Yesterday, when asked about all that retirement episode, Misbah smiled and tried to cut a joke, “I talked about that in 2016. It’s 2017. What has gone, has gone. As of now, it is completely out of my mind.”
Yesterday's joke made as much sense as did Misbah's plans today, in SCG. He might have left 2016 behind but his bowlers haven’t. Nor have his fielders, who kept repeating what they would do in 2016 and, pretty much, through all those years behind them.
Pakistan at SCG was no different from Pakistan at MCG or Gabba, not even Hamilton or Christchurch. That puts forth a few questions, even more pertinent than Misbah’s retirement, very first of which is: Do Misbah’s grinding tactics even work in the world across Tasman sea?
Over the years, Misbah has earned a repute of slowing down things and testing the patience of his opponents with his batting as well as his captaincy. Though his tactics worked in most parts of the world except South Africa but the conditions down under were deemed to be a real test of his philosophy.
Be it Dhoni, Cook or Matthews, every captain has recently been tested down under. But Misbah has come under more scrutiny than anyone else. The bottom-line here is, you can’t block the flow of runs in Aussie conditions. And the punchline, though harsh it may sound, is that Misbah has failed to derive any suitable conclusion that could even be helpful, if not useful.
If we revisit all of Misbah’s tactics over his last three games, there comes a lot of confusion as well as misery, if we have to dig out some justifications. Most recent of those was the debate around that six three leg-side field for Yasir Shah in Melbourne. Did Misbah fail Yasir or, was it the reverse of it?
When all the analysts were done with the debate, Yasir came to confess it was his idea not Misbah’s.
It could be Yasir sharing the blame with his Captain, and it might even offer some relief for Misbah and his fans but Yasir’s confession rings the bell for future of Pakistan cricket. Let’s put it on the table and go through a bit of dissection.
A, Misbah set the defensive fields and forced Yasir to bowl a certain line. That didn’t work in Gabba. That couldn’t work in Melbourne. Why would Misbah persist with it?
B, Assuming Misbah didn’t want that because it hadn’t worked in Gabba, why would he let Yasir repeat it at MCG? Wasn’t he the man in charge there?
And in both the cases, if he had to control things, why couldn’t Misbah come up with a plan B?
And if, we assume, Misbah had a plan B, why wouldn’t Yasir follow him?
Only two probable answers could provide a bit of reason to all this irrationality.
One, Misbah didn’t have any plan B. Two, Misbah had a plan B, but Yasir refused to follow it.
In either case, things seem worse for both Misbah and Yasir, and more than that, for Pakistan.
Let’s employ another example. Today, Yasir was given a five four field and used as an attacking option rather than what he was in the last two games. But even that role reversal and field shuffle didn’t work. Neither Yasir nor Misbah succeeded in blocking the flow of runs.
Whatever was going through Misbah’s mind, when Warner was toying with all his ploys, and whatever he tried to counter it didn’t work at all.
Yasir is just one example. Same goes for Wahab and Imran, even Amir who has been wicketless in the last game and thus far in this game.
This Pakistan bowling, of late, has looked short of plans under Misbah. They are not short of options, though, but a random mix of options doesn’t qualify to be called a plan.
Something must be terribly wrong with this bowling, as well as, this captaincy.
What could it be?
Probably bowlers have gone nuts. They are too dumb to follow a simple plan. Or it could be that Misbah doesn’t even have any plans to help his bowlers. Or maybe bowlers get the plans but they find them too unreliable to follow. Or, there could be a remote possibility, that bowlers have too many plans to follow, and prioritise things on their own.
Are they capable of coming up with a plan of their own? I guess, we kind of know the answer.
There is, evidently, a lack of coordination between the bowlers and their captain. There could be a trust deficit between the two. The captain could be doubtful of his bowlers’ capabilities and the bowlers could be wary of his plans. And neither of the factors seems to be helping Pakistan.
There has to be a bridge to fill in the wide blank space between both the parties. Support staff should come up with suggestions, rather solutions. But in this case, either is yet to be seen.
Is there a conflict of interest between the team and the management?
Is it a battle between two schools of thought?
Or, is it, simply, the end of an era?
We might not like the answers but, certainly, we know them.
Yesterday's joke made as much sense as did Misbah's plans today, in SCG. He might have left 2016 behind but his bowlers haven’t. Nor have his fielders, who kept repeating what they would do in 2016 and, pretty much, through all those years behind them.
Pakistan at SCG was no different from Pakistan at MCG or Gabba, not even Hamilton or Christchurch. That puts forth a few questions, even more pertinent than Misbah’s retirement, very first of which is: Do Misbah’s grinding tactics even work in the world across Tasman sea?
Over the years, Misbah has earned a repute of slowing down things and testing the patience of his opponents with his batting as well as his captaincy. Though his tactics worked in most parts of the world except South Africa but the conditions down under were deemed to be a real test of his philosophy.
Be it Dhoni, Cook or Matthews, every captain has recently been tested down under. But Misbah has come under more scrutiny than anyone else. The bottom-line here is, you can’t block the flow of runs in Aussie conditions. And the punchline, though harsh it may sound, is that Misbah has failed to derive any suitable conclusion that could even be helpful, if not useful.
If we revisit all of Misbah’s tactics over his last three games, there comes a lot of confusion as well as misery, if we have to dig out some justifications. Most recent of those was the debate around that six three leg-side field for Yasir Shah in Melbourne. Did Misbah fail Yasir or, was it the reverse of it?
When all the analysts were done with the debate, Yasir came to confess it was his idea not Misbah’s.
It could be Yasir sharing the blame with his Captain, and it might even offer some relief for Misbah and his fans but Yasir’s confession rings the bell for future of Pakistan cricket. Let’s put it on the table and go through a bit of dissection.
A, Misbah set the defensive fields and forced Yasir to bowl a certain line. That didn’t work in Gabba. That couldn’t work in Melbourne. Why would Misbah persist with it?
B, Assuming Misbah didn’t want that because it hadn’t worked in Gabba, why would he let Yasir repeat it at MCG? Wasn’t he the man in charge there?
And in both the cases, if he had to control things, why couldn’t Misbah come up with a plan B?
And if, we assume, Misbah had a plan B, why wouldn’t Yasir follow him?
Only two probable answers could provide a bit of reason to all this irrationality.
One, Misbah didn’t have any plan B. Two, Misbah had a plan B, but Yasir refused to follow it.
In either case, things seem worse for both Misbah and Yasir, and more than that, for Pakistan.
Let’s employ another example. Today, Yasir was given a five four field and used as an attacking option rather than what he was in the last two games. But even that role reversal and field shuffle didn’t work. Neither Yasir nor Misbah succeeded in blocking the flow of runs.
Whatever was going through Misbah’s mind, when Warner was toying with all his ploys, and whatever he tried to counter it didn’t work at all.
Yasir is just one example. Same goes for Wahab and Imran, even Amir who has been wicketless in the last game and thus far in this game.
This Pakistan bowling, of late, has looked short of plans under Misbah. They are not short of options, though, but a random mix of options doesn’t qualify to be called a plan.
Something must be terribly wrong with this bowling, as well as, this captaincy.
What could it be?
Probably bowlers have gone nuts. They are too dumb to follow a simple plan. Or it could be that Misbah doesn’t even have any plans to help his bowlers. Or maybe bowlers get the plans but they find them too unreliable to follow. Or, there could be a remote possibility, that bowlers have too many plans to follow, and prioritise things on their own.
Are they capable of coming up with a plan of their own? I guess, we kind of know the answer.
There is, evidently, a lack of coordination between the bowlers and their captain. There could be a trust deficit between the two. The captain could be doubtful of his bowlers’ capabilities and the bowlers could be wary of his plans. And neither of the factors seems to be helping Pakistan.
There has to be a bridge to fill in the wide blank space between both the parties. Support staff should come up with suggestions, rather solutions. But in this case, either is yet to be seen.
Is there a conflict of interest between the team and the management?
Is it a battle between two schools of thought?
Or, is it, simply, the end of an era?
We might not like the answers but, certainly, we know them.
No comments:
Post a Comment