Pre series build up thread Pakistan vs England

[workkey]

With about almost 3 weeks left for the tour to begin ,Pakistan team is right now busy with there training camp in Lahore.
Shoab Akhthar fitness is still a concern as he twisted his ankle during the training session..while Rana naveed and Mohammad Asid are busy playing from there counties and they seem to be doing very well..
Also there is news about the possible recall of Mushtaq mohammad who is in top form in the english county season and so far has grabbed abou 30 wickets in 5 matches.
Pakistan has not lost a series in England since the famous lords victory under Imran khan in 1982.

[DomainK]

Testing time this for Pakistan. Beating England in England is going to be tougher than it was at home. They need a fit Akhtar badly.

[workkey]

The latest news is that shoaib might not be available for the first half of the tour .

[Wanderer]

Seems like there might be a slight fracture in Shoaib's ankle. They'll be sending his scans to a specialist in SA according to Bob, and they'll re-assess his fitness in a week.

The selectors will name their 16-man squad on Friday, and if necessary, they'll name Shoaib as 17th man.

So many conflicting statements being made anyway, make me agree with Osman (Cricinfo). We'll know about Shoaib when he turns up at Lord's on 13 July, whites on, red ball in hand...

[DomainK]

Without Shoaib, Pakistan's pace attack is reduced to half. I am very keen to see how Kaneria does in this series. Its a big opportunity for him.

[workkey]

I agree that Shoaib is a real threat for any team when he is 100%fit but we have been doing good without him lately, starting from the Indian tour last year, Pakistan was able to level the test series without him and then wins against India at home and Srilanka abroad and also levelling the series 1-1 in the W.indies..

If Shoaib is not fit we can go with Asif who has so far 3 test wins under his belt by destroying the Indian and Srilankan batting line up....and to support him we have Rana naveed and Mohammad Sami supported by Abdur razaq ,Afridi and Kaneria..
In my view after England loosing the third test match to Srilanka because of a brilliant bowling performance from Muralitharan the spinners will be Pakistan real weapon also to mention that Pansear took five wickets in the second innings and in the spinning department we have Kaneria,Afridi and there also talks about a possible recall of Mushtaq Mohammad who is also doing very good in the county championship.

[Maranello]

Originally Posted by workkey

a possible recall of Mushtaq Mohammad who is also doing very good in the county championship.

A bit old, isn't he?

I do agree about Mushy (Mushtaq Ahmed) though - he is worth a recall, and the way the English plan spin bowlers, even Mushtaq Muhammad and Intikhab Alam might be half-decent options!

On more general matters:

Pakistani supporters shouldn't be too happy about today's result. It means that the pressure is off England to an extent, who now do not go into the Pak series as overwhelming favourites. Pakistan have done very well of late when they have been tagged as underdogs; however, they will not be perceived as such when even SL managed a very creditable draw! The expectation will be for Pakistan to do at least as well, if not better - and that frankly, is not realistic, as England will probably not make the same selection blunders and play with the same woeful ineptitude for two series in a row. England may relish entering a series when they are not just 'expected' to win, and in fact, have their reputations to salvage - they would be fighting hard and would shed any complacency they may otherwise have had.

As such, I believe England's chances against Pakistan have actually improved significantly after today's result!

[Rachael]

Originally Posted by Maranello

England will probably not make the same selection blunders and play with the same woeful ineptitude for two series in a row.

I'm not sure "blunders" is an appropriate term: I'm not sure the selectors should actually have regrets about any of their selections or that they got anything other than what they expected from those they selected - it's not like when the Aussies toured last summer and sent home their in-form batsmen and ignored the poor form of their 1st choice bowlers!

With hindsight... what would they have done differently? Played Bell at 6, drop Flintoff to 7, replace Jones with Read and stick to the experience of Lewis for all three Tests instead of trying out Mahmood and Plunkett? Play a second spinner at Trebt Bridge? That might have been a better way to go in terms of winning the series but it would have been a serious admission of the failure of the Fletcher approach of recent times!

In terms of ineptitude... what came as a surprise in this series? What failings we saw were mostly familiar, ranging from technical deficiencies on the part of the batsmen and 'keeper through to the unimaginative use of the spinner. Sure, the spate of dropped chances in one match was exceptional... but that aside... the only ineotitude was on the part of youngsters who weren't even expected to know better.

The preparation and planning was again A1... and to my mind the most interesting bit of the Pakistan series is going to be the head-to-head contest vetween the two coaches: Woolmer has a tougher job.. but strikes me as better - should be interesting :-)

[Zainub]

This whole deal aboout England having lots of youngsters and them not expected to know anything in the first place strikes a bit odd to me Rachael. Its not as if Sri Lanka's team is full of old pros, in fact, I'd say the young-to-old players ratio was just about equal for both teams. If England had inexperienced players in Plunkett, Monty, Cook and Lewis, the likes of Kupegedra, Tharanga, and what's his name, Dilshan, these guys aren't exactly what you can call seasoned campaigners either.

England lost today because of simple plain technical defficency, a complete inability to play high class spin bowling. They just didn't know how to play Murali. And I think its simply as simple as that. Do you think any difference to the team composition could have actually made a difference to the way England batted against Murali on this pitch on the fourth day? I don't think so. One after another players kept playing back to deliveries they should have played forward to. It does surprise me sometimes really. England like to tell us how they've got the best coaching facilities in the world. How they've got such an excellent coach. How they've got this, how they've got that. But they keep on making the same, basic mistakes over and over again when it comes to playing spin bowling. You'd expect them to learn at least a little bit from their mistakes over time, but no. Andy Miller sighted arrogance as one of the reasons for England's downfall today, and I think he made very strong point.

It could be argued picking another spinner might have meant more success with the ball, and perhaps a smaller target to have a go at, but I don't think, it would have made a difference to the final result. But that's just my opinion. Others are perfectly entitled to agree or disagree.

As for the win putting Pakistan under more pressure, well I can see where you're coming from Maranello...but I disagree. I'd actually think the pressure on England to beat Pakistan is even greater now, and hence the chances of England collapsing under the weight of that pressure and expectation even greater. You talk about selection blunders and I can see your point there too, but most of the so called selection blunders are to do with the bowling attack, my point is basically to do with how they played Murali, even Sanath Jayasuriya at times (did you see that shot Freddie played in the first innings at Trent Bridge to get out?).

If England plan to play Kaneria like that then they're going to be in serious trouble. Of course they might learn their lesson and not produce a surface as conducive to spin bowling (a weakness for them) as this TB pitch was but if they don't improve their technique they'll be in trouble on most wickets...or at least, that's what I think anyway.

[Rachael]

Originally Posted by Zainub

England lost today because of simple plain technical defficinay, a complete inability to play high class spin bowling. They just didn't know how to play Murali. And I think its simply as simple as that. [...] One after another players kept playing back to deliveries they should have played forward to.

The pitch was threatening the odd "shooter" and that's fair enough: such deliveries seperate the men from the boys. Against the seamers that obviously necessitates getting further forward (even if that means taking blows from short balls) but when facing a slow bowler the reverse remains true - you can get forward if you are sure you will get to the pitch of the ball... but otherwise you are better off playing as far back as possible to allow yourself the maximum time to adjust to deviation.

Boycott noted that the difference between Strauss and Tresco was twofold: Tresco had softer hands and adjusted better to movement off the pitch... but Strauss (whilst prodding with firm hands) was a better judge of length and made a better job of getting either right forward or right back. Tresco looked a mess... and Strauss (stiff-wristed prods aside) looked accomplished - and irrespective of outcome I'd suggest as a matter of principle that it's better for a side to look to back themselves to pick the doosra and play late than to just thrust a leg forward and hope!

Technical limitations? Sure... but as much temperamental than technical: in building a side that will not "die wondering" the captain and coach have produced a side that ain't right good at grinding out big totals.