29 May 2005 13:36:05
Afzal A. Khan
Comprehensive Win For West Indies



They were deserving winners. A few observations :

Pakistan were without two of their most experienced players -
Inzimam and Yousuf Youhana. Also, it seems Shoaib Malik was
not available for selection. The replacements did not come up
to expectations.

Fidel Edwards, with his raw pace, really rattled the Pak batsmen.
Though he was able to bowl only one over in the second innings,
he got the first breakthrough by getting Salman Butt out for a
duck. Gayle came up with a superb catch. He is making a habit
of making one-handed catches. His languid appearance conceals
his athleticism.

Then there was the silly run-out of Younis Khan. It is amazing
that players at this level ignore the basics of run-calling.
Yasser was squarely to blame. He took a few hurried strides,
prompting Younis, already backing up, to run through. I think
he should have sacrificed his wicket by getting past Younis.
Then he himself fell to a fine ball. But he has always been
suspect in that area. Also, it was a no-ball, though not called.
The culprit ? Pakistan's nemesis in recent times -- umpire David
Shepherd. I think he is still atoning for his incompetence in
that famous win by the Pakistanis a few years back in England,
when he failed to call some no-balls, and one or two England
wickets fell to these no-balls.

Bazid Khan is not yet Test class, I believe. Maybe, in this
Test, the Pakistanis had no choice but to play him. But, surely,
he must be dropped for the next Test. His fielding too is not
quite up to the mark.

Asim Kamal had a good outing, but he did display this tendency
to play away from his body. This seems to be a technical flaw
with several Pak batsmen.

And what can one say about Afridi ? He again played a breath-taking
innings, this time in a Test, and in a losing cause. But he
provided immense entertainment. Also noticeable was a change in
his approach. In between playing regular "Afridi" shots, he tried
to play in an orthodox fashion too. Maybe Woolmer and others
should do a little more counselling. He is better suited to the
# 5 or # 6 batting slot. He is too useful to be wasted as an
opener (in Tests).

Abdur Razzaq and Kamran Akmal are gritty players. Both played
their parts well.

The Pak pacemen were largely disappointing. Rana Naved took just
one wicket. And let us not be fooled by the number of his maidens
or the relatively lesser number of runs scored off him. He was
consistently bowling outside the stumps, allowing the batsmen to
safely ignore a great many deliveries. For someone who is now
supposed to be the spearhead of the pace attack, it was a most
disappointing performance. Shabbir Ahmed did bowl a more
probing line, but his pace is not going to trouble any batsmen.
And, for a fast bowler, he seems to lack aggression. There is
always a forlorn expression on his face. Abdur Razzaq was
probably the best of the Pak pacemen in this Test, but was
unlucky with some LBW appeals. He did pick up a few wickets
in this Test. Though lacking express pace, he does bowl with
considerable guile, mixing up yorkers and slower balls skillfully.
Kaneria was a sore disappointment. Lara and Chanderpaul, both
left-handers scored very heavily in both innings against him.
Afridi had some successes with the ball in this Test and, maybe,
Kaneria should make way for Arshad Khan. The latter is a very
steady bowler and keeps the runs down. Also, there is the
traditional argument of off-spinners against left-handers.
And West Indies have Gayle and Wavell Hinds, apart from Lara and
Chanderpaul.

Since Pakistan have nothing to lose, they can even try out Rao
Iftikhar Anjum, instead of either Rana Naved or Shabbir Ahmed.

I don't know why Pakistan were considered favourites here. Perhaps
their showing in India and the one-dayers here made them a wee
bit overconfident.

The next Test in Jamaica is likely to offer interesting fare.
If Fidel Edwards does not play, it would be more of a level
contest. Perhaps Tino Best would come in for him. BTW, what
has happened to Germaine Lawson ? I remember that his action
had been questioned. Any developments since then ? If Bravo is
fit, he too would be a good replacement for Edwards and also
strengthen the batting.



A. A. Khan


29 May 2005 19:57:41
Mike Holmans
Re: Comprehensive Win For West Indies

On Sun, 29 May 2005 13:36:05 -0500, "Afzal A. Khan"
<me_afzal@privacy.net > tapped the keyboard and brought forth:

>
>
> They were deserving winners. A few observations :

> And what can one say about Afridi ? He again played a breath-taking
> innings, this time in a Test, and in a losing cause. But he
> provided immense entertainment. Also noticeable was a change in
> his approach. In between playing regular "Afridi" shots, he tried
> to play in an orthodox fashion too. Maybe Woolmer and others
> should do a little more counselling. He is better suited to the
> # 5 or # 6 batting slot. He is too useful to be wasted as an
> opener (in Tests).
>
> Abdur Razzaq and Kamran Akmal are gritty players. Both played
> their parts well.
>
> Abdur Razzaq was
> probably the best of the Pak pacemen in this Test, but was
> unlucky with some LBW appeals. He did pick up a few wickets
> in this Test. Though lacking express pace, he does bowl with
> considerable guile, mixing up yorkers and slower balls skillfully.

The improvement in these two is very noticeable, and this has to be
the result of the new coach giving them actual roles in the team. They
accept that Afridi's a blaster, and put him in when it seems to them
that a blast would be good in an innings. In this second innings, the
obvious plan A was to bat for a long time and occupy the crease, and
Afridi would be entirely the wrong opener for that. On other
occasions, him going out to marmalise the bowling first up could be
the tactically best option.

But the good news is that their talents are being harnesed properly
now.

> I don't know why Pakistan were considered favourites here. Perhaps
> their showing in India and the one-dayers here made them a wee
> bit overconfident.

Because WI looked so god-awful against South Africa that it was
assumed by many, including me, that even Pakistan couldn't fail to
beat them.

Cheers,

Mike


29 May 2005 15:17:50
zRahul
Re: Comprehensive Win For West Indies

Afzal A. Khan wrote:

>
> I don't know why Pakistan were considered favourites here. Perhaps
> their showing in India and the one-dayers here made them a wee
> bit overconfident.

I had regarded Pak as the favorites too. Only problem that with Pak was
that without Sami the bowling was a bit weak. They should have taken a
risk with Shoaib since Since Sami was not available.
Also WI bowling was bit of a surprise . All WI need is 2 good pace
bowlers ( their traditional Strength) and they can compete ( repeat I
said compete not necessarily win) even with Aus. If WI can manage to get
a couple of bowlers who are at least accurate if not fast before they
tour AUS We can get to see a good series later in the year .


29 May 2005 14:06:10
FRAN
Re: Comprehensive Win For West Indies



Afzal A. Khan wrote:
> They were deserving winners. A few observations :
>
> Pakistan were without two of their most experienced players -
> Inzimam and Yousuf Youhana. Also, it seems Shoaib Malik was
> not available for selection. The replacements did not come up
> to expectations.
>
> Fidel Edwards, with his raw pace, really rattled the Pak batsmen.
> Though he was able to bowl only one over in the second innings,
> he got the first breakthrough by getting Salman Butt out for a
> duck. Gayle came up with a superb catch. He is making a habit
> of making one-handed catches. His languid appearance conceals
> his athleticism.
>
> Then there was the silly run-out of Younis Khan. It is amazing
> that players at this level ignore the basics of run-calling.
> Yasser was squarely to blame. He took a few hurried strides,
> prompting Younis, already backing up, to run through.

I've said this many times. Running between wickets is basic. If people
put something like the effort into getting this right that they spend
paractising how to defend against their own bowlers on pitches in nets
unlike those they are going to bat on, it would be time better spent.

> I think
> he should have sacrificed his wicket by getting past Younis.
> Then he himself fell to a fine ball. But he has always been
> suspect in that area. Also, it was a no-ball, though not called.
> The culprit ? Pakistan's nemesis in recent times -- umpire David
> Shepherd. I think he is still atoning for his incompetence in
> that famous win by the Pakistanis a few years back in England,
> when he failed to call some no-balls, and one or two England
> wickets fell to these no-balls.
>
> Bazid Khan is not yet Test class, I believe. Maybe, in this
> Test, the Pakistanis had no choice but to play him. But, surely,
> he must be dropped for the next Test. His fielding too is not
> quite up to the mark.
>
> Asim Kamal had a good outing, but he did display this tendency
> to play away from his body. This seems to be a technical flaw
> with several Pak batsmen.
>
> And what can one say about Afridi ? He again played a breath-taking
> innings, this time in a Test, and in a losing cause. But he
> provided immense entertainment. Also noticeable was a change in
> his approach. In between playing regular "Afridi" shots, he tried
> to play in an orthodox fashion too. Maybe Woolmer and others
> should do a little more counselling. He is better suited to the
> # 5 or # 6 batting slot. He is too useful to be wasted as an
> opener (in Tests).

Certainly in tests I'm inclined to agree particularly as he is expected
to bowl and particularly if Pakistan is batting last. The prospects of
winning were so small that it probably made little difference how he'd
have batted, but if there was a slim chance of keeping the game in the
balance Afridi's approach was as plausible as any -- and certainly he
won't have lost any admirers this way. I continue to be impressed. More
power to him.

Fran



>
> Abdur Razzaq and Kamran Akmal are gritty players. Both played
> their parts well.
>
> The Pak pacemen were largely disappointing. Rana Naved took just
> one wicket. And let us not be fooled by the number of his maidens
> or the relatively lesser number of runs scored off him. He was
> consistently bowling outside the stumps, allowing the batsmen to
> safely ignore a great many deliveries. For someone who is now
> supposed to be the spearhead of the pace attack, it was a most
> disappointing performance. Shabbir Ahmed did bowl a more
> probing line, but his pace is not going to trouble any batsmen.
> And, for a fast bowler, he seems to lack aggression. There is
> always a forlorn expression on his face. Abdur Razzaq was
> probably the best of the Pak pacemen in this Test, but was
> unlucky with some LBW appeals. He did pick up a few wickets
> in this Test. Though lacking express pace, he does bowl with
> considerable guile, mixing up yorkers and slower balls skillfully.
> Kaneria was a sore disappointment. Lara and Chanderpaul, both
> left-handers scored very heavily in both innings against him.
> Afridi had some successes with the ball in this Test and, maybe,
> Kaneria should make way for Arshad Khan. The latter is a very
> steady bowler and keeps the runs down. Also, there is the
> traditional argument of off-spinners against left-handers.
> And West Indies have Gayle and Wavell Hinds, apart from Lara and
> Chanderpaul.
>
> Since Pakistan have nothing to lose, they can even try out Rao
> Iftikhar Anjum, instead of either Rana Naved or Shabbir Ahmed.
>
> I don't know why Pakistan were considered favourites here. Perhaps
> their showing in India and the one-dayers here made them a wee
> bit overconfident.
>
> The next Test in Jamaica is likely to offer interesting fare.
> If Fidel Edwards does not play, it would be more of a level
> contest. Perhaps Tino Best would come in for him. BTW, what
> has happened to Germaine Lawson ? I remember that his action
> had been questioned. Any developments since then ? If Bravo is
> fit, he too would be a good replacement for Edwards and also
> strengthen the batting.
>
>
>
> A. A. Khan