2nd test Multan

[miked]

The rumours are that Stokes will play instead of Woakes although he prob
wont bowl the 35 overs CW did; while PAk have dropped Babar, Shaheen and
Naseem Shah [seems very unfair as he looked their sharpest bowler unless
hes unfit], recalled 2 elderly spinners in Zaheed and Noman and some
newbies like Kamran and Mumtaz.

Apparently they are gonna play on the same pitch and theres nothing in
the laws to prevent it, but it seems very odd. Everyone assumes it will
be a turner but if the cracks that were visible at the end of the test,
are still apparent it could help the quicks as well. Plus an old pitch
usually has uneven bounce, so the toss could be doubly important.

mike

[miked]

Post by miked
The rumours are that Stokes will play instead of Woakes although he prob
wont bowl the 35 overs CW did; while PAk have dropped Babar, Shaheen and
Naseem Shah [seems very unfair as he looked their sharpest bowler unless
hes unfit], recalled 2 elderly spinners in Zaheed and Noman and some
newbies like Kamran and Mumtaz.
Apparently they are gonna play on the same pitch and theres nothing in
the laws to prevent it, but it seems very odd. Everyone assumes it will
be a turner but if the cracks that were visible at the end of the test,
are still apparent it could help the quicks as well. Plus an old pitch
usually has uneven bounce, so the toss could be doubly important.
mike

Potts in for Atkinson who bowled 39 overs on the flatty.

mike

[John Hall]

Post by miked

Post by miked
The rumours are that Stokes will play instead of Woakes although he prob
wont bowl the 35 overs CW did; while PAk have dropped Babar, Shaheen and
Naseem Shah [seems very unfair as he looked their sharpest bowler unless
hes unfit],

Yes, though Babar and Shaheen have been out of form, it does smack
rather of panic to drop three of their best and most experienced
players.

Post by miked

Post by miked
recalled 2 elderly spinners in Zaheed and Noman and some
newbies like Kamran and Mumtaz.
Apparently they are gonna play on the same pitch and theres nothing in
the laws to prevent it, but it seems very odd. Everyone assumes it will
be a turner but if the cracks that were visible at the end of the test,
are still apparent it could help the quicks as well. Plus an old pitch
usually has uneven bounce, so the toss could be doubly important.

The my think it's the only way of getting a result at Multan and, as
they are one down I can understand why they did it. I don't suppose
England's bowlers will be complaining. And as Stokes doesn't like draws,
he probably won't mind either.

Post by miked
Potts in for Atkinson who bowled 39 overs on the flatty.
mike

Yep. I imagine for the 3rd match it might be Carse's turn for a rest.

[miked]

If Duckett had nabbed Kamran on 79, Pak would have been 178-5, so a
chance missed, quite lucky that he later gave Bash the charge and
missed, but again Potts was right that he had got Rizwan, but overruled
by the Root and the others, so 2 chances missed by england to take
control, similar really to the summer, when they kept dropping chances.
However bowlers stuck at it, but with that crazy paving I expected the
ball to do more. This was probably the best i've seen Carse bowl, Potts
gave it everything, and surely this must be the first time all 3 quicks
play for Durham. For Pak at 19-2 this was a strong recovery and Kamrans
100 on debut proves they were right to drop Babar, who they say hasnt
got to 50 in 2 years.

mike

[miked]

Stokes better make some big runs for england becos they really could do
with a 3rd seamer like woakes, to support carse and potts. As usual
england struggling to finish off the tail as pak move closer to 400. 4
bowlers and isnt enough

mike

[John Hall]

Post by miked
Stokes better make some big runs for england becos they really could do
with a 3rd seamer like woakes, to support carse and potts. As usual
england struggling to finish off the tail as pak move closer to 400. 4
bowlers and isnt enough
mike

On this pitch, Root's bowling isn't negligible. And Stokes got some
reverse swing, so I thing England have enough bowling.

However the pitch finally seemed to deteriorate quite sharply late on
day two, so the main concern is whether we can make enough runs to keep
us in the match. Ideally I'd like a sizeable lead, since we have to bat
last, but that hardly seems to be possible so I'd settle for a deficit
of less than 50. I hope Bashir was taking note of the line outside the
right-hander's off stump that Sajid bowled, and won't bowl a line on the
stumps like he did in the first innings.

[miked]

Post by John Hall

Post by miked
Stokes better make some big runs for england becos they really could do
with a 3rd seamer like woakes, to support carse and potts. As usual
england struggling to finish off the tail as pak move closer to 400. 4
bowlers and isnt enough
mike

On this pitch, Root's bowling isn't negligible. And Stokes got some
reverse swing, so I thing England have enough bowling.
However the pitch finally seemed to deteriorate quite sharply late on
day two, so the main concern is whether we can make enough runs to keep
us in the match. Ideally I'd like a sizeable lead, since we have to bat
last, but that hardly seems to be possible so I'd settle for a deficit
of less than 50. I hope Bashir was taking note of the line outside the
right-hander's off stump that Sajid bowled, and won't bowl a line on the
stumps like he did in the first innings.

yes both here and in the last match he bowled very defensively. Also
once
duckett was out it might have been sensible to send in a nightstalker
for the last 45 mins, rather than stokes, who yet again showed hes not
so great against spin, although seeing that brook then was bowled too, i
guess he would have had to come in at the end anyway. Losing 3 wkts in 7
balls handed the initiative straight back to pak. But yes england need
to get as near as poss to pak, because it looks as if batting last will
be very difficult.

mike

[John Hall]

Post by miked

Post by John Hall

Post by miked
Stokes better make some big runs for england becos they really could do
with a 3rd seamer like woakes, to support carse and potts. As usual
england struggling to finish off the tail as pak move closer to 400. 4
bowlers and isnt enough
mike

On this pitch, Root's bowling isn't negligible. And Stokes got some
reverse swing, so I thing England have enough bowling.
However the pitch finally seemed to deteriorate quite sharply late on
day two, so the main concern is whether we can make enough runs to keep
us in the match. Ideally I'd like a sizeable lead, since we have to bat
last, but that hardly seems to be possible so I'd settle for a deficit
of less than 50. I hope Bashir was taking note of the line outside the
right-hander's off stump that Sajid bowled, and won't bowl a line on the
stumps like he did in the first innings.

yes both here and in the last match he bowled very defensively. Also
once
duckett was out it might have been sensible to send in a nightstalker
for the last 45 mins, rather than stokes, who yet again showed hes not
so great against spin,

It can't have helped that he hasn't batted for quite a while, but I
think when Duckett got out there was still too long left in the day to
send in a nightwatchman.

Post by miked
although seeing that brook then was bowled too, i
guess he would have had to come in at the end anyway. Losing 3 wkts in 7
balls handed the initiative straight back to pak.

Duckett's wicket was crucial, as his brilliant use of the sweep and
reverse sweep was disrupting the bowlers' lines and lengths. Nobody else
seemed comfortable for long.

Post by miked
But yes england need
to get as near as poss to pak, because it looks as if batting last will
be very difficult.
mike

Yep. If Stokes hadn't played, I wonder if Pope would have made the same
call at the toss. If not, it's a pity that Stokes declared himself fit.
:)

[John Hall]

In message <***@www.novabbs.com>, miked
<***@library.net> writes
<snip>

Post by miked
But yes england need
to get as near as poss to pak, because it looks as if batting last will
be very difficult.
mike

Well a deficit of 75 was about par given what had happened overnight,
and had Leach not displayed an unexpected ability for quick scoring it
would have been worse.

England's last faint chance probably disappeared when Salman was dropped
twice in an over off Carse. Root's chance wasn't easy given how close he
was standing, but Smith's was straightforward. I blame all the
commentators remarking on how well he'd been keeping (not to mention
Scyld Berry in my morning Telegraph) for it. It clearly brought sod's
law into play. Even before the openers went quickly, it was hard to see
England scoring almost 300 on this pitch.

[miked]

Post by John Hall
<snip>

Post by miked
But yes england need
to get as near as poss to pak, because it looks as if batting last will
be very difficult.
mike

Well a deficit of 75 was about par given what had happened overnight,
and had Leach not displayed an unexpected ability for quick scoring it
would have been worse.
England's last faint chance probably disappeared when Salman was dropped
twice in an over off Carse. Root's chance wasn't easy given how close he
was standing, but Smith's was straightforward. I blame all the
commentators remarking on how well he'd been keeping (not to mention
Scyld Berry in my morning Telegraph) for it. It clearly brought sod's
law into play. Even before the openers went quickly, it was hard to see
England scoring almost 300 on this pitch.

more records of a different kind; Noman and Sajid took all the wkts for
Pak in the match, dunno when this last happened, but there was L&L at OT
in 1956. Also players on the same side taking 7for and 8for in the same
match.

Not surprising engalnd lost, but disappointing that they seemed to have
learned nothing about playing spin on turners from 2 woeful tours of
india Our spinners were rather disappointing too and the bowlers were
let down by the fielding. The horde of pakistani selectors will be
pleased this gamble came off, but supposing stokes had won the toss,
might it have been the opposite outcome?

mike

[HVS]

Post by miked

Post by John Hall
<snip>

Post by miked
But yes england need
to get as near as poss to pak, because it looks as if batting
last will be very difficult.
mike

Well a deficit of 75 was about par given what had happened
overnight, and had Leach not displayed an unexpected ability for
quick scoring it would have been worse.
England's last faint chance probably disappeared when Salman was
dropped twice in an over off Carse. Root's chance wasn't easy
given how close he was standing, but Smith's was straightforward.
I blame all the commentators remarking on how well he'd been
keeping (not to mention Scyld Berry in my morning Telegraph) for
it. It clearly brought sod's law into play. Even before the
openers went quickly, it was hard to see England scoring almost
300 on this pitch.

more records of a different kind; Noman and Sajid took all the
wkts for Pak in the match, dunno when this last happened, but
there was L&L at OT in 1956. Also players on the same side taking
7for and 8for in the same match.
Not surprising engalnd lost, but disappointing that they seemed to
have learned nothing about playing spin on turners from 2 woeful
tours of india Our spinners were rather disappointing too and the
bowlers were let down by the fielding. The horde of pakistani
selectors will be pleased this gamble came off, but supposing
stokes had won the toss, might it have been the opposite outcome?

Is it common to use the same pitch for two international tests with
just a few days between them? (The Indian commentators on CricBuzz
referred to it as "a spinning (technically ninth day) track".)

Who would have taken the decision to do that, rather than to move to a
different pitch at the ground?

[John Hall]

Post by HVS
Is it common to use the same pitch for two international tests with
just a few days between them? (The Indian commentators on CricBuzz
referred to it as "a spinning (technically ninth day) track".)

I believe it's unique. Of course it's very rare to play two successive
Tests at the same ground, though I think it happened in England in 2020
because of Covid.

Post by HVS
Who would have taken the decision to do that, rather than to move to a
different pitch at the ground?

Presumably the Pakistan board/selectors, in the hope of winning the toss
and gaining an advantage. Until they lost the first Test, the intention
had been to use a different pitch.

[HVS]

Post by John Hall

Post by HVS
Is it common to use the same pitch for two international tests
with just a few days between them? (The Indian commentators on
CricBuzz referred to it as "a spinning (technically ninth day)
track".)

I believe it's unique. Of course it's very rare to play two
successive Tests at the same ground, though I think it happened in
England in 2020 because of Covid.

Post by HVS
Who would have taken the decision to do that, rather than to move
to a different pitch at the ground?

Presumably the Pakistan board/selectors, in the hope of winning
the toss and gaining an advantage. Until they lost the first Test,
the intention had been to use a different pitch.

Thanks; interesting.

[David North]

Post by miked

Post by John Hall
<snip>

Post by miked
But yes england need
to get as near as poss to pak, because it looks as if batting last will
be very difficult.
mike

Well a deficit of 75 was about par given what had happened overnight,
and had Leach not displayed an unexpected ability for quick scoring it
would have been worse.
England's last faint chance probably disappeared when Salman was dropped
twice in an over off Carse. Root's chance wasn't easy given how close he
was standing, but Smith's was straightforward. I blame all the
commentators remarking on how well he'd been keeping (not to mention
Scyld Berry in my morning Telegraph) for it. It clearly brought sod's
law into play. Even before the openers went quickly, it was hard to see
England scoring almost 300 on this pitch.

more records of a different kind; Noman and Sajid took all the wkts for
Pak in the match, dunno when this last happened, but there was L&L at OT
in 1956.

Previous occurrences:

Monty Noble 13/87, Hugh Trumble 7/87, Aus v Eng, MCG, 1901/02
(Sydney Barnes and Colin Blythe took 19 wickets between them for England
in that match)

Colin Blythe 11/102, George Hirst 9/86, Eng v Aus, Edgbaston, 1909

Bert Vogler 12/181, Aubrey Faulkner 8/140, SA v Eng, Jo'burg, 1909/10

Jim Laker 19/90, Tony Lock 1/106, Eng v Aus, Old Trafford, 1956

Fazal Mahmood 13/114, Khan Mohammad 7/112, Pak v Aus, Karachi, 1956/57

Bob Massie 16/137, Dennis Lillee 4/140, Aus v Eng, Lord's, 1972

Post by miked
Also players on the same side taking 7for and 8for in the same
match.

That's never happened before. There are two instances of two different
players taking 7-fors for the same side:

Richie Benaud 7/72, Ray Lindwall 7/43, Aus v Ind, Madras, 1956/57

Glenn McGrath 7/76, Mike Kasprowicz 7/36, Aus v Eng, The Oval, 1997
(Phil Tufnell took 7/66 in Australia's 1st innings)

[John Hall]

Post by miked
more records of a different kind; Noman and Sajid took all the wkts for
Pak in the match, dunno when this last happened, but there was L&L at OT
in 1956. Also players on the same side taking 7for and 8for in the same
match.
Not surprising engalnd lost, but disappointing that they seemed to have
learned nothing about playing spin on turners from 2 woeful tours of
india

Well conditions were pretty extreme by the end. Pakistan only made 221
in their second innings, and would probably only have made about 150 had
Salman not been dropped twice early on. In the light of that, England's
second innings doesn't look so bad. The collapse in our first innings
late on day 2 was what really made the difference of course, but even
then the pitch was doing enough to make it tricky to start on..

Post by miked
Our spinners were rather disappointing too

Bashir was poor in the first innings, but apart from that I think they
did all right. Yes, Pakistan's two main spinners were better, but they
were very good indeed.

Post by miked
and the bowlers were
let down by the fielding.

Yep. Disappointing after we'd fielded very well in the first match.

Post by miked
The horde of pakistani selectors will be
pleased this gamble came off, but supposing stokes had won the toss,
might it have been the opposite outcome?

Very probably.