***Official*** Pakistan in England

[Dasa]

How lacklustre to England look? I've never been a huge fan of Harmison, but he looks as bad right now as he did in South Africa in 04/05. Real worry there with the Ashes coming up. Hoggard also looks a shadow of the bowler that he's been over the last couple of years (Ashes excluded, somewhat). They were making the Pakistan batting look absolutely unstoppable today.

Interesting to look at Harmison's figures for the series. 11/76 in one match, 5/419 (so far) in the other three.

 

[Jono]

Interesting to look at Harmison's figures for the series. 11/76 in one match, 5/419 (so far) in the other three.

Shock horror, maybe he's not that good.

 

[Nate]

I didn't know Nick Borcich was English

I got it Nady, don`t worry.

Asif - difference between this Pakistan team winning and losing?

 

[Jono]

I got it Nady, don`t worry.

Asif - difference between this Pakistan team winning and losing?

I guess that depends if you rate him higher than Shoaib?

 

[Nate]

I guess shut-up.

Haha, I was more implying that, bar the Australian tour, when Asif plays - Pakistan win. He takes vital top-order wickets, and has the consistency so badly lacking in their attack. Definately been demonstrated in this match. No doubt Shoaib has the explosive pace, but I feel that Asif`s consistency and general calmness resonates throughout the side.

Not discrediting the high standard of play from Yousuf, Younis and co. They`ve been okay.

 

[Swervy]

And therein lies the problem doesn't it? Eliminate that inconsistency and you have IMO the second ranked team in the world, without question. But we do have that inconsistency…and hence the doubts about whether we can be called the second best team and challenge Aus for the top spot.

Eliminate West Indies inconsistancy, or SA's or NZ's or whatever, and you have the worlds second best team!!!! If England could consistantly play at the level they played at in 2005 Ashes then England would be pretty close to number one.

Pakistan's inconsistancy stem from not only the cliched 'Pakistan have always been inconsistant, its a mental thing blah blah' but also because they have distinct areas of weakness.

The batting is solely based around Inzy,Yousuf and Younis, the rest is merely average. No-one else has contributed in those first 3 tests other than those three batsmen,(so much so that only Imran Farhat has gone beyond 100 runs in the series outside those 3 players) and that is against a weakened England bowling attack who have really not bowled too well. The opening position is shot at, and Kamran Akmal has been badly exposed as a keeper.

The bowling is better still has in general been whipped by the England batting. I know Pakistan have missed Shoaib etc, but for me, the bowling has been disappointing. Asif looks good, but lets see how he does after a few more tests.

So unfortunately I just cant see the problem as being Pakistan are inconsistant, because other teams are just as inconsistant. Pakistan have underlying issues in the team which mean they arent yet in a position to be consistant

 

[Swervy]

I guess shut-up.

Haha, I was more implying that, bar the Australian tour, when Asif plays - Pakistan win. He takes vital top-order wickets, and has the consistency so badly lacking in their attack. Definately been demonstrated in this match. No doubt Shoaib has the explosive pace, but I feel that Asif`s consistency and general calmness resonates throughout the side.

Not discrediting the high standard of play from Yousuf, Younis and co. They`ve been okay.

so he has played 5 full tests, and actually only been on the winning team twice.

 

[Jono]

Eliminate West Indies inconsistancy, or SA's or NZ's or whatever, and you have the worlds second best team!!!! If England could consistantly play at the level they played at in 2005 Ashes then England would be pretty close to number one.

Pakistan's inconsistancy stem from not only the cliched 'Pakistan have always been inconsistant, its a mental thing blah blah' but also because they have distinct areas of weakness.

The batting is solely based around Inzy,Yousuf and Younis, the rest is merely average. No-one else has contributed in those first 3 tests other than those three batsmen,(so much so that only Imran Farhat has gone beyond 100 runs in the series outside those 3 players) and that is against a weakened England bowling attack who have really not bowled too well. The opening position is shot at, and Kamran Akmal has been badly exposed as a keeper.

The bowling is better still has in general been whipped by the England batting. I know Pakistan have missed Shoaib etc, but for me, the bowling has been disappointing. Asif looks good, but lets see how he does after a few more tests.

So unfortunately I just cant see the problem as being Pakistan are inconsistant, because other teams are just as inconsistant. Pakistan have underlying issues in the team which mean they arent yet in a position to be consistant

Why are you so sensitive to the idea that some people believe Pakistan have what it takes to be better than England at full strength? You launch anytime someone even shows a sign of mentioning it.

England were embarassed by Pakistan last year, and one can claim whatever you like about how they shot themselves in the foot in the first test, in the second they only just escaped a loss, and in the third they were embarassing.

This idea you have that there is daylight between England and Pakistan doesn't correlate with the fact that by simply adding Mohammad Asif into the Pakistan team made a world of difference.

And you can point out the flaws of Pakistan all you like, one can do the same with England to. Their performance this test has been very very poor.

 

[Jono]

so he has played 5 full tests, and actually only been on the winning team twice.

Two tests in which there was always going to be a draw, always.

One test when Asif was clearly not the bowler he is now.

Asif still has a lot to prove, definitely, but having very few tests experience didn't stop people from claiming Pietersen was the messiah after one series.

The thing about Asif is, he had a reputation BEFORE this test, and all he has done is live up to it. He hasn't built it after this test, he's just meeting the expectations all the time. He's a gun, and I'd expect he'd walk into the England team, even with only 5 tests behind him. I'd take him over Steve "I bowl well once every year, when I get the right conditions" Harmison, at the moment.

 

[Swervy]

Two tests in which there was always going to be a draw, always.

One test when Asif was clearly not the bowler he is now.

Asif still has a lot to prove, definitely, but having very few tests experience didn't stop people from claiming Pietersen was the messiah after one series.

The thing about Asif is, he had a reputation BEFORE this test, and all he has done is live up to it. He hasn't built it after this test, he's just meeting the expectations all the time. He's a gun, and I'd expect he'd walk into the England team, even with only 5 tests behind him. I'd take him over Steve "I bowl well once every year, when I get the right conditions" Harmison, at the moment.

yeah, fair enough

 

[Nate]

Word up. I reiterate all the things I said before about Asif`s conistency and calming effect upon the side. Obviously he hasn`t had the time to become a great, but after 6 tests, in some pressure situations, he`s averaging under 20.

 

[Swervy]

Why are you so sensitive to the idea that some people believe Pakistan have what it takes to be better than England at full strength? You launch anytime someone even shows a sign of mentioning it.

England were embarassed by Pakistan last year, and one can claim whatever you like about how they shot themselves in the foot in the first test, in the second they only just escaped a loss, and in the third they were embarassing.

This idea you have that there is daylight between England and Pakistan doesn't correlate with the fact that by simply adding Mohammad Asif into the Pakistan team made a world of difference.

And you can point out the flaws of Pakistan all you like, one can do the same with England to. Their performance this test has been very very poor.

Have a look at what I responded to...it basically came down to Pakistan are not the second best team in the world because they are inconsistant...no **** sherlock.
Pakistan have been outplayed all series and now they are doing well in a dead match, you get this kind of stuff on here, AGAIN.

We dont know if adding Asif has made the difference, there are alsorts of reasons as to why Pakistan got England out cheaply. One thing is for sure, Pakistan being 340 for 3 is nothing to do with Asif, and yet its been Pakistans batting which in general has been very poor.

If Pakistan can prove it over a period of time, then fair enough, but at the moment there are far too many weaknesses in this team for them to get kind of consistancy.

Yeah and go for your life picking England apart. For me, they have actually performed pretty badly all summer, but then again when you are missing your captain and also the best allrounder in the world, and someone like Simon Jones, I guess your performance is going to slump..but Englands shortcomings have nothing to do with Pakistans.

 

[Nate]

England surely should`ve gotten used to life without Vaughan and Jones. And the Pakistanis have been missing Asif, they still don`t have Rana, Shoaib, Malik. But go for your life.

 

[Jono]

Yeah and go for your life picking England apart. For me, they have actually performed pretty badly all summer, but then again when you are missing your captain and also the best allrounder in the world, and someone like Simon Jones, I guess your performance is going to slump..but Englands shortcomings have nothing to do with Pakistans.

When discussing who is the 2nd best team in the world it does. Pakistan rely on 3 batsman? I suppose England have stars from 1-7? Every team which isn't Australia has gaping holes somewhere. Pakistan's obvious one is their openers. I'm not prepared to write off Akmal yet, he's just had a bad series. What we saw of him against India in the 3rd test last year was superb, and showed he can bat when the conditions are tough. Inzy, Yousuf, Younis and Akmal, 4 very good batsman... I don't know too many teams with 5?

Pakistan's batting hasn't been great, but surely you should realise that its their crap bowling that gave them no chance of winning any of the first 3 tests.

Mind you, despite saying all of this I've said many times in this thread that I at the moment rate England ahead of Pakistan. But if both teams had been full strength or close to it, and Pakistan had won or drew this series, then I would have said they would be #2.

Oh and Shoaib > Jones surely! If you say England are missing Vaughan, then who are you gong to drop? Because that player has likely outperformed him, whether it be Cook, Bell or Collingwood (I realise Vaughan's captaincy has an affect too). And don't claim Giles...

As far as I'm concerned, its England missing Freddy, and Pak missing Asif and Shoaib... the rest don't matter. Haven't had enough of an affect, or have been out too long.

 

[Swervy]

When discussing who is the 2nd best team in the world it does. Pakistan rely on 3 batsman? I suppose England have stars from 1-7? Every team which isn't Australia has gaping holes somewhere. Pakistan's obvious one is their openers. I'm not prepared to write off Akmal yet, he's just had a bad series. What we saw of him against India in the 3rd test last year was superb, and showed he can bat when the conditions are tough. Inzy, Yousuf, Younis and Akmal, 4 very good batsman... I don't know too many teams with 5?

Pakistan's batting hasn't been great, but surely you should realise that its their crap bowling that gave them no chance of winning any of the first 3 tests.

Mind you, despite saying all of this I've said many times in this thread that I at the moment rate England ahead of Pakistan. But if both teams had been full strength or close to it, and Pakistan had won or drew this series, then I would have said they would be #2.

Oh and Shoaib > Jones surely! If you say England are missing Vaughan, then who are you gong to drop? Because that player has likely outperformed him, whether it be Cook, Bell or Collingwood (I realise Vaughan's captaincy has an affect too). And don't claim Giles...

As far as I'm concerned, its England missing Freddy, and Pak missing Asif and Shoaib... the rest don't matter. Haven't had enough of an affect, or have been out too long.

Well of course, but then if West indies had have won their last 5 series they would be considered number two maybe...but they didnt...if's and but's, its all pie in the sky.

When I was discussing Vaughan missing, its more for his captaincy more than anything, despite the fact that in fact he is a world class batsman

 

[Jono]

Well of course, but then if West indies had have won their last 5 series they would be considered number two maybe...but they didnt...if's and but's, its all pie in the sky.

Bit of a stupid comparison eh? Why? Because we're arguing here whether there is THAT much of a gap between England an Pakistan. Now if all it would have taken was Pakistan to draw this series to be at the least equal 2nd, then clearly they aren't that far off.

That's a lot less far fetched than WI winning their last 5 series. So really, that part of your post was irrelevant.

When I was discussing Vaughan missing, its more for his captaincy more than anything, despite the fact that in fact he is a world class batsman

*Was

He averages 38.65 since the start of 2003. Let's be fair here, if that's world class than Ponting is Zeus.

http://statserver.cricket.org/guru?...edhigh=;csearch=;submit=1;.cgifields=viewtype

 

[TheEpic]

What is WRONG with Harmison!?!?

 

[marc71178]

712. Kallis v West Indies, 2003-04.

Which is bizarrely less than the most in a 3 Test series!

 

[marc71178]

Shock horror, maybe he's not that good.

I guess he's enigmatic because the way he bowled at Old Trafford was so supremely good, yet at others times he's so shockingly bad.

 

[Jono]

I guess he's enigmatic because the way he bowled at Old Trafford was so supremely good, yet at others times he's so shockingly bad.

True, but really that can go for so many bowlers as well. We also have to remember how much those conditions were perfect for his style of bowling at OT. I just feel he doesn't adapt to different conditions, and just continues to bowl the same way no matter if its bouncing waist high or chin high.