This just emphasises the extra pressure MoYo, Inzi and to a lesser extent YK are under constantly, comming in when we are 2/3 wickets down we desperately need some decent openers.
Rashid says a lot of things Afridi has failed in that position he does not have the temprement to play there maybe in ODIs he can but not in tests, he's better comming lower down as shown previously but then again our current openers are no different, we just need two openers who can see off the new ball and build a stable platform for the middle order to build on.
Had high hopes for Taufeeq Umar hopefully he will get a chance in the comming test matches.
Okay, (real serious, for a change), I like Taufeeq, he's one of my fave world cricketers. I think he's predominantly front-footed, so if he can see off Harmison and to a lesser extent, Flintoff, he shouldn't have a great deal of trouble. I think he bowls half decent off spin, too?
Yep he started of pretty well scored some runs vs Aus and did very well against SA home and away, he had a bad knee injury and was out for a long time when he came back the slectors expected instant runs he didn't get many then got dropped but i guess he can't do worser then the current two.
Anwar was class but Sohail was a bit dodgy, but yes they were the last successful Pak opening parternship but the last time these two batted together was 6 years ago, so that's 6 years without a decent opening pair!
Now it's time to think about next week's second Test and if I was selecting the Pakistan team I would have Shahid Afridi opening the batting.
My thinking is that Pakistan would be better off with one right-handed batsman and one left-handed batsman at the top of the order, rather than the two lefties they had at Lord's.
Afridi is dangerous because at the start of an innings all the fielders are in the slips and the covers and he can hit the new ball hard like the Indian opener Virender Sehwag.
His partner would be one of the two left-handers we saw at Lord's - Salman Butt or Imran Farhat, whichever one is more confident - and then the fit-again Younis Khan would play at three.
Four (Yousuf) and five (Inzamam) stay the same, with Faisal Iqbal (number three at Lord's) dropping down to six.
The 2 youngsters have failed in mere 1 test match and that too in ENG! Give them a break!! There is absolutely no need to change the opening combination.
Afridi has played 90% of his matches on flat tracks in asia and the west indies, thinking he can do a sehwag and score bigger runs on tracks in places like england is pure fanatsy.
I don't like the overuse of the term flat track bully but in afrid's case it's the only way to descibe him.
This just emphasises the extra pressure MoYo, Inzi and to a lesser extent YK are under constantly, comming in when we are 2/3 wickets down we desperately need some decent openers.
Maks,
Whatever happened to Wajahtullah Wasti?
Whatever I saw of him, he wasn't that bad atleast as compared to current crop of Pak opening batsmen?
As for the pressure on Inzi & co because of this, I agree with this. As you know, some years back, Pak had atleast fiery pace attack to balance the inability of its openers to give Pak a decent start.
But now, in the absence of Shoaib and Asif, even this area looks quite vulnerable and hence all credit to Pak for getting an honorable draw in the Lords test.
Originally posted by shakes: Afridi has played 90% of his matches on flat tracks in asia and the west indies, thinking he can do a sehwag and score bigger runs on tracks in places like england is pure fanatsy.
I don't like the overuse of the term flat track bully but in afrid's case it's the only way to descibe him.
He should be seen as an allrounder and not as an opening batsman! He doesn't even open in ODIs anymore and IMO that has helped his bowling.
That Lords deck was as flat as anything in World!!
I don't think so! I thought it was a very good test wicket and just because the scores were that doesn't mean the pitch was a pancake. IMO it was a combination of poor bowling/fielding and some excellent batting.
Pakistan have had better opening batsmen than India. Theyve had one top class opener - Saeed Anwar, while India have had zero.
Of the current lot, Butt started off impressively, but didnt make runs against India. Taufeeq Umar played really well in South Africa and since then has been inconsistent.
Atleast Pakistan seem to have identified a pool of openers - Butt, Farhat, Umar. With India, its been a nightmare with specialist openers since Sidhu left. One after another we've had openers with crippling limitations. I mean - if you consider Akash Chopra, Shiv Sunder Das and co. to be your opening options, then youve got to really think again about comparing with any team in the world, let alone Pakistan.
IMO it was a combination of poor bowling/fielding and some excellent batting.
I agree with this, though I'd still say that pitch was very good for batting all 5 days.
It was a good test wicket and Harmison and Hoggard are good test bowlers bowling so they got the youngsters out! IMO Harmison,Hoggard and Kaneria were the only "test class" bowlers on either teams.
Some experts kept on saying "oh the Lords wicket was the winner", now that is not a fair comment because that makes the ground’s man look bad! IMO it was a fair pitch which helped both batsmen and bowlers (regardless of the type of bowlers).
Originally posted by Kartikeya: Pakistan have had better opening batsmen than India. Theyve had one top class opener - Saeed Anwar, while India have had zero.
Of the current lot, Butt started off impressively, but didnt make runs against India. Taufeeq Umar played really well in South Africa and since then has been inconsistent.
Atleast Pakistan seem to have identified a pool of openers - Butt, Farhat, Umar. With India, its been a nightmare with specialist openers since Sidhu left. One after another we've had openers with crippling limitations. I mean - if you consider Akash Chopra, Shiv Sunder Das and co. to be your opening options, then youve got to really think again about comparing with any team in the world, let alone Pakistan.
