I had a sneaking feeling that England would win. When faced with the pressure of batting out time on the final day, Pakistan’s erratic batting unit folded. I feel for them. Two of their three most experienced batsmen (Hafeez and Younis) are completely out of sorts. And when your tail begins at eight, you’re asking for trouble. In the end, it was too much for Sami Aslam, Azhar Ali and Misbah to do on their own.
Make no mistake about it. This was an absolutely crushing defeat for Pakistan. As they will know (it was repeated on television often enough) teams only lose 3% of the time after securing a first innings lead of over one hundred. England, on the other hand, will be as happy as a puppies on ecstasy. It was a superb fightback.
It wasn’t just the pressure of the situation that did for Pakistan. England’s seamers – by far the most reliable cog in the team – bowled beautifully. They key, of course, was the reverse swing they managed to find. The pitch offered very little conventional movement all match so their eyes lit up when the ball finally started to reverse. They exploited the opportunity ruthlessly.
All of the seamers played their part. Anderson, Broad, Woakes and Finn all took two wickets. The latter looked both relieved and ecstatic when he took the key wickets of Misbah and Aslam. Good on ‘im. Although his match return of 2-114 doesn’t look much on paper, he bowled really well. It was good to see him sprinting to the wicket, looking more confident, and generating more pace. Finn is an excellent bowler when he’s on song and his selection was thoroughly justified in the end. I’m more than happy to eat my humble tartlet this time.
The other much maligned member of the attack, Moeen Ali, also bowled pretty well. Perhaps helped by Pakistan’s negative frame of mind, Moeen settled into a decent rhythm and picked up the crucial wickets of Azhar and Sohail. After scoring important half-centuries in both of England’s innings, Mo was named man of the match. Perhaps it’s time to drop Vince, move Mo up the order, and make room for Adil Rashid? As I’ve said a couple of times before, England’s all-rounders bat just as well as some of the so called specialist batsmen anyway.
Talking of England’s all-rounders, guys like Woakes, Moeen and Stokes (when fit) are the difference between these two sides. They give England so much depth. Pakistan’s four-man attack has looked really exposed at times. Whenever England have kept them in the field for a prolonged period of time, it has been impossible for Misbah to keep the pressure on.
What’s more, the depth the all-rounders give to England’s batting is priceless. The margin of victory in this game was 141 runs. Moeen scored 149 runs on his own. There’s no way England would have capitulated so limply on day five if roles were reversed. Unless it’s turning square, England’s lower order is sometimes better than the middle-order.
With the 4th test at The Oval beginning in a few days time, I can’t see Pakistan coming back to square the series – unless the pitch is a raging bunsen of course. Although I admire many of Pakistan’s players, it’s now clear that this is a far from vintage Pakistan team. They’re better than Sri Lanka of course, but the bowling has been quite disappointing.
Although Amir has looked good at times, he’s still feeling his way back into test cricket. He isn’t quite the bowler he was back in 2010. The Pakistan coaches have actually been working on his action during the games, which shows that something isn’t quite right. Cricinfo’s Polite Enquiries even debated whether Amir is overhyped.
Meanwhile, Sohail Khan doesn’t quite look fit enough for test cricket. His opening bursts are usually pretty good, but he soon loses pace and potency. Rahat, on the other hand, looks handy at times but his test average of 39 probably doesn’t lie. How they miss Wahab at his best.
As for Pakistan’s batting, it’s a bit of a throwback really. There’s no way that England would field a team with a tail that long. It’s very old fashioned and probably not sustainable in the modern era. Duncan Fletcher must be shaking his head.
Meanwhile, Younis’ alarming decline – we all assumed pre-series that he’s be a real threat -must be a worry. He’s been a brilliant player for many years, but is time finally catching up with him? Not everyone has Misbah’s remarkable longevity. His lack of form has really dented Pakistan’s hopes.
As for Yasir Shah, I still think he’s a very good bowler. There’s been a lot of talk about how well England have played him, and there’s some truth in that, but he hasn’t been helped by the pitches recently. There’s been no turn to speak of and precious little bounce either.
My personal feeling is that Yasir has been blunted by conditions and will bounce back strongly. Why? Because I can’t believe that England have suddenly learned to play quality spin bowling after struggling at it for decades. It just doesn’t add up. I guess we’ll find out more this winter.
James Morgan
Good win for England, at the end of a cracking test match (and one which should be the end of the debate about 4 day tests). I think this has been an excellent series so far.
Looking ahead to the tours of Bangladesh and India, is there a case for England playing 6 bowlers: 4 seamers (say Anderson, Broad, Stokes and Woakes) and two spinners (Ali and Rashid or Borthwick)? One of the batsmen (probably Vince or Ballance) would make way, and Bairstow bats 5.
This is the team that I think we need to see, with Finn in reserve, although I doubt it’ll be before the next series. There’s plenty of batting there in those six to justify dropping a batsman – Rashid, Ali, Stokes, and Woakes average 35, 39, 37, and 34 respectively in FC. And think of the options available during matches!
Very interesting to see where this England team are going – if results fall favourably in the final tests they could be the number one ranked team. The acid test would be the away series in India, but if they acquit themselves well it would be merited.
Next couple of years exciting with the only major loss being Anderson; otherwise I would expect the spine of the team to continue improving.
A small correction. It is Woakes who averages 37 in FC and Stokes 34 rather than the other way around.
There are still big doubts about whether the tour to Bangladesh will go ahead. The team are due to fly out on September 28th so there isn’t that long until a decision must be made. As the FCO advice is to avoid outdoor congregations of Westerners, it’s difficult to see how the tour can proceed.
If it does go ahead, Bangladesh will be without Mustafizar Rahman who was declared out for six months in July with a shoulder injury.
I think England could easily do that. Not because we want or particularly need 6 bowlers (it’s an embarrassment of riches) but because the all-rounders could be picked for their batting alone on merit. The fact they bowl is a real bonus.
Woakes has looked just as good a batsman as Vince this summer. Stokes would probably play as a specialist batsman if he couldn’t bowl too.
In regards to Yasir, I do think in fairness England’s batsmen have had something to do with it – the Edgbaston pitch wasn’t too dissimilar to Lord’s (although it offered less turn) in its slow and low nature and he was lethal there, so they’ve definitely learned to nullify him somewhat at least. At Old Trafford I think conditions played more of a part as they were the first time he’d been confronted with something truly un-Asian, as it were – it offered enough turn but mainly it had zip and bounce. Warne would have been licking his lips at the prospect of bowling on that track, he’s always said bounce was as important as turn and it was why he loved bowling at the Gabba so much.
I guess time will tell re: Yasir. The other thing is that he’s bowled so many overs that his fingers / wrist must have tired. It’s a shame for Pakistan that Hafeez is currently banned from bowling. They really miss a 5th option who can generally keep things tight and give the other bowlers a rest.
It will be really interesting to see what the pitch does at The Oval. It’s been known to turn in the past obviously. In some ways, I want a typical English wicket so we can win the series 3-1. On the other hand, it might help us to get some practice on a turning deck before we go to India. We might learn something too. If the pitch might turn, perhaps Rashid will play? Might be good to get him acclimatised to test cricket again before the winter.
I agree that Rashid ought to play – and note he just took seven wickets in Yorkshire’s win. Just needs a decent run in the side to prove himself/learn to compete at the top level (it’s notable he’s done so in limited overs when given the chance).
Yes, I agree that Pakistan really suffered from having limited bowling options, particularly compared to England. This is especially important during back-to-back tests, which are also a test of endurance when you have three players over 35 (one over 40!) in your side. It is not surprising that Pakistan have dropped off somewhat since their excellent win at Lord’s. Still been a mighty fine series, though. And praise be, no controversies so far, despite Pakistani TV’s attempt to stir things about England’s management of the ball. Since that beautiful man Misbah took over, Pakistan have been just about the best-behaved side in the world (ignoring Yasir’s drug ban, in which the mitigating evidence was unusually strong).
I fear we are getting carried away, especially with the call to drop a bat and play both Moeen Ali and Rashid. The fact is that neither are top rank spinners. Rashid has a FC bowling average of 34 and Moeen 41. The reasons are pretty obvious; Rashid bowls too many gimmees and Moeen is a converted bat. I cannot see any good reason to play them both unless on a very helpful wicket. The argument that it does not weaken the batting to replace a bat (perhaps Vince) with Rashid may have some merit (although I think this greatly exaggerates Rashid’s batting quality). But if this is the case it is a stronger argument for reinforcing the batting with a better specialist, the obvious option being Bell. Alternatively, bring Billings in for Vince, give him the gloves and we gain a decent keeper.
And I will declare one interest. If we are to push forward a leg spinning all rounder I would much rather fast track Critchley of Derby. Whatever Rashid does I expect Critchley to supplant him in this role in the next 2-3 years.
You fear we’re getting carried away, and propose an 19 year old spinner with a FC average of 121 ?
:-)
I ranted on about Woakes for 6 years plus and was roundly abused. I was told I was joking when I suggested Billings would be an England player soon after his FC debut. I am simply making a similar prediction about Critchley. When a player has technique and consistency you can spot it young. Critchley has already shown he can bat and he has the most repeatable leg spin action I have seen in a long time. I would not dream of picking him to play for England yet, but a development tour as a squad member, or a key player for the Lions, will pay future benefit. This would not be needed except that Rashid is a (good) county journeyman until and unless he cuts out the gimmees. It is a dreadful indictment of English spin that we need to look to a novice – and I prefer Rashid as one who at least turns the ball to the non-spinning spinners such as Tredwell, Batty and Dawson. :)
An average of 34 is good for a spinner (I generally add on five runs for spinners, so this is the equivalent of 29 for a seamer). As for Moeen, it shouldn’t be forgotten what an excellent strike rate he has, even if he is often a little expensive (except on Sunday, he managed to be both economical and dangerous). I also wonder why spinners are expected to adapt to test level right away, while seamers are allowed a longer time to bed in. If anything, it should be the other way around, since it seems to me that the art of spin (and maybe especially leg-spin) is a steeper learning curve than bowling fast. Many spinners are late developers.
This is the exact opposite of the impression I gained from the stands. In fact, the Pakistani batsmen were determined to take on Moeen and kept trying to drive him. The fact that they were largely unsuccessful is a reflection of what a tight line Ali bowled. Even the excellent Aslam looked like he could be out at any moment, so determined was he to attack the spinner. Normally, Ali takes wickets at a healthy rate, but is rather expensive. On that basis, I’d say that this was his best bowling performance at test level (it helps having a fifth day wicket to bowl on, of course) as he both contained and attacked.
After wasting the new ball in the morning to largely defensive fields (surely the only point of racking up such a large total rather than declaring earlier is so that you can attack right from the start and not worry about runs?), England got their tactics spot on in the afternoon. Moeen tied up one end while the seamers alternated in short burst from the other. I thought at the time that Anderson was the first one to get reverse swing going, but looking at the highlights later, it seemed Broad got it going in his excellent spell just before that. When Finn also reversed the ball, it was clear that the batsmen were in trouble, which is probably why they tried to attack Moeen. Paradoxically, it was when Moeen was removed from the attack and we had seam from both ends that four wickets fell for one run, the highlight being Finn’s set piece to Misbah — the away swingers followed by the inswinger. It really was a complete performance by England with bat and ball. That was as good an England win as anything since India in 2012.