Akmal as opener can balance the side? [Archive] - PakPassion

zorawar

15th March 2005, 16:16

Akmal clearly showed in the first test that he can play the Indian pace attack with the new ball on Indian pitches.

Although I am in favor of playing a specialist opener in Tests, at the moment our openers are fighting for form and we need to make room for 5 bowlers in the team to have any chance of bowling out the Indians twice.

Why not try this line-up :

Akmal
Taufeeq (only cuz Bob said he will get a continued run on this tour)
Younus (Since Inzi has confirmed he will be playing)
Inzi
Youhana
Kamal
Razzaq
Afridi/Arshad
Sami
Khalil
Kaneria

We still have Razzaq at 7 so enough batting depth and now we can have a lot of flexibility in the bowling attack and can play 3 pacers and 2 spinners or even 3 spinners with Sami-Razzaq depending on the pitch.

Gasherbrum

15th March 2005, 16:18

please remeber the pitch was on its 5th day, barely any movement and keeping quite low. also, he had a few reaching drives that flew over the 3rd slip region.
i think he's fine at where he is. we need an opener to step up and take the spot that is open, not for someone to fill in.

Rob H

15th March 2005, 16:23

I made a post on this and no one agreed with me! :(

zorawar

15th March 2005, 16:23

Gasher I agree that a specialist opener should be the first choice. And with that reasoning It should be Yasir Hameed openeing with Taufeeq.

But when Afridi is being discussed as opening option then aren't we talking about someone who is going to play his shots at the start anyway?

If Afridi is going to open he will play riskier shots than Akmal won't he?

So why not use a comparatively safer option of Akmal as opener.

GamBiTT

15th March 2005, 16:38

Zorawar: Not a bad idea to open with Akmal !

I think that having a fifth bowling option poses a lot of tricky questions to the team management and this can be one of the solution. Using Afridi as an opener is always going to be a very risky proposition so perhaps any other option seems to be better at the moment.

It will be interesting to see what the team management chooses. What I do like is that the Indians will also be wondering what will be Pakistan's lineup? From one perspective it gives instability to our batting with the changes, but from another it does give a kind of a surprise to the Indian setup and their bowling plan against us. By posing a question to the Indian team in the form that we may open with:

Taufeeq, Akmal OR Taufeeq, Razzaq OR Taufeeq, Younis OR Taufeeq, Afridi

And if Taufeeq isn't there .. then that is an entirely new set of options :).

merabhai

15th March 2005, 16:47

gambitt ..future star of what.

me as an emerging player...i,m on the verge of retiring.

zorawar

15th March 2005, 16:50

Well Taufeeq will be there as Bob has planned to give him a run for this series. Otherwise Yasir should be the next in line to replace him...

With the quality of attack we have and the quality of Indian Batsmen, 5 bowlers are a must to have any chances of a Test win in this series.

merabhai

15th March 2005, 16:52

not a bad side .afridi should be in and malik for taufiq not yasir for sure.

zorawar

15th March 2005, 16:52

merabhai ...these are automatic titles assigned by pakpassion depending on the # of posts you have....

Amjid is "living legend" :)

merabhai

15th March 2005, 16:57

i know zorawar just pulling tata,s leg.i hope he does not come up with a 30 line answer. :-^

Cartman

15th March 2005, 16:58

Way I see it, Afridi and Akmal cannot do worse job than Butt and Umar so just improvising Zorawar's suggested side a bit more to give you more depth

1. Afridi
2. Akmal
3. Khan
4. Inzi
5. Youhana
6. Kamal
7. Razzaq
8. Sami
9. Khalil
10. Arshad
11. Kaneria

:)

What do you guys say to that?

sajjad

15th March 2005, 17:00

the current guys are fine. just need to apply themselves more but since we need an extra bowler afridi may come in instaed of Butt and since rana maybe injured, khalil may get a chance.

im looking forward to afridi's bowling on this semi grassy, semi turning wkt

zorawar

15th March 2005, 17:10

Cartman ... going in with 2 non-specialist openers just to play 6 bowlers is a big overkill.

on the Stability scale I would rate the opening pairs as below ASSUMING BUTT IS DROPPED which Inzi indicated already:

Taufeeq-Yasir or Taufeeq-Malik : 2 specialist batsmen, but then it becomes impossible to fit 5th bowler.

Taufeeq - Akmal : Next best option available with an in-form player who has shown he can play the current opposition attack. 5 bowlers possible with this option.

Taufeeq - Afridi: Playing Afridi as opener is always a big gamble as you know he will go for his shots no matter what. With the #3 batsman (younus) already struggling, why introduce further risk at the top of the order? He does give you the 5th bowler option.

Rob H

15th March 2005, 17:13

Come on people. There is already a post on this already.

Officer Barbrady

15th March 2005, 17:15

I think he should bat at number 7.

Cartman

15th March 2005, 17:19

I was just kidding with my previous post, man. I am never going to favor opening with Afridi in the test, quite honestly, Akmal could probably be a reasonable risk though.

Way I see it we need 5 bowlers in the side no matter what. I would prefer them to be Sami, Khalil, Razzaq, Kaneria and Arshad Khan. If we play Afridi too that gives us added strength in bowling but lessens our batting strength because he is a wild card. (Besides who are you going to sit out? YK is playing and we cannot drop Kamal, he scored 90 plus in the first test, You cannot drop inzi and youhana)

If we play the 5 bowlers, it means we have to drop one batsman, and having Akmal open with Umar would probably be the best bet, even though I would prefer Butt to be retained and Umar to be dropped.

Akmal
Umar
YK
Inzi
Youhana
Kamal
Razzaq
Sami
Kaneria
Khalil
Arshad

Have to take a gamble and weaken our batting if we wish to play positive cricket and plan to win. If they want to play it safe to draw it might as well go in with Sami, Razzaq and Kaneria only and stuff the side with
7 batsmen.

Hashim

15th March 2005, 17:25

Akmal is a excellent player, but not a opener.

Cartman

15th March 2005, 17:27

He scored a hundred against West Indies as an opener and also faced the new ball in the second innings of the Mohali test.

He may not be a genuine opener but then again I dont see him doing any worse than the current specialist openers we have.

Hashim

15th March 2005, 17:32

Excellent point!

Lahoria

15th March 2005, 17:38

Akmal is most likely going to be opening during the ODIs and I find nothing wrong with that, however when it comes to test cricket we can't rely on stop gap measure and have to sooner rather than later come up with a good opening partnership.

I think BOB is a great coach but he has the tendency to chop and change too much. We need to stick with one opening pair atleast through the series and then evalutate. If we start evaluating players after every game then even Inzi will find it hard to play every game.

the true passionist

15th March 2005, 17:38

Gasher I agree that a specialist opener should be the first choice. And with that reasoning It should be Yasir Hameed openeing with Taufeeq.
But when Afridi is being discussed as opening option then aren't we talking about someone who is going to play his shots at the start anyway?

If Afridi is going to open he will play riskier shots than Akmal won't he?

So why not use a comparatively safer option of Akmal as opener.

Yasir is not a specialist opener...
he is a specialist no.3
so we should let the two continue.

Lahoria

15th March 2005, 17:42

Agreed, I have said this many times and I'll say it again Yasir is a middle order batsmen so stop destroying his career by playing him as an opener.

zorawar

15th March 2005, 17:42

Everyone assumed that Bob will keep his word on persisting with same opening pair for the series. And I am all in favor for playing specialist batsmen as openers.

I am also ONLY suggesting Akmal as an opener as a better alternative to The Afridi as an opener.

With 4 Pakistani bowlers not proving to be as effective as all of us would have hoped for, it is imperative we play 5 bowlers for any hopes of a Win and Bob and Inzi are obviously realising that.

OZGOD

15th March 2005, 17:44

Crazy talk, moving Akmal to open in a Test match on the basis of one knock. Using that argument, why not open with Inzy and Youhana? They've scored heaps of hundreds.

Akmal is best as a lower order batsman who can provide stubborn resistance in the latter stages of an innings, a la Gilchrist. It's extremely demoralising for a bowling side to get half the team out, particularly the top and middle order, and then be unable to break through to the tail. The mental impact of that is enormous. Leave Akmal where he is. He's already keeping - if you're going to ask him to open the innings because some other bugger's not doing his job, why not ask him to bowl too?

Crazy talk, this shuffling the batting order based upon who's in form at the time. Stick with Butt and Umar as openers for the series - they need to develop as a combination together.

the true passionist

15th March 2005, 17:45

Uzi

15th March 2005, 17:47

Yes I also reckon that Akmal should stay where he is.

zorawar

15th March 2005, 17:50

If our attack was Shoaib, Shabbir, Sami, Kaneria and Razzaq, we would not be having this discussion.

You have to keep the team needs in mind and NOT be rigid that we have to play the same pair throughout the series no matter what the rest of the team is capable of or not.

WE NEED 5 BOWLERS TO HAVE ANY HOPE OF A WIN

Officer Barbrady

15th March 2005, 17:52

OZGOD

15th March 2005, 17:54

If they've been out of form after a while, definitely. If their technique is flawed, then yes. But surely you don't want to pull them out just after one or two failures?

Note that I'm just speaking from the OZ perspective - we try not to overreact after one or two failures. Look how long it took us to drop Brett Lee from the side, and Matt Hayden. Accountability is important, but so is stability.

That said, when we do decide a player is not suitable and we drop him, it will take him FOREVER to get back into the side (eg Hayden, Martyn). Some of them NEVER make it back into the side once they've been discarded. So we're loyal, but not stupid. :-D

the true passionist

15th March 2005, 17:55

yeh...there's no point playing 2 allrounders...to make up the 5 count...
u better play 4 spercialist bowlers and a specialist batsman..
that is more attacking i reckon..
playing too many all-rounders in tests is defensive technique i reckon.

zorawar

15th March 2005, 18:00

Cartman

15th March 2005, 18:09

As Zorawar said I have been whining about for so long too.. We need 5 bowlers no matter what because keeping the standard of our current bowlers in mind, 4 aint gonna win us a match. Then again if we just wanna play defensive and plan to draw, by all means play just Razzaq, Sami and Kaneria and put Afridi in there too.

Officer Barbrady

15th March 2005, 18:13

I disagree. I d say you need your BEST four bowlers for the best hope. A fifth and fourth part timer don't make as much a difference.

And the best four imo are: Rana, Sami, Arshad and Kaneria.

As for Akmal, he is most useful at number 7 and that is where he should remain.

Marooned I agree with the top 4 bowlers but your maths is wrong..... how would you include Arshad in the 11? Drop Razzaq??

Rana is injured and not playing and can be replaced with Khalil. But then again where is Arshad's spot in the lineup if you play the regular openers?

Don't worry mate I have my math right. And Yes I would drop Razzak. Rana is still in the running for a spot as far as I understand. It depends on how his shoulder is on the morning of the match.

On the topic, I think Kamran is most useful where he bats at the moment.

zorawar

15th March 2005, 18:13

Akmal is best as a lower order batsman who can provide stubborn resistance in the latter stages of an innings, a la Gilchrist. It's extremely demoralising for a bowling side to get half the team out, particularly the top and middle order, and then be unable to break through to the tail. The mental impact of that is enormous. Leave Akmal where he is.

That is the best argument for playing Akmal at his slot. But the rest of the arguments about sticking with the failing openers are nonsense and a luxury we cannot afford as we have such a makeshift bowling attack (now Rana is injured as well).

If we cannot accomodate a 5th bowler then we might as well just replace Rana with Khalil or Arshad and play for a draw.

Officer Barbrady

15th March 2005, 18:17

Akmal is best as a lower order batsman who can provide stubborn resistance in the latter stages of an innings, a la Gilchrist. It's extremely demoralising for a bowling side to get half the team out, particularly the top and middle order, and then be unable to break through to the tail. The mental impact of that is enormous. Leave Akmal where he is.

That is the best argument for playing Akmal at his slot. But the rest of the arguments about sticking with the failing openers are nonsense and a luxury we cannot afford as we have such a makeshift bowling attack (now Rana is injured as well).

This is *the* argument. He is most useful where he is!

zorawar

15th March 2005, 18:21

Don't worry mate I have my math right. And Yes I would drop Razzak. Rana is still in the running for a spot as far as I understand. It depends on how his shoulder is on the morning of the match.

On the topic, I think Kamran is most useful where he bats at the moment.

OK I was wrong then, your maths is right but then your logic is flawed. We all know Razzaq will not be dropped in the 2nd test.... so you have to base your arguments on realities and not ideal scenarios.

Officer Barbrady

15th March 2005, 18:27

You stated that we need five bowlers for our best hope to win and I responded to that.

Even in the given scenario I would drop Razzak. And even if that doesn't happen I wouldn't open with Kamran (which was the topic). I believe he is a good player lower down and can help us from that five down position. I also believe he is more than likely to get sacrificed early at the top of the order.

Cartman

15th March 2005, 18:33

I dont think Inzi and BW would put as much effort into selecting the side as we do discussing it in this here forum.. Its hilarious.

:)

zorawar

15th March 2005, 18:39

ok so if we all agree on the following:

(a) Akmal is best placed where he is right now
(b) We should presist with the opening pair
(c) we know Razzaq is going to play
(d) we know Younus will also play as confirmed by Inzi

There is no place for 5 bowlers. With the attack we have... 4 bowlers mean to me that we are starting the Test with the following possible results:

(a) A Draw
(b) A loss
(c) A miracle

I'll hope for (c) and start praying...

Cartman

15th March 2005, 18:47

Following these assumptions the side would look exactly like the one that played in the first test except maybe a few changes :

-Khalil may replace Rana if he is injured
-Razzaq might be dropped in favor of another bowler (Arshad/Afridi)
-Kamal might be dropped in favor of another bowler
(Arshad/Afridi)

I can see the first one happening but not the remaining two, that would be stupid.

Officer Barbrady

15th March 2005, 18:51

It depends on what you expect from say Afridi as a bowler. I feel his inclusion does not strengthen the bowling much. In a test match I expect him to be OK without really picking up wickets. If he was a wicket-taker I would select him. But as I don't I don't think him playing as a 5th bowler will increasing our chances of getting 20 wickets by much.

That is why I would prefer to go with two specialist openers (Hameed for Butt if necessary) rather than chance luck with Afridi. Also, I think we should remember that the pitch on the first day played very differently to the rest of the match. We lost wickets to some very good bowling.

Cartman

15th March 2005, 18:58

Marooned, what would your side be if you picked it honestly?
list in batting order please

pakistani pride

15th March 2005, 19:01

lol. He is fine there leave him at his place. Thats our problem when somebody plays well everybody feels like ok promote him etc !

its a sad idea. Our side will be balanced when our pacers return !

zorawar

15th March 2005, 19:04

I totally agree with marooned that we are chancing our luck with Afridi as an opener.

Ok here is an afterthought....

Razzaq
Taufeeq
Younus
Inzi
Youhana
Kamal
Akmal
Sami
Khalil
Arshad
Kaneria

2 specialist spinners, 3 pacers including a left armer and Akmal at #7 by popular demand.

zorawar

15th March 2005, 19:07

lol. He is fine there leave him at his place. Thats our problem when somebody plays well everybody feels like ok promote him etc !

its a sad idea. Our side will be balanced when our pacers return !

PP I know our side will be balanced when our pacers return but till then we should just resign ourselves to playing it safe and go for a draw with 4 bowlers and a batsmen packed order where Akmal or Razzaq comes in at 8?

MIG

15th March 2005, 19:11

Akmal on the 4th day of a test coming in late VS Akmal on the first morning of the match coming into open - I think there is a difference - let him play some more good knocks in his current position. We need someone at that position to hold the innings together when the bowlers start to tire etc.

Officer Barbrady

15th March 2005, 21:31

Marooned, what would your side be if you picked it honestly?
list in batting order please

Taufeeq
Hameed/Butt
Younis (I don't rate him very highly but I ll give him another go)
Inzi
Youhana
Asim
Kamran
Sami
Rana (Khalil if unfit)
Arshad
Kaneria

But, given the current situation I can live with Zorawar's team as listed above.