Test Cricket Prediction and Discussion Thread [self - mod]

[7788bitcoin]

~
Why it always has to be a test-playing nation? If other test playing nations were not available, then Pakistan could have played against Afghanistan or Ireland. And I am sure that these two teams could have performed much better than Zimbabwe. And there are associate nations, who deserve a chance of playing against a test nation. I am talking about teams such as Nepal, Netherlands, Kenya and Scotland. Given the pathetic performance put up by Zimbabwe, I don't think that these teams could have performed any worse.

Zimbabwe was the team available as far as i know and so is the reason they are playing a series right now and even though it is a one sided affair we can only speculate that other associate teams will perform better, Afghanistan will not get the service of Rashid Khan because he was busy with the IPL and so does a couple of other players and you cannot imagine the collapse they will be in without players like Rashid Khan and cannot expect anything different from any other associate team as well.

[Vaskiy]

Right now this helps Pakistan to rank up on the table. ICC knows well about the performance level of Zimbabwe team. It should have organised the series against other teams like Nepal, Scotland, etc. As in a quote the Zimbabwe Cricket board is into corrupt hands. Once Zimbabwe team is much popular, now everything has turned completely upside down.

[Sithara007]

Right now this helps Pakistan to rank up on the table. ICC knows well about the performance level of Zimbabwe team. It should have organised the series against other teams like Nepal, Scotland, etc. As in a quote the Zimbabwe Cricket board is into corrupt hands. Once Zimbabwe team is much popular, now everything has turned completely upside down.

They should remove the disparity in funding as well. Why Zimbabwe continues to receive ICC funding at a level which is three times of what is given to Ireland and Afghanistan? Since all these three teams are placed in the second division of the test cricket, the funding should be equal. The ICC seriously need to revisit the funding plan for the next cycle (2023-31). But I don't have much hope, since after the resignation of Shashank Manohar the businessmen cabal has regained their control of the ICC.

[UmerIdrees]

But it seems Babar Azam was thinking something different, instead of looking for Abid Ali to score triple century, he might be looking for victory from this test match; that must be a reason why he had declared when Nauman Ali got out for 97 runs. Abid Ali really showed his character; yes batting all through the innings definitely needs lots of patience in test cricket. He definitely deserves a triple century but I will not blame the decision of a skipper for teams' victory sake.

That's a bad decision by the skipper. They would have still won the match because there was so much time left in the match. When a player is playing at above 200 runs , you should let him play until he is bowled out. Who knows he would have make 300 - 400 runs. Don't think if a player score more runs, it would be for his own records, but it will also help in breaking individual batting records.
I think it was a selfish decision of baber Azam for not allowing Abid Ali to play further.

[bryant.coleman]

That's a bad decision by the skipper. They would have still won the match because there was so much time left in the match. When a player is playing at above 200 runs , you should let him play until he is bowled out. Who knows he would have make 300 - 400 runs. Don't think if a player score more runs, it would be for his own records, but it will also help in breaking individual batting records.
I think it was a selfish decision of baber Azam for not allowing Abid Ali to play further.

If Abid Ali wanted to score a triple ton, then he should have scored runs quickly. Team always come before the individual records. Anyway, what is the point in scoring a test triple against Zimbabwe? Their bowling is actually worse than many of the associate teams. And how can you say that someone who is batting at 215 is close to a triple century? This is ridiculous. Will you say that Sajid Khan narrowly missed a century by 80 runs, since he got out for 20? If Abid had scored 280 or 290, then I would have agreed with you. But this just doesn't make any sense.

[UmerIdrees]

If Abid Ali wanted to score a triple ton, then he should have scored runs quickly. Team always come before the individual records.

I failed to understand your vague arguments. We are only in the 3rd day of the match. Even if he plays slowly that does not hurt anyone.

Anyway, what is the point in scoring a test triple against Zimbabwe? Their bowling is actually worse than many of the associate teams.

So you are saying that when Matthew Hayden scored 380 against Zimbabwe, it was useless as this score was not against one of the better teams ?

[Vishnu.Reang]

Abid Ali was on 215. He was almost hundred runs away from scoring a triple century. I don't understand the argument here. How can you guys say that he was denied of a triple century? Are you 100% sure that he could have scored another 85 runs without getting dismissed? Pakistan had just two wickets remaining and the Zimbabwe bowlers could have taken those two within a couple of overs. The declaration came after Nauman Ali was dismissed. The no.10 and no.11 batsmen were Shaheen Shah Afridi and Tabish Khan, who are genuine tail enders. I fully agree with Babar Azam's decision to declare the innings. Abid had zero chance of getting a triple century. 

[UmerIdrees]

Abid Ali was on 215. He was almost hundred runs away from scoring a triple century. I don't understand the argument here. How can you guys say that he was denied of a triple century? Are you 100% sure that he could have scored another 85 runs without getting dismissed? Pakistan had just two wickets remaining and the Zimbabwe bowlers could have taken those two within a couple of overs. The declaration came after Nauman Ali was dismissed. The no.10 and no.11 batsmen were Shaheen Shah Afridi and Tabish Khan, who are genuine tail enders. I fully agree with Babar Azam's decision to declare the innings. Abid had zero chance of getting a triple century. 

No one is saying that he would have made triple century but only that he should have been given a chance when there was too much time left in the match.

Pakistan finally won the match and the series. 

[Vishnu.Reang]

To Zimbabwe's credit, they managed to stretch it to the 4th day. Apart from a half century by Regis Chakabva and a 3-wicket haul by Blessing Muzarabani, there was nothing in this match for Zimbabwe. Until they get ready for the test matches, they should refrain from staging matches against strong teams such as Pakistan. First they should play some 4-day matches against Ireland, Afghanistan or some of the other associate nations. If they perform well, they can play against test nations. 

[7788bitcoin]

Abid Ali was on 215. He was almost hundred runs away from scoring a triple century. I don't understand the argument here. How can you guys say that he was denied of a triple century? Are you 100% sure that he could have scored another 85 runs without getting dismissed? Pakistan had just two wickets remaining and the Zimbabwe bowlers could have taken those two within a couple of overs.

The problem might be the argument came because they did not see the entire scorecard . If he was above 260 runs then the captain would have given him the opportunity to score the runs and reach the milestone as it can be once in a lifetime opportunity, but clearly that was not the situation here.

The declaration came after Nauman Ali was dismissed. The no.10 and no.11 batsmen were Shaheen Shah Afridi and Tabish Khan, who are genuine tail enders. I fully agree with Babar Azam's decision to declare the innings. Abid had zero chance of getting a triple century. 

I am hearing about these players for the first time but he played an outstanding innings and he deserved a century as he feel short of just 3 runs.

[bryant.coleman]

Abid Ali was on 215. He was almost hundred runs away from scoring a triple century. I don't understand the argument here. How can you guys say that he was denied of a triple century? Are you 100% sure that he could have scored another 85 runs without getting dismissed? Pakistan had just two wickets remaining and the Zimbabwe bowlers could have taken those two within a couple of overs.

The problem might be the argument came because they did not see the entire scorecard . If he was above 260 runs then the captain would have given him the opportunity to score the runs and reach the milestone as it can be once in a lifetime opportunity, but clearly that was not the situation here.

If you check the posts, I was the first one to point out that Abid Ali was batting on 215. To say that someone batting on 215 missed a triple century is like saying that someone on 15 lost his chance for scoring a century. If we go by this logic, then the captains won't be able to declare the innings. I am not sure about 260, but if Abid had scored 280 or 290, then the captain (Babar Azam) would have definitely allowed him to complete the triple ton. I don't know what these people are smoking, when they expect Abid Ali to score another 85 runs when two tail end batsmen are batting with him.

[JSRAW]

To Zimbabwe's credit, they managed to stretch it to the 4th day. Apart from a half century by Regis Chakabva and a 3-wicket haul by Blessing Muzarabani, there was nothing in this match for Zimbabwe. Until they get ready for the test matches, they should refrain from staging matches against strong teams such as Pakistan. First they should play some 4-day matches against Ireland, Afghanistan or some of the other associate nations. If they perform well, they can play against test nations. 

Well they did manage to score highest total by the end of the series. Before 2nd inning of the last match Zimbabwe scorecard looked like this 176,134, 132. Give some credit to them that they crossed the 200 mark.

[Vishnu.Reang]

To Zimbabwe's credit, they managed to stretch it to the 4th day. Apart from a half century by Regis Chakabva and a 3-wicket haul by Blessing Muzarabani, there was nothing in this match for Zimbabwe. Until they get ready for the test matches, they should refrain from staging matches against strong teams such as Pakistan. First they should play some 4-day matches against Ireland, Afghanistan or some of the other associate nations. If they perform well, they can play against test nations.  

Well they did manage to score highest total by the end of the series. Before 2nd inning of the last match Zimbabwe scorecard looked like this 176,134, 132. Give some credit to them that they crossed the 200 mark. 

LOL.. in that regard, yes.. we need to appreciate Zimbabwe. Perhaps the ICC can change rules to make the matches more competitive. Other teams should be given only one innings per test match, while Zimbabwe should be allowed to bat for two innings. But the problem is that even then there is no guarantee that the matches will be competitive. The total Pakistan scored in their first innings was higher than the combined total Zimbabwe made in two of their innings.

[7788bitcoin]

~
I don't know what these people are smoking, when they expect Abid Ali to score another 85 runs when two tail end batsmen are batting with him.

It must be something hard as everyone is going through hard times and let them enjoy the fun smokes  .
There is a long gap between the next match i think, after looking at the schedule the next Test match is between England and New Zealand on June 2 and the second match starts on June 10th and after that we have the WTC final.

[ene1980]

Perhaps the ICC can change rules to make the matches more competitive. Other teams should be given only one innings per test match, while Zimbabwe should be allowed to bat for two innings. But the problem is that even then there is no guarantee that the matches will be competitive. The total Pakistan scored in their first innings was higher than the combined total Zimbabwe made in two of their innings.

Another better way is to force the Pakistan players who bats right handed to play the match left handed and the left handed batsman to right handed to become competitive . May be they are playing according to the ICC schedule, either way these type of one sided matches will not help either teams and i will be surprised if there is any substantial viewership for series like these.

[Sithara007]

Another better way is to force the Pakistan players who bats right handed to play the match left handed and the left handed batsman to right handed to become competitive . May be they are playing according to the ICC schedule, either way these type of one sided matches will not help either teams and i will be surprised if there is any substantial viewership for series like these.

I don't think that such fixtures are necessitated due to the ICC requirement. Pakistan is placed in the first division of the test cricket, while Zimbabwe is in the second division. As such, both the teams are not required to play against each other. Zimbabwe should be ideally paying against teams such as Ireland and Nepal, which they have refused on multiple occasions (probably due to the fear that they will lose such matches against the associate nations). And since the ICC want to maintain the status quo, we are stuck with Zimbabwe for the near future.

[UmerIdrees]

Sanjay Manjrekar, Aakash Chopra, Deep Dasgupta and few others are exploring the options of  implementing a two-tier structure in test cricket.
Do you guys agree if this two tier structure should be implemented in test cricket ?

[Vaskiy]

Sanjay Manjrekar, Aakash Chopra, Deep Dasgupta and few others are exploring the options of  implementing a two-tier structure in test cricket.
Do you guys agree if this two tier structure should be implemented in test cricket ?

Two tier structure in cricket team is a good thing for the small teams than the one in the top order. When small teams perform better, they get the chance to play against teams in the top order. This will increase the competence level among the bottom teams and improve their performance playing against the top teams.

[Vishnu.Reang]

Sanjay Manjrekar, Aakash Chopra, Deep Dasgupta and few others are exploring the options of  implementing a two-tier structure in test cricket.
Do you guys agree if this two tier structure should be implemented in test cricket ?

It should have been implemented at least one decade ago. Now these jokers are just exploring the possibility. This lack of inclusiveness is the reason why cricket has remained as a stagnating sport, confined to South Asia. I just hope that now the ICC will wake up from their deep slumber and allow the second tier test cricket. But again, a second division test league is meaningless, if there is no relegation-promotion structure. After a period of 3 or 4 years, the best performing team from the second division should be promoted to the first division, and the worst performing first division member should be relegated to the second division.

[ene1980]

It should have been implemented at least one decade ago. Now these jokers are just exploring the possibility. This lack of inclusiveness is the reason why cricket has remained as a stagnating sport, confined to South Asia.

The main reason cricket remained a stagnant sport is because of the long playing hours and it is different from any other sporting event and things have changed globally and people do not have the time to spend long hours to watch a match. The reason shorter formats is getting more popular is because of the short time period and it can gel with the fast paced society.

I just hope that now the ICC will wake up from their deep slumber and allow the second tier test cricket. But again, a second division test league is meaningless, if there is no relegation-promotion structure. After a period of 3 or 4 years, the best performing team from the second division should be promoted to the first division, and the worst performing first division member should be relegated to the second division.

They can make any number of experiments but i doubt whether these changes will make any major changes in the viewership or attract new audience.