Pakistan V WI iccct

[Nikhil]

Rachael, for once I do not agree with you.

Even though Pakistan are usually comfortable defending a total, it was a poor decision. You have to take the conditions in consideration, and that's why winning the toss is crucial. Lara would have been the happiest man there. I know Pakistani bowlers are not as desciplined, but still they would certainly love bowling, when the conditions are favourable for swing, Most of them except Shoaib, swing the ball rather than seam it off the pitch. So the morning conditions were suitable for them.

Add to it, the fact fact that they think batting is their strength, so chasing should be easier than defending a total.

I agree the execution of the plan was very poor and you can not blame anyone but the players for three runouts, but the plan was a bit off the target.

[R W S]

09-23-2004 , 09:25© 2004 AFP



Arif Ali - (AFP/File) KARACHI (AFP) - Captain Inzamam ul-Haq and coach Bob Woolmer came under fire for choosing to bat first on a tricky pitch after Pakistan's humiliating defeat in the ICC Champions Trophy semi-final.

"Mind boggling to say the least was Inzamam's decision to bat first on a pitch conducive to bowling and against opponents who are good chasers," former captain and coach Intikhab Alam told AFP.

The West Indies routed Pakistan by seven wickets in the southern English city of Southampton Wednesday to set up a date with England in Saturday's final of the 12-team competition.

Inzamam, who won the toss and surprisingly chose to bat first, watched his side struggle from the start. They were eventually bowled out for 131 in the 39th over.

Anchored by a half century from Ramnaresh Sarwan, the West Indies reached their target in only 28.1 overs.

"I want to know who's calling the shots, Inzamam or coach Bob Woolmer? With his experience Woolmer should have known the conditions better and taken a wise decision," said Alam.

"I am amazed at Woolmer, to me he is the most over-rated coach," said Alam. Englishman Woolmer became Pakistan's eleventh coach in six years in June.

"Inzamam gamble fails as Windies rout Pakistan" ran the banner headline in Daily Dawn while the headline in The News read: "Pakistan falters in key clash as Windies reach ICC Trophy final."

Inzamam blamed himself and his fellow batsmen for failing to post a decent score.

"The batsmen did not take their responsibility and should have made 200 to make it hard for them, but 131 was far too few," he said.

Man-of-the-match Sarwan said he had been surprised by Inzamam's decision to bat first.

"We were surprised they went into bat in the first place," he said.

Former Pakistan captain Javed Miandad, Woolmer's predecessor, took a swipe at the coach.

"I would blame the coach because it was not Inzamam's decision alone, Woolmer should have known the conditions for having played and coached in England," said Miandad.

Former Pakistan batsman Zaheer Abbas also expressed surprise at Inzamam's remarks that he decided to bat first because he thought the pitch would favour spinners in the second session.

"Inzamam's justification lacks logic as Pakistan went into the match with four specialist pace bowlers, and two spinners who are also batsmen."

The Pakistani team returns home on Friday to take on Zimbabwe and Sri Lanka in a one-day tournament starting on September 30.

SOUTHAMPTON, England (AFP) - Pakistan captain Inzamam-ul-Haq admitted he had made a mistake in choosing to bat first at the Rose Bowl as the West Indies inflicted a seven-wicket defeat in their Champions Trophy semi-final.
The West Indies now face England at the Oval in Saturday's final after their easy win on a difficult wicket and under overcast skies.

Inzamam made his choice after discussing his options with coach Bob Woolmer and with teammates and then became part of a batting collapse which saw Pakistan shot out for 131 in the 39th over on Wednesday.

West Indies cruised to the target at the start of the 29th over despite having captain Brian Lara helped from the field after being hit on the back of the neck facing a 90 mph delivery from Shoaib Akhtar.

"We felt any score over 200 on the Rose Bowl wicket would be difficult to chase. Obviously, as captain, it was my decision to bat first and I got it wrong," said Inzamam.

[Zainub]

Racheal and Nikhil.

I'd not be surprised if Woolemer doesn't go sick or something in the next few days...his website is filled with questions from fans asking what the justification behind batting first was. Here is what one fan, namely Tariq Aziz had to say:

Bob, With all due respect, batting first, knowing the record on this ground (B'desh 93 all out batting first) and knowing our inconsistent and at times fragile batting form / lineup, was for lack of a more politically correct word "Insane"!!!... I am lost for words and even 6 hrs after the match is over and reading all the comments from WI / Sarwan, just cannot comprehend the logic of this decision.... just simply Unbelievable............ Its not that I am making these comments after the fact / in hind sight but am basing on the facts that we all knew going into this encounter........ I am sorry but its just mind boggling. My apologies, I had to air this out.

Bob was polight in his reply, although he did prove his point I felt:

England 250 batting first against Sri Lanka, West Indies batting first against Bangladesh!!!! Historical;ly chasing at the Rose bowl not good, the driest pitch of all that they produced, advice from an International captain that it was very hard to chase 225 changed our original minds!Its a tough job when you get it wrong hey!

I have just one view on this, the toss NEVER (absolutely NEVER) determines the result of the match, it only effect's it to a certain degree. Eventually it is how you play that makes the differece. So weather or not it was a sensible decesion remains a debate in futility as far as I'm concerned. What if let's suppose West Indies had won the toss and put us in and the same result would have come out...then we would have no option but to blame our batsmen, wouldn't we? We let our selves down with the bat. Simple enough. After having done well to see off the new ball we should have got more runs but the middle order just collapsed, which happens once in a while with a team like ours, unfortunately for us it happened at the worst possible time. And that for me is principally why we lost, not because we made the wrong decesion after winning the toss. Having said that I do not agree with Sarwan's comments of Pakistan having played the match into their hands. We batted first because we beleived we had what it takes to put up a decent score on the board for the Windies to chase - but they bowled well, and that never happened. But our intent was always a positive one, an agressive one too in some ways. It was a dificult decesion but I don't it was that the decesion alone the cost us the match, it's over now any ways and nothing can be done about it.

[Zainub]

[quote=R W S]"I am amazed at Woolmer, to me he is the most over-rated coach," says Intikhab Alam[quote=R W S]

I don't beleive Woolmer is over rated. He can't be. He has a record that speaks for him self, he doesn't need any one to over/under rate him. Intikhab Alam is probably getting carried away with his criticism of Pakistan think tank's tactis here. I hate such personal attacks on players and athourities, there should be a fine line drawn here. I know this decesios will be talked about for some time to come, and there is no harm in all the criticsm coming through, I for once beleive there is a positive side to it, and Inzi's will learn from this experience and be more prepared come next time...but why go out and call names at the coach, who needless to say has only recently been part of the setup and is still in the process of trying to aclamitize to the cricketing culture here in the Sub Continent. Woolmer has made a distinguised reputation for him self, he's earned that and than put it at rick by opting to associate him self with Pakistan cricket. It's not an easy job by any strech of imagination. And it doesn't help when former players come out and make statements like these. I have always felt the fans of pakistan cricket are at ease with the notion of a foreigner being in charge of the national side, it is the former players that have all the problems. The Miandads, the Majid Khan and Aqib Javeds. Not to forget Intikhab Alam.

[flanflinger]

Originally Posted by Rachael

I'm sure the decision came from the new coach.. and that it was far, far from stupid: the plan didn't quite work out.. but I can't help thinking that the failure of the plan was more down to poor execution than to bad planning.

.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cric...an/3689434.stm

Even Woolmer admits that it was a mistake....Rachael, can you admit that on this occasion you may have wrong?

[Rachael]

m.. Woolmer says he's quite comfortable taking the flak if he makes mistakes.. but in no way suggest that the decision WAS a mistake: he makes it very clear that it was carefully thought out and at least as defendable as the alternative. His explanation is the same as mine: execution.

The headline misrepresents what is reported in the text: Woolmer's view that the team may have lost their nerve.

[flanflinger]

Do you ever admit your wrong? Every pundit who watched that game admits that it was an error. Yes the execution was also wrong, but it was also the wrong decision in the first place...

Woolmer took into account lots of factors, and then made the wrong call. He has admitted that in the article...

http://uk.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/CR...27SEP2004.html

In this article the general consenus is that the reason for failure was the batting. However, they do stress that the original decision was wrong!!

As stated if you look, throughout the Tournament, only on one occasion, during the serious matches (i.e. the last round) did the side batting first win, what does that say? It says that a decision to bat first was the wrong decision...