman. Now they are similar to the other two teams.

I thought your bowling would do well but there are too many debuts it seems.

Release Amir from his ridiculous ban!
Click to expand...

Do explain.
 
Another series wrapped up. Hopefully this is the beginning of a long period of dominance.
 
Enjoyed this article on cricinfo

t may not have been the most accurate story ever told, but Fire In Babylon provided a fitting soundtrack for fast bowling: reggae. You can imagine Michael Holding running in as a bass guitar plays; joyously keyboard and drums join in as whispering death sneaks up on the umpire; then as Holding lets go, Bob Marley goes, "Could You Be Loved?" Could you ever?

Reverse swing, though, deserves a soundtrack of its own.

Try this. Thursday evenings in Lahore, at the tomb of Baba Jamal Shah, plays Pappu Saeen. Bearded, long-haired, beating with sticks - one straight, one crooked - the only instrument, the dhol. No slips, gullies or short legs required here, you see. The dervishes around him are all in a trance. In the right mood, it is all a trippy whirl; something not to explain but merely enjoy. A bit like what seems to be a low full toss but changes its mind three-quarters of its journey through and suddenly dips and darts and makes a possessed charge towards batsmen's toes.

Still, in the modern world, where viewers sight the seam better than batsmen, everything must be explained and traced. The explanation is now not as mystical as it once was. When the ball gets old, provided it is kept well, so as to get one half of it shinier and moister than the other, it inverts the traditional mechanics of swing and begins to go with the shine when bowled at the right pace. This swing, though, happens late, thus seems more pronounced, and gives batsmen little time to make adjustments. It is all the more difficult for a new batsman or a tailender to face, which explains the staggering number of dramatic collapses in Tests in the late 1980s and early '90s.

Reverse swing involves so much meticulous devotion it is almost worship. You bounce the wrong side on the grass, and the rough side might lose its roughness. You place a sweaty palm on the ball and you can kiss reverse swing goodbye. Saqlain Mushtaq was made to alter his action because he used to rub the ball in a manner that would soften the rough side. Alastair Cook is given sole rights to look after the ball because he is reptilian when it comes to sweating. Everything, from what might look like innocuous bouncers to throws into the practice pitches, is deliberate.

To trace the evolution of reverse swing is much more difficult. Well before Sarfraz Nawaz made it famous, well before it was given a name, possibly well before it was considered a distinct phenomenon that merited a name, reverse swing was practised in the mohallas and maidans of Pakistan. Sikander Bakht, born in 1957, told Wisden Asia Cricket magazine in 2004 that he reversed it as a schoolboy.

Even in Australia there have been ancient mentions of reverse swing. Imran Khan, who was legendarily handed the art by Sarfraz, also credits Max Walker, who in turn credits Alan Connolly, a Victorian who played 29 Tests for Australia. Connolly was an old-fashioned quick who wanted to run in as hard and bowl as fast as he could, but he found little assistance from the pebbly MCG pitch of the 1960s. He is believed to have borrowed from baseball's bad-old spitball the idea of loading one side of the ball up with "perspiration and saliva".

Walker says he was taught the art by Connolly in 1973. About a couple of years earlier, a man known even less than Connolly was handing down similar tricks to Sarfraz. Farrukh Ahmed Khan - 20 wickets from nine first-class matches - might not have invented or discovered reverse swing but his association with Sarfraz remains a turning point. "I was in the nets one day," Sarfraz told Wisden Asia Cricket. "And he told me how, if the ball gets rough and old enough on one side while remaining fairly new on the other, bowlers could generate extravagant late swing with it. He didn't know why, he just did it." In about 1974, Sarfraz started sharing the art with Imran.

It was only in the late 1970s and 1980s, though, that reverse swing began to be used consistently - allowance needs to be made here for matches not being so assiduously analysed back then as they are now. Imran tormented India in Karachi in 1982-83, stunning them with bursts of five wickets for three runs and three wickets for none in the same innings, after India had been 102 for 1 at tea. The image of Gundappa Viswanath shouldering arms to what looks like a harmless wide delivery only to see his off stump knocked back is the stuff of legend.

Before that came Sarfraz's show at the MCG - seven wickets for one run in the space of 33 deliveries - to skittle Australia's chase of 382 after they had been 305 for 3, but the Wisden report doesn't mention the word "reverse".

The world at large might have been ignorant of reverse swing for a long time, but the new sultans of swing, Wasim Akram and Waqar Younis, made sure it couldn't look the other way in the late 1980s and the early '90s. Starting with the series against New Zealand in 1990-91, series after series featured Wasim, Waqar and batting collapses unheard of. Teams would be going swimmingly at about 40 overs for the loss of one or two wickets, and then disintegrate spectacularly. Wasim took two hat-tricks in Sharjah, and once took four wickets in five balls against West Indies.

Reverse swing didn't quite do for fast bowling what Shane Warne, Anil Kumble and Abdul Qadir did for legspin - it didn't need a renaissance - but introduced a whole new branch, which can be regarded as a different art in its own right. Toes became the new throat, opening the batting became easier than being in the middle order, the old ball became the new new ball. Fielders became redundant and umpiring easier, as there was no bounce to judge. Fifty-seven per cent of Waqar's Test victims were either bowled or lbw; Wasim's 53% wasn't much less staggering.

The initial reaction to all this was of suspicion, and perhaps further ignorance. Lawsuits have been filed, dirt has been carried in pockets, a Test has been called off, bottle caps have been credited, lozenges have been thought of as cricketing equipment… Whether the ball used to be tampered with or not, whether Pakistan alone did it or not, we will never know, but it will be pointed out - not without merit - that it all became kosher when Zaheer Khan and James Anderson and Brett Lee began to do it too.

No one will argue against the excitement reverse swing brought into Test cricket in Asia, especially Pakistan. India's response to lifeless pitches had been to create dirt tracks and unleash their four spinners, but Pakistan - somehow their side of Punjab has produced more fast bowlers than the whole of India put together - took the pitch out of the equation. Nine out of 13, and ten out of 14 Tests were drawn in Pakistan in the 1960s and '70s respectively. In the '80s and '90s, the draw rate fell to 24 out of 43 and 13 out of 34. A cure had been found for parched and unhelpful pitches, and obstinate and newly armoured tailenders. It was done swiftly, spectacularly and without violence - unless you count a broken toe here or there.

Apart from this huge impact on Test cricket in Asia, what set reverse swing apart was that it was born not out of adventure or accident but sheer necessity. It was more life support than an accessory, a matter of survival for poor fast bowlers in conditions adverse both underfoot and overhead. Not only have they survived, they have left us in a trance while doing so. Try watching a collection of Waqar's Yorkers to the sound of Pappu Saeen's dhol.

Sidharth Monga is an assistant editor at ESPNcricinfo

****



The switch hit needs plenty of skill and ambition © AFP
Enlarge
The switch hit
Ayaz Memon
Having agonised for a few weeks on how to start this piece, I finally decided on an experiential approach: I pulled out a bat stored in the old coffin for a long, long time, stood in front of a full-length mirror and tried the switch hit.

When pushing 58, admittedly the body is not what it used to be when the reflexes were sharper, the muscles and bones could support sudden swivels and turns, the wrists and forearms were strong enough to wield the bat vertically or horizontally to drive, cut, pull and plunder.

What surprised me, however, was that even getting halfway into position for the switch hit was a challenge - even in a mock drill. When the feet moved, the change of grip was sluggish; when the grip switch seemed perfect, the foot movements lagged behind terribly, leaving me in a grotesque tangle.

Age spares none, as all of us learn to our chagrin at some time. But the difficulty of playing this shot - at whatever age - comes through clearly. Try it. To become a left-hander from a right-hander (or vice versa), get into position to play an attacking shot against a ball delivered at speeds ranging from 45 to 130mph in just a fraction of a second is a work of complex biomechanics, skill, strength and, above all, great derring-do.

The switch hit is not only about reflexes, muscular coordination and power, rather more about intent and ambition. This can sometimes be mistaken for showmanship. But every innovation, at its core, is about transcending convention. As in all such endeavours, this can put prevailing legalities under duress.

When Kevin Pietersen exhibited this shot against New Zealand in an ODI in 2008, there was shock and awe: shock that a batsman dared to challenge the canons of cricket, awe that he could execute it so brilliantly.

Those feelings gave rise to consternation and furore as the repercussions of the switch hit were discussed and debated in dressing rooms, drawing rooms, newsrooms, long rooms - not to mention the hallowed committee room of the Marylebone Cricket Club, where matters of law are decided.

Was it right for the game or did it violate its very fabric? The MCC ruled in favour of the shot - and rightly so, I believe.

Those opposed to it argue that the switch hit is grossly unfair to the bowler. This is not without basis, admittedly. A bowler is required by law to inform whether he is bowling over or round the wicket, and which arm he will be using.

Unlike in the reverse sweep, the grip changes in the switch hit and can make field placings superfluous, but the bowler receives no advance notice of this. Moreover, what if a right-hand batsman attempting a switch hit misses a delivery that would have hit the stumps even though it pitched outside leg? Should the benefit of a leg-before decision not accrue to the bowler in this case?

The case, however, is not open and shut, but has stimulating layers of grey. My position, in favour of the switch hit, stems from the belief that improvisations are a necessary part of life - not just sport - and must not be drowned out by dogma. Moreover, Test cricket, more than any other, needs to look agreeably at innovations that will engage fans.



The switch hit can possibly become the defining characteristic of the bionic batsman of the 21st century

The conformist approach overlooks some vital matters germane to the contest between bat and ball. Foremost here is the notion that laws in any case are ranged in favour of batsmen, so allowing the switch hit makes it far worse for the bowler.

From an existential point of view, the batsman is alone in grim battle against 11 predators. True, he has the non-striker at the other end, but when he is facing a delivery, he is isolated in his quest for survival, while the bowler has several allies in getting him out.

And frankly, there are several other factors that have stymied bowlers more than the switch hit. The two-bouncers-per-over rule, for instance, has defanged fast bowlers; short, 60-65 yard boundaries have made spinners rueful, as even mishits sail over the fence; and field restrictions have made the contest even more lopsided.

The switch hit, in contrast, gives bowlers more than an equal chance. It is not a percentage shot. In fact, it is fraught with great risk. Like the hook, the switch hit is an expression of a batsman's ego and relies on daring. It is entirely premeditated, often reckless. From a bowler's point of view, this is how they would like batsmen to be.

There are other aspects, too, that make the switch hit relevant in the modern era. A 7-2 on-side field (for a right-hander) would not only make run-scoring difficult, but also impact the rhythm of play so much as to drive away spectators.

The switch hit is no less radical than the leg glance, though not as highly nuanced, obviously. The glance added an extraordinary dimension to batting technique for the 20th century; the switch hit can possibly become the defining characteristic of the bionic batsman of the 21st.

It is a breathless mixture of courage, free-spiritedness and improvisation. A batsman steps out of his comfort zone to step up the ante, and forces the others on the field to do so as well. It may work spectacularly and it may also fail. This adds immeasurably to the thrill of the sport.

And as long as the spirit of the game is not disturbed, this can only be for the good.
Click to expand...
 
ha_rooney said:
Well it took 3 days for SA to win.

Hopefully the ODIs and T20s are more of a contest.
Click to expand...

It will most certainly be. Our ODI and T20 teams are not settled yet and we're still trying to get the right combinations going there so I could even see Pakistan winning those considering they have a much more settle line up.

Traub said:
Another series wrapped up. Hopefully this is the beginning of a long period of dominance.
Click to expand...

I would love that but I'm a little cautious. Everyone goes on about how 'perfect' our team is. The issue I have is that we're not quite perfect. We have one glaring weakness, no world class spinner that can bowl us to victory on the subcontinent.

Thing is, yeah we won in Aus, Eng, and dominate at home but this team's not really been tested heavily on the subcontinent. The wickets in Aus and Eng are more similar to what we have at home than what's on the subcontinent. Playing on the kind of wicket like the recent raping of Aus by India is my fear. That's my issue and I'm afraid it's one we can't address because we simply don't have the spin talent.

The one thing that set the great Aussie team apart from the rest was that they had every single angle covered. For pace, they had McGrath, Gillespie and co, for spin the great Shane Warne, and their batting speaks for itself.
 
As Anderson proved, quality seam bowlers can do it on every pitch. I remember Dale Steyn destroying us in India once. Plus nearly all of your batsmen have experience of playing in India.
 
The South Africa series in England was a strange one.
It was like we (England) were burnt out after the superb spell of performances we had. It never really felt like it got going.

I expect England to give a better account of themselves next time round, and think we do actually have the nucleus of a side to beat SA, even away from home.

SA are the best side right now though, very difficult to argue against, just feel there's still more to come from England - not sure about the other nations.
 
KM said:
As Anderson proved, quality seam bowlers can do it on every pitch. I remember Dale Steyn destroying us in India once. Plus nearly all of your batsmen have experience of playing in India.
Click to expand...

This is true but the likes of Philander is untested on flat dusty surfaces. My point is simple, this team will be completely dominant for a lengthy period in any conditions IF it had an Ajmal for example. It doesn't which means there's enough room for things to go horribly wrong when playing on spinning wickets on the subcontinent.
 
SA's real strength now is the middle order of - Amla, Kallis, AB and Faf. Only thing Eng has got over SA is Swann. Other than that SA are better in pretty much every department.
 
Utd heap said:
The South Africa series in England was a strange one.
It was like we (England) were burnt out after the superb spell of performances we had. It never really felt like it got going.

I expect England to give a better account of themselves next time round, and think we do actually have the nucleus of a side to beat SA, even away from home.

SA are the best side right now though, very difficult to argue against, just feel there's still more to come from England - not sure about the other nations.
Click to expand...

Agree, Root opening and Bairstow at 6 in a couple of years, along with the standard 5 who should not have dropped of yet should be a very strong top 7. Then the bowling is very strong, if Broad or Bresnan get back to their best, a very difficult side to beat. James Harris is also very good, and will come into the equation in the next couple of years, as I think may Tymal Mills.
 
crappycraperson said:
SA's real strength now is the middle order of - Amla, Kallis, AB and Faf. Only thing Eng has got over SA is Swann. Other than that SA are better in pretty much every department.
Click to expand...

Don't think Faf will be a long term star, and when Jaques goes the batting begins to look a bit weaker.
 
Bairstow hasn't impressed me much. Root though is quality.

Faf will be a star mate, his batting in Australia was excellent.
 
Bairstow needs a couple more years. I'd stick with Compton for the time being. Give him atleast 1 home series to see what he can do. Root must play at 6. He's good enough already.
 
KM said:
Bairstow hasn't impressed me much. Root though is quality.

Faf will be a star mate, his batting in Australia was excellent.
Click to expand...

Agreed that Faf was great in Aus, think it was out of context with the performances throughout his career and his general ability level though, he didn't look anything special at Lancashire. We'll see.

Bairstow has good first class average, good performances with the Lions and a solid technique going for him, as well as being 23. Think he'll be a very good player in time, but yeah, can't see him scoring heavily regularly for 2-3 years.
 
KM said:
Bairstow hasn't impressed me much. Root though is quality.

Faf will be a star mate, his batting in Australia was excellent.
Click to expand...

Bairstow against SA was brilliant in that one test.
 
Why was the Lancashire stadium naming thread closed? can't see it been discussed in here and probably not the best place as matches and series are usually here.
 
My guess is he posted it in the United forum to see if he could get any reactions, they closed it and moved it here
 
What a performance and win by Pakistan!

Stunning collapse by SA, the type you'd normally expect from Pakistan. Gul was incredible and blew away the SA chances of winning (finished with 5-6). Even the fielding was superb.

Hafeez scored more runs today than he did in the entire Test series, good innings from him. He then picked up a few wickets. We should just make him Test match captain as well, much better than the clueless Misbah.

As expected, we're far more competitive in the shorter format of the game, although SA did not play their best side. The ODIs should be good.
 
Only 3 players from our test team played and one of them is arguably not even first choice (Peterson). I'm not quite sure what our long term goal is for limited overs cricket. We seem to be using it to try bring in young players. Having said that, it was a quality performance by Pakistan.
 
That wasn't even a South African Second XI. What a meaningless 'game' for the fans and TV audience. Now the Pakistanis will be complacent for the rest of the ODIs. I tip my cap to you S.Africans, clever.
 
Traub said:
Only 3 players from our test team played and one of them is arguably not even first choice (Peterson). I'm not quite sure what our long term goal is for limited overs cricket. We seem to be using it to try bring in young players. Having said that, it was a quality performance by Pakistan.
Click to expand...

True, quality performance from Pakistan.

Dumbstar said:
That wasn't even a South African Second XI. What a meaningless 'game' for the fans and TV audience. Now the Pakistanis will be complacent for the rest of the ODIs. I tip my cap to you S.Africans, clever.
Click to expand...

Well, since Gary Kirsten has been on board the test team and the shorter format teams have differed completely. It's a fresh start. We seem to be going for specialists in a certain format. We will suffer severe losses within the next year still but that's mainly due to inexperience of this side they're trying to build. You will see a different side in the ODIs with the likes of Smith, Amla and Morkel making a return. SA are trying to create niche sides for every format which is a good approach IMO.
 
Unless something amazing happens, SA will win the first ODI comfortably.

I don't understand why Misbah is in the fecking ODI side but Umar Akmal is not :confused:
 
Excellent win for Pakistan. We bowled well and the batting was sensible for once. Good comeback after the first game humiliation. Series is now tied.
 
How fecking good is Hashim Amla?
So, so underrated as an ODI player.
 
KM said:
How fecking good is Hashim Amla?
So, so underrated as an ODI player.
Click to expand...

He's my favourite batsman. Such an elegant player in all forms of the game, really a class act.
 
Afridi out :( brilliant innings from him.

That should be enough for SA to win this.
 
ha_rooney said:
He's my favourite batsman. Such an elegant player in all forms of the game, really a class act.
Click to expand...

In ODI's he has an average of 60 and strikerate of 91. Phenomenal.

Him and Clarke are the best all round batsmen right now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.