Pakistan v India - One-off ODI, Nov 13

[Occasional Fan]

Late in the day, I realise, but for those interested I have just seen that cricinfo is streaming a commentary free of charge on this match.

[Rachael]

I noticed a truly abysmal set of figures returned by Sami in the Indian innings: Mohammad Sami 6.0 0 51 0. Compare that with the others:

Shoaib Akhtar 9.0 1 55 1
Naved-ul-Hasan 9.0 1 67 1
Shahid Afridi 10.0 0 29 2
Shoaib Malik 6.0 0 31 0
Abdul Razzaq 10.0 0 49 1

Surely if Afridi and Razzaq can keep the damage down then Sami should be able to aovid being hit out of the attack.

I'm hoping the Pakistan innings gets off to a very good start and we see the Indian bowlers come under severe pressure now as that will lead to an interesting comparison: I'm keen to see how Pathan, Nehra and Khan measure up on a track on which Shoiab Akhtar was almost totally ineffective.

---------------------Update-----------------

OK.. bowling ended up being:

Bowler O M R W
I K Pathan 10.0 1 48 0
Z Khan 10.0 1 47 1
A Nehra 10.0 0 65 2
Harbhajan Singh 10.0 0 51 0
V Sehwag 6.0 0 43 1
S R Tendulkar 1.0 0 15 0
S C Ganguly 1.0 0 9 0
Yuvraj Singh 1.0 0 10 0

Nehra returned poor figures compared to Khan and Pathan (predicatable) and both the better rated Indian seamers returned more impressive figures than Akhtar (on a par with Razzaq).. and even Sehwag returned better figures than Sami.. but the Indian refusal to play a 5th bowler proved decisive: 3 overs for 33 runs was clearly the killer blow.

[Maranello]

A couple of factors that are not brought up in comparison of raw bowling analyses:

{i} It was a slow paced pitch, more suited to medium pacers than to fast bowlers..
{ii} In the Sub-continent, and in most other ODI cricket, bowling figures in ODIs depend to a great extent on when you as a bowler are asked to bowl - if its withint the first 15 overs, and the "par" run-rate the opposition are gunning for is 7 an over, than to concede 6 is well done. Similarly, at the death, conceding 6 an over might be brilliant if the batsmen are aiming to get 90 off 10 overs! Conversely, bowling in the middle overs, when the bowlers should strangle and stifle the batsmen, conceding over 5 an over is often a crime.
{iii} Individual figures in ODIs, much more than Tests, are hostage to fortune - perfectly good deliveries can be top-edged over the keeper's head for boundaries, inside edges would go between the stumps and the pads to the ropes, and so on. Margin for error is limited.
{iv} Often the bowler striving for wickets ends up having worse figures due to the role assigned to them - the field placings and the strategy for them is all-out attack, to psyche out the batsmen, or simply to get wickets. So they may have to sacrifice line and length for what the team wants.

[Maranello]

Interesting comment on today's match on cricinfo. Having seen the whole match and analysed it quite a few times over Eid dinner, I am not sure if I agree with all of it. However, the following passage on Inzi definitely has my approval!

Originally Posted by cricinfo

Inzamam led by example, pacing the chase perfectly in the middle overs. His zen-like calm sometimes seems inappropriate when he is running between wickets, but it is just what his youthful team needs from a captain, and what this situation demanded of a batsman. Nothing the Indians did could shake him, and his presence was far more daunting than his physical frame is. He is one of the batting geniuses of our age, along with Brian Lara and Sachin Tendulkar and an Australian or two, and he might end up being one of Pakistan's finest captains as well.

Imran Khan, who was commentating today, was adamant that Inzi does not get the credit he deserves, and should rank with Tendulkar, Lara and an Aussie or two as the foremost batting genius of our era. In Imran's opinion, Inzamam is the best player of fast bowling he has seen since Viv Richards, and one of the best against spin. He sometimes is unsure against medium paced seam movement, especially early on when his foot movement can be a bit slow, but after the first 15-20 minutes, the feet get moving and the sweet timing takes over.

It is a fact over the past 6-7 years, that when Inzi plays well and scores runs, Pakistan invariably win, since the others take confidence from him and play around him. His calm demeanour and cool composure are a welcome contrast to some of the other more hotheaded players! IMO this guy takes pressure better than almost any contemporary cricketer, and the importance of that to Pakistan cannot be overstated.
When Inzi fails, particularly in ODIs, but also in Tests, the whole batting line-up often collapses - there is some statistical research somewhere on cricinfo to back this up too, ie everyone's average is 10-30 runs lower in the instances where Inzi gets <30!

[Rachael]

Absolutely agree on everything you say here, Maranello... but Sami was actuall hit out of the attack.. and as one of the few senior, specialist bowlers in the side that is poor!

One single ODI is a poor guide to anything.. statistically meaningless.. but what stands out from this match is that Abdul Razzaq, I K Pathan and Z Khan seemed to be setting a "par" performance for a seamer.. one almost matched by A Nehra Shoaib Akhtar and Naved-ul-Hasan. That's six bowlers who were able to "doa job" for their team ina way that wasn't going to cost their side the game.

Sami should count himself lucky: had India picked a genuine 5th bowler his side would have lost this match.. and eyes would very much be drawn to a guy who really didn't pull his weight.. not only by the standards set by his own colleagues.. but also by the standards set by his opponents.

I'm glad Pakistan won though: India shouldn't be allowed to win when trying to fiddle 10 overs from the batsmen.

[Maranello]

Sorry, another point on Sami I forgot to mention earlier. He did have abysmal figures today and I feel he bowled much worse than Shoaib.

However, he has just come back from injury and apparently did not have a lot of training before the game. Not presenting an excuse - simply another fact to be mulled over and considered.

Shoaib on other hand bowled very well - he had an initial spell of 4 overs, when SRT (Tendulkar) and Sehwag were looking to get off to a flier, and conceded only 17 runs off the 4, with SRT being dropped at mid-on too!

His 4 overs at the death were very good too - Yuvraj Singh and the other batsmen were hitting all other bowlers for 10-12 an over at that stage, and Shoaib managed to restrict them to less than that, he even had an over for 3 runs at the death, and another for 6 - and on a belter of a batting track, he did pretty ok.

But the real star of the show was Afridi - bowled when Pakistan were under some pressure from Sehwag and Laxman, and dominated the batsmen throughout his 10 overs.

Edit:
Wrote the above before reading your reply, but yes, absolutely agree with you. Sami's bowling was not good at all and he should carefully review his approach - Razzaq did much much better than Sami simply by bowling line and length, and to his field.
My earlier post was addressed at Shoaib Akhtar's figures - he bowled much better than 9-1-55-1 suggests - the bowling analysis on paper looks very ordinary, but it was not.

[Maranello]

Originally Posted by Rachael

I'm glad Pakistan won though: India shouldn't be allowed to win when trying to fiddle 10 overs from the batsmen.

Quite!

2 very defensive moves by India, both of which I do not agree with:

1. Not having an all-rounder or a 5th bowler, and getting 10 overs from part-timers. Either they should use the part-timers earlier, and more aggressively, or play someone like Powar, a spinner who can bat quite well.

2. Having Dravid as keeper also cost them a few in byes, and wides going down to the ropes which a genuine keeper (not Patel though!) could have prevented.


Both of these are long-standing Indian traits - Ganguly and Wright give a lot weight to their "7 batsmen" strategy. I think its nonsensical to be so negative in ODIs, on perfect batting tracks. If the top 6 do not do much in 50 overs, the 7th is not going to win you the match (particularly when the top 6 are: Tendulkar, Sehwag, Laxman, Ganguly, Dravid and Yuvraj/Kaif).
Woolmer has a point when he says that 7 batsmen is a wrong signal to send your team. It also makes the other 6 batsmen overconfident, and there can be a lot of "passing the buck" - so the top order will take unnecessary risks, because they know they have a 'deep batting line-up'.
Having

[Maranello]

Pakistan v India encounters have come to represent the apogee of the shorter form of the game. The passion, interest, drama, excitement and sheer joy generated by the dozens of classic encounters over the years has given untold satisfaction to even those of us who would rather have their cricketers wear whites, thank you very much. Recent games between these two have had global television audiences in the hundreds of millions. Hence some statistical analysis on this encounter would not go amiss.

Pakistan have consistently had the better of India in ODIs over time - winning 63% of the 90 ODIs which had a result, with India winning the other 37%. Even of the 14 ODIs played between these two teams in India, Pakistan have won 10 (71%) and India only 4.

Pakistan's win on Saturday (Nov-13) at Calcutta was their fourth on the trot against India. Woolmer now has a 4 out of 4 record against them, and seems to have the measure of Wright - if that will not give him job security as Pakistan coach, nothing will! Inzamam too has had the better of Ganguly, winning 6 as captain against India and losing 3. On the subject of consecutive winnings streaks, the following makes interesting reading:

Pakistan winning streaks

• The longest was in 1998/98, starting in the Sahara Cup at Toronto. Pakistan won eight in a row.
• In addition, Pakistan won four consecutive ODIs between 1978 and 1982 (two different series).
• Pakistan won five consecutive ODIs between Nov-1985 and Feb-1987. The second match of this 5 match sequence was the famous Sharjah match in which Miandad hit a six off the last ball. This sequence was broken by the Indian "win" at Hyderabad Deccan, which under today's rules would have been a tie.
• After that one loss at Hyderabad, Pakistan won the next five games consecutively too. The last three games of that series in 1987, and the next two in Sharjah in 1987 and 1988.
• Pakistan lost the next game after this sequence to India, at Dhaka in the Asia Cup 1988. But after that started yet another winning streak against India, winning four on the trot. The third game of these was the Nehru Cup encounter at Calcutta. This sequence of wins was broken by a "no result" at Karachi - match abandoned due to crowd trouble in the 1989 tour.
• Apart from the eight games streak mentioned above, the next winning streak for Pakistan is the current one, where they have won four in a row.
• In addition, there have been two other incidences of three consecutive wins by Pakistan, which I have not listed here.

India winning streaks

• India has no winning streaks against Pakistan of four matches, let alone five or eight.
• The best India have done is three consecutive wins in 1985, and another three on the trot in 1983 and 1984. This means two sequence of three wins in a row, both of which are over 20 years old.

[haseebbutt007]

I think Pakistanis played excellent cricket in that match. Altough some of the factors were in there favour but the most important thing which went against them was the pressure of playing in india .It was very difficut to chase a huge target of 292 runs in front of a huge crowd of 100,000 spectators among which most of them were indians.
In this match , Afridi bowled really well he was the one who put indians on the back foot . Abdul Razzaq also bowled well with in his Limits.Most of the Indian batsmen had starts but they could not capitalize on it. Yuvraj was the one who gave indian the upper had in the match due to his flashing inning .yuvraj's timming was excellent.
Despite of due factor if Indians could take 3 or 4 early wickets in the first 20 overs when the ball was hard and was slipping from the pitch after then that match would have been interesting . I think Indiains should play 5 regulr bowlers and a regular wicket keeper.
Salman Butt played an excellent inning he is a great prospect for pakistan. Inzamam was nervous in the start but he did not away his wicket . in the end pakistan won that match convincingly .