The vices and virtues of Misbah

Pakistan's batting over the past week can be reduced to these two sets of numbers: 1 for 4, and 14 off 10. Against West Indies, they lost four wickets for one run. Against Zimbabwe, they put up 14 in the first ten overs of their innings. They are the sort of numbers that other sides dissolve boards or have their Test credentials questioned over. For Pakistan, those shocking numbers have inevitably become a debate about their best batsman in the tournament:Misbah-ul-Haq.

In fact, for Pakistani cricket, the past four years have been all about this very long, very monotonous debate: is Misbah holding Pakistan back, or is he holding them together?

You are probably aware of how this goes. Detractors complain that Misbah plays too slowly and is too negative. His supporters find such sentiments shocking and almost offensive, arguing that he is forced to bat this way to compensate for his team-mates' constantly failing.

The problem is that this debate never seems to come close to answering the question supposedly being asked. Misbah's critics, particularly in the media and amongst ex-players, blame spurious things like his family life or body language. He gets attacked personally over perceptions that those who know him know to be false. He is always blamed for not conforming to a gung-ho style that was never as successful or effective as it is imagined. In response, his supporters point to his fantastic stats. They argue that the reason he never gets to a hundred, that he gets forced to bat slow or that he does all those tuk-tuks, is that the rest of the batting is too weak and unreliable, and fails far too often.

Regardless of their relative merits, both sides try and channel all the blame on the other. While the personal attacks are vile and also irrelevant, they are expressing a kernel of a legitimate complaint against Misbah's batting and captaincy.

For starters, Misbah's approach to captaincy has won him great success as a Test captain. Yet the same reactive, conservative cricket has seen the ODI team steadily slip behind the world. Modern ODI batting has profoundly changed in the last few years, particularly with the change in field restrictions. Its impact can be seen in rising scores, in rising successful chases and in fresh batting records. In contrast, Pakistan still employ an approach which looks to start slow and hit out at the end - something that conforms to the ideal of the storied 90s sides.

There is no doubt that a lack of playing at home and access to the IPL, as well as injuries and form, have all affected the side. But it is also demonstrable that throughout this era, there has been a consistent conservatism to the tactics and selections of the team. A look at this tournament alone, where Younis Khan and Nasir Jamshed have been persisted with at the cost ofSarfraz Ahmed and Yasir Shah, gives an example of how fears about weaknesses have led to strengths being sacrificed. Moreover, batting tactics remain stuck in the past - 300 is still a mental block, chasing is still a cause of fear, rotation of strike is still an oddity and the innings breakdown is far too often behind the boil

Read More

Wahab, Irfan put Pakistan on the board

Pakistan 235 for 7 (Misbah 73, Wahab 54*, Chatara 3-35) beat Zimbabwe 215 (Taylor 50, Irfan 4-30, Wahab 4-45) by 20 runs

Read More

SANGAKKARA, THIRIMANNE LEAD SRI LANKA TO BIG WIN

he win against West Indies would have definitely settled the nerves of a few of the squad members and released the pressure somewhat
England hasn’t been at its best at the ICC Cricket World Cup 2015, but it does appear to have a blueprint. And, for half of the Sunday (March 1) game it worked just fine. The second half, not so much.

The result, in terms of its margin if not in performance, speed or sheer devastation, was even worse than the defeat New Zealand handed England at the same ground nine days ago, Sri Lanka beating it by nine wickets after chasing down 310. Lahiru Thirimanne and Kumar Sangakkara scored contrasting but equally effective centuries in a massive unbroken 212-run stand to take Sri Lanka over the line with 16 balls in hand.
England must be glad to leave New Zealand on Monday, although one wonders whether its recent record in Australia would provide any possible consolation. 

Having won the toss and batted on a fine Wellington day – little in the way of the famous wind but plenty of sun – England did what it aims to do with the bat; it started fast and accumulated steadily in the middle overs, before accelerating in the Power Play and hitting out in the final ten. In doing so, its resourceful set of youngsters – Joe Root, James Taylor and Jos Buttler – played with invention, panache and power. At the halfway stage, a target of 310 looked some proposition for the Sri Lankans. 

Read More

STEPHEN FLEMING: NERVY IN THE END BUT NEW ZEALAND WILL TAKE THE POSITIVES

Win shows why Brendon McCullum’s men can be considered among the top contenders for the World Cup but there are lessons to learn too ahead of the knock-outs.

Share this article:

 

 
 
 

The end might not have been pretty – apart from the winning six by Kane Williamson, which produced a wave of relief around Eden Park – but New Zealand will take the win, take the positives, and take the lessons too.
 
Any victory against Australia is something to savour and this was no exception, even allowing for that late collapse that reduced the vast majority of the packed house to near silence.


 
But as a statement of intent with the ball, the Black Caps showed once again they have every right to be considered one of the top contenders for this World Cup because that bowling effort was special.
 
You could argue Tim Southee was a little loose early on when Australia got away to a flier and you could also argue that Michael Clarke’s side batted like players looking for form and confidence at the crease after two weeks without a game.
 
But the quality and aggression of the New Zealand’s attack was a joy to see, and even better was the fact that, with Southee struggling just a little, Trent Boult stepped up and produced an outstanding display.
 

" That is the sign of a very good side, that when one player is off his game, another can step up, and Boult’s display was top-drawer. "

 
The late wobble that saw five wickets fall for 15 runs at one stage was tough to watch – we Kiwis never believe in doing things easily – but it may actually serve to temper the euphoria and keep a lid on the confidence that has been sweeping across the country on the back of the side’s performances.
 
The mood of belief among the public was best reflected by the chant that rang around Eden Park as Brendon McCullumwas charging towards his 21-ball half century. “You’re worse than England”, shouted the fans at the Australia players and I had to stop and laugh at that, as I have never heard anything like that before from a New Zealand crowd.
 
What the collapse does is show the players and the fans that no matter how good you are, or how good you think you are, you always need to be absolutely on your game. And if you are not, especially against the very best sides, you are liable to come unstuck. In that sense, the last few overs of the game have provided a very healthy reality check.


 
McCullum, in particular, will be disappointed that having put Australia on the canvass, his dismissal allowed them to get up again. Allowing a side to do that now is something you can get away with; once you get to the sudden death of a quarter-final or a semi-final, you cannot afford to be so generous.
 
In the final analysis, this match has been a useful exercise for a whole host of reasons, not least because winning breeds confidence, and winning against the top-ranked side shows the players they can go up against the best and deliver.

" There were a lot of question marks coming into the game about how good this New Zealand side really is and this win has provided a decent answer, that they are not out of place at the top table. "

 
It also means New Zealand can now be considered clear favourites to top the pool, which would bring with it a quarter-final tie against the fourth-ranked side in the other half of the draw. There is plenty of water still to go under the bridge in the other pool but whoever ends up in that fourth spot will not relish a trip to Wellington for that encounter.
 
The fact the Black Caps have now played a big match in front of such a massive and expectant crowd will also serve a purpose because when it comes to the knock-out stages the players will now know what to expect and hopefully be able to handle it accordingly. That is important because I detected some nerves early on, but the players will be more attuned to that environment next time.

What the match also demonstrated to me is that Eden Park is a bowl-first ground in this World Cup. Why? Because the short, straight boundaries make you believe if you bat first that you need a massive score given the modern players’ ability to hit the ball so cleanly so often.

But what that means is you can go too hard too early, something Australia’s batsmen were guilty of, and rather than their middle order looking to sit in when wickets began to go down, too many of the their batsmen went looking for run-scoring opportunities before getting set.
 
If you bowl first in Auckland you get two bites at the cherry: you have the chance to put pressure on the opposition and even if they do score a huge total, you can still redeem yourselves with the bat knowing that if one player comes off you are still in with a chance of chasing down virtually any score.

Have we seen the Black Caps a month ahead of their World Cup coronation? Maybe, and as Martin Crowe said when presented with his ICC Cricket Hall of Fame cap during an emotional ceremony at the dinner break we, as New Zealanders, can “dare to dream.”
 
But there is still a long, long way to go and after the nervy conclusion to today’s game, McCullum and his players, while happy to come out on top, will know that better than anyone else.

Read More