Year-ender 2016: Pakistan’s exhilarating highs and embarrassing lows

2016 witnessed Pakistan scale heights they never have.

Barely anything new happened to Pakistan cricket this year. Misbah-ul-Haq turned a year older, though his body refuses to age with him. Mohammad Yousuf kept criticising Misbah at random points of time. Younis Khan took his helmet off and raised his bat several times. One (it has almost always been one when it comes to Pakistan, no more, no less) world-class spinner reached the next level. Seamers swung the new and old ball prodigiously. There were astonishing wins. There were spirited fights. There were new records. There were obnoxious defeats. Young talents appeared on the horizon. And Shahid Afridi continues to be around.

In other words, 2016 was just another year in Pakistan cricket.

And yet, 2016 witnessed Pakistan scale heights they never have. Misbah brought Lord’s to its feet with an innings Grimm Brothers would have been proud of. He celebrated the landmark in a way cricket has never witnessed, or even imagined, at least from a quadragenarian. Pakistan roared to a victory, and celebrated in style. It was almost impossible to believe that they had not played a Test in eight months.

As is common with Pakistan, they sunk without a trace in their next Test, and collapsed in a heap in the one that followed. As is also common with Pakistan, they came back at The Oval. There have been finer innings than Misbah’s hundred at Lord’s or Younis’ at The Oval this year, but few that have moved a nation to this extent.

A quick recap

Pakistan started their year in whites as late as in July, but when they did, they did it in style. In true spirit of Pakistan cricket, they oscillated between the sublime and subpar with ridiculous ease, never exemplified better than the two Tests at Brisbane and Melbourne.

At Brisbane they were shot out for 142. Then, set a near-impossible 490, they responded with 450. At Melbourne they declared on 443. Then, with two sessions to bat, they were bowled out for 163. Nothing summed up Pakistan’s year more than the 142-490-443-163 sequence.

There was more. There was a victory at Lord’s that brought about an emotional surge barely matched in cricket fraternity this year. In the next Test at Old Trafford they scored 198 and 234 on a pitch where England 762 for 9 across innings. At Edgbaston they lost 9 wickets in less than two sessions to lose a Test after securing a 103-run lead. And they won at The Oval by 10 wickets.

The saga does not end there. At Dubai Pakistan scored 579 for 3 and 123 (see how unreal they have been?). After a ‘normal’ outing at Abu Dhabi they managed to lose to West Indies outside the islands, at Sharjah. Barring Bangladesh and Zimbabwe, West Indies had won only once outside home between 2000 and 2016 (against South Africa, at Port Elizabeth in 2007).

They collapsed twice at Christchurch, for 133 and 171. At Hamilton they did better, with 216 in the first innings. Then, set 369, they were going strong at 131 without loss before getting bowled out for 230.

Old Trafford, twice. Edgbaston. Dubai. Sharjah. Christchurch, twice. Hamilton. Brisbane. Melbourne. In 11 Tests in 2016 (8 outside Asia, 3 others in UAE) Pakistan managed to collapse 10 times, and still finished with a 4-7 result.

Satisfactory? To some. Frustrating? To most. Trademark Pakistan? Hell yes!

Year-ender: 10 best Tests from 2016

King among commoners

Misbah spent 2016 being Misbah. He scored a hundred at Lord’s. If I get repetitive about the hundred, it is perhaps because I continue to remain overwhelmed by the innings and the celebrations. He secured the much-coveted mace reserved for the No. 1 Test team in ICC rankings (without the opportunity to lead at home, if I may remind). By the time the year ended, he has also led Pakistan in more Tests than anyone.

If Pakistan cricket has scaled new heights over the past few years, Misbah has certainly been the man behind it. Despite Younis’ heavy scoring, despite a plethora of fast bowlers, despite two outstanding spinners in Saeed Ajmal and Yasir Shah, Pakistan’s resurgence has been almost entirely orchestrated by Misbah.

Pakistan cricket could have gone downhill after 2009, more so after 2010. While most captains would have caved in or ruled with an iron fist, Misbah smiled his way to success.

The term King Misbah will never be coined, for Misbah was always there with the Pakistani. Misbah was never distant. Imran Khan remains the king; Javed Miandad, the man you would count on save your life; Wasim Akram, a star you can worship, but always from a distance.

All three were superstars you could barely relate to. Misbah is the neighbour who smiles at you as he walks past you in the morning. He could have been you as well.

Misbah has used familiarity, congeniality as his mantra; and has made sure Pakistan reached the top.

And he still smiles, for he never ages, for the Misbahs of the world never age.

His career will probably not outlast 2017, as he has hinted after the Melbourne Test. Given Misbah, it will be a premature retirement.

Year-ender 2016: Top emerging international cricketers

In pursuit of five figures

Younis averaged 37.38 this year. The last time the number had dipped below the 50-mark was in 2012. To find the last sub-50 year before 2012 you need to go back to 2003. His magnum opus came at The Oval, in an innings when he scored a double-hundred, got his runs quickly (his strike rate was 71), and got them in style. An astonishing 68% of his runs came in boundaries.

He also shepherded the tail brilliantly. The Oval Test was almost evenly balanced with Pakistan on 320 for 6 after England had scored 328. Younis took that to 542. England never found a way back.

He missed the Dubai Test due to dengue. He returned to score 127, 29*, and 51 in his next three innings. Unfortunately, those four consecutive innings accounted for almost two-thirds of his runs in 2016. There was even a run of 16 runs in 6 innings.

Younis had gone past the 9,000-run mark in 2015. He is still 211 short of that magical five-figure mark in Test cricket. He will become the first Pakistan cricketer to get there. Given his incredible run over the past few years he should have gone there by this year.

Maybe it will happen at Sydney. Maybe there is nothing to worry about. Yet. Younis is 39, but he is four years younger to the oldest member in the side. There is no reason to think he is past his sublime days, for as we know, a Younis Khan hundred is always around the corner.

The invisible man

Neither Misbah nor Younis has been as consistent as Azhar Ali this year. Azhar batted at No. 3 in England, and got a magnificent 139 at Edgbaston. Against West Indies in UAE he was pushed to the top to encounter the pink ball. He responded with a triple-hundred. He got 79 in the second Test, and 91 in the third.

He would fail in New Zealand, they said. He failed, but that was not due to lack of application: twice in four innings he faced over 160 balls. He stonewalled at Christchurch, keeping a more-than-potent seam attack at bay, and grinded his way to a 173-ball 31. Set 369 at Hamilton, and Azhar and Sami Aslam batted for 60 overs, adding 131 for the opening stand. Pakistan collapsed to 230, but the openers were not at fault.

Azhar kept growing in stature as a stonewaller in alien conditions. Even Brisbane, Australia’s greatest fortress, was not a challenge, even not after Pakistan were set 490. Azhar batted for 179 balls for his 71. And at Melbourne came that 364-ball unbeaten 205, the first double-hundred by a Pakistani on Australian soil. Still not satisfied, Azhar added 43 more in his final innings of the year.

Azhar is one of the seven men to have crossed the 1,000-run mark this year. Of them, Azhar has faced most balls per dismissal (135).

Cricket has had its share of stonewallers. Cricket has also had its share of makeshift openers. However, makeshift openers are almost never natural strokeplayers, perhaps for obvious reasons. Azhar belongs to a rare set.

There have been instances, plenty of them, of grafters holding their teams back, more so in the current era when almost every team plays for results. They have led to delayed declarations. Bowlers have been left with inadequate time. That may make Azhar’s stonewalling redundant.

However, Pakistan have not had a stable opening pair for a long, long time now. Scoring quick runs at the top almost always gives the side an edge. However, at this stage Pakistan do not have any, and they will almost certainly prefer a slow, stable pair over a slow, unstable one.

Azhar finished the year with 1,198 runs at 63.05. None of his teammates has scored more than 750 or have averaged even 40. As an opener his 982 runs have come at an astonishing 75.53. To put things into perspective, Virat Kohli got his 1,215 runs this year at 75.93.

That is probably indicative of how good Azhar has been.

The other batsmen

Azhar’s partner Sami went past fifty 6 times in 18 innings, but he did not get that one massive innings — despite the fact that he went past 70 five times (including three innings of 82, 90, and 91). He still faced 93 balls per dismissal.

None of the openers have scored at a rapid rate, but that has rarely been Pakistan’s problem over the years. They have probably found a pair at the top they can rely on.

What about Asad Shafiq, then, the epitome of inconsistency in the Pakistan line-up? Of course, his finest innings was the 137 at Brisbane. But even if you take that away, Shafiq has delivered in almost every Pakistan win: 73 and 49 at Lord’s, 109 at The Oval, 67 at Dubai, and 68 and 58* at Abu Dhabi.

In the 7 innings from the 4 Tests Pakistan won he went past 50 five times (and got a 49) and averaged 71.50; in the others, he did that once (that 137) and averaged 21.71. If one takes that hundred away, the number drops to 12.85. There were 5 ducks including 2 pairs.

For ages cricket fraternity has been divided into critics who believe in the concept of match-winners and those who do not. The former claim that performing in victories should ideally mean everything to cricketers; the counterargument to this is the fact that cricket is a team game, which makes it almost impossible for one player to win a Test.

The former group would have hailed Shafiq as a champion. The other, perhaps not.

There is also the curious case of Yasir as well. Let me get the main piece of data out of the way first: Yasir finished 2016 with 45 wickets, 50% more than Mohammad Aamer, the next man on the list.

Till 2015 Yasir was hailed as perhaps the best spinner in contemporary cricket. He is still the finest wrist-spinner, but his claim for the top spot is perhaps not valid anymore. He failed in New Zealand and Australia, but the England story merits a recall.

Yasir claimed 19 wickets at 40.73 on the tour. While that sounds sub-par, it is worth a mention that 15 of these wickets came in the 2 Tests in London (that too at 18.13), and he failed in the other 2, which accounted for 4 wickets at 125.50. Even the economy rates read 2.59 and 3.77. However, more importantly, Pakistan won the 2 Tests in which Yasir delivered and lost the others. That, indeed, is a curious observation, for Pakistan’s success stories, especially in England, have been built around quality swing bowling.

Once back in UAE, Yasir took 17 wickets from the first 2 Tests (that Pakistan won). He also held a stunning caught-and-bowled at Dubai to decide the Test. In the third Test he got a mere 4, and Pakistan lost. In New Zealand and Australia he looked wayward. Pakistan won nothing.

The table below shows the differences of the two men depending on match results. As a firm believer of the concept of the inability (barring exceptions) of one cricketer to change the outcome of a Test, I must admit that the numbers are certainly sufficient to make one curious.

	Yasir Shah				Asad Shafiq
	W	Ave	SR	5WIs	R	Ave	50+
Won	32	22.37	48.1	4	429	71.50	5
Lost	11	77.90	113.2		304	21.71	1

But then, the probability of two men affecting the course of a match is certainly more than one man doing the same. The ratio suddenly changes from 1:21 to 1:10.

The prodigal son

We have talked about Misbah’s hundred, Younis’ double-hundred, and Shafiq’s epic. We have talked about celebrations. Perhaps it is time to talk about Aamer as well.

Back in 2010 Aamer had taken money to bowl a no-ball. He was a teenager so immature that he had not even bothered to disguise his overstepping. He had served his sentence. He came back, much to the chagrin of many, dividing the world of cricket for a while.

Aamer was magnificent in bursts when he donned the green jersey, but the Lord’s was going to be the real thing: it was Pakistan’s first Test in England since that dreaded 2010 outing; it was the same ground where Aamer, along with Salman Butt and Mohammad Asif, had cheated cricket-lovers; it was also going to be Aamer’s comeback test.

Aamer was 24 when he played that Test. He had become a superstar, had been involved in spot-fixing, had been banned, had survived the ban, and had gnawed his way back to the top. All that, by 24. It takes most mortals a lifetime to do even a fraction of that.

Aamer did not take more than 2 wickets in an innings on the England tour. However, he had at least one wicket in 7 of the 8 innings he bowled in. The wickets came at 42.41. He failed in UAE as well, but on the windy mornings at Christchurch and Hamilton. There was also a four-wicket haul at Brisbane, but he fell away thereafter.

Even then, despite the nothing-to-talk-about year, Aamer’s has not been a year of disappointment. He has bowled well, even brilliantly in bursts; he has remained fit; and he has handled his comeback with grace. His first year has not been spectacular, but he has still finished as the leading wicket-taker among the fast bowlers.

The other bowlers

One wonders exactly what poor Imran Khan Jr needs to do to find a regular place in the side. He got a solitary Test this year, at Hamilton. He took 3 cheap wickets in each innings. Curiously, it was also the only Test Misbah did not lead this year.

In a career spanning three years Imran has played a mere 8 Tests and missed 16. He has taken 26 wickets at 26.53, and has taken at least 2 wickets in each of his Tests; the average is better than his contemporaries. Exactly why Pakistan wants to ignore him remains a mystery as deep as the team itself.

On a lighter note, Imran scored 6 in the first innings at Hamilton, his first runs in Test cricket after a wait of 7 Tests and over two years. He perhaps got carried away by that, and promptly followed it with a duck. His batting average sits at a princely 1.50.

But enough of Imran: let us move on to the more fortunate triumvirate. Wahab Riaz bowled with pace and bounce but less hostility than before. He was expected to do well on the Brisbane, the bounciest track he encountered this year, and he did.

Wahab played a significant role in the victory at The Oval: he took 5 wickets in the Test, and all five were of top-order batsmen. And at Sharjah, where West Indies stunned Pakistan on a pitch that barely offered any help to fast bowlers, Wahab claimed 7 of the 15 scalps his team managed.

Sohail Khan thrived in the England series, moving the ball around under conditions that favoured him. He bowled beautifully, troubling every batsman at Edgbaston and The Oval. The two Tests, his first of the year, got him 13 wickets at 25. He played 5 more, which also fetched him 13 — at 42.69. He was not the same bowler anymore.

Just like Wahab, however, Sohail finished with a better average than both Yasir and Aamer. That, however, does not explain why Imran did not get more opportunities.

Rahat Ali was brisk in phases. He was wayward in England but found his rhythm in Christchurch before falling apart again.

Mohammad Nawaz did a good containing job in UAE, but his batting never came off. He never matured into the all-rounder Pakistan expected him to be. Had that happened, he might have been the ideal replacement for Mohammad Hafeez, whose Test career seems to be in the doldrums with Azhar and Sami both delivering at the top. Hafeez will perhaps have a role to play once Misbah and Younis quits, but at this point he will have to sit out.

Hafeez will also find it tough to keep out Babar Azam, who has squandered promising starts that it makes you wonder whether that is a part of his job description. Babar’s unbeaten 90 at Hamilton was a gem: he seemed at ease in alien conditions, stood firm when they deserted him one by one, and played some delightful shots, not all of which went for boundaries.

Despite being a man of such talent and poise, Babar’s 10 innings in his debut year fetched a mere 291 runs at 32.33. The infuriating bit is the fact that he reached double-figures in 8 of these 10 innings but made it past 30 only twice. Had Babar managed to attains the consistency he bats with in limited-overs cricket, his average would have been around the 50-mark by now.

However, at 22, Babar looks level-headed and composed, and is probably as good a filler Pakistan can find to link an improving opening stand and a formidable middle-order.

The relevance of Sarfraz

Pakistan cricketers are known to provide surprises every now and then, but the delayed career of Sarfraz Ahmed is almost unbelievable even by their standards. Behind the stumps he is safe, not spectacular. Whether he is as good as Wriddhiman Saha or BJ Watling is debatable. What cannot, however, be argued on is his prowess with bat.

Sarfraz averages 41.28. This year was not good, for his 569 runs came at 33.05. However, his three fifties have all come at strike rates of above 85. Across the year the strike rate reads 70.33.

Does strike rate matter? Under most circumstances, yes, since you need to give your bowlers enough time; the requirement is more, significantly more for Pakistan — for none of their top six have a strike rate in excess of 55. Let us do a check.

Batsman (2016)	R	BF	SR
Azhar Ali	1,198	2,569	46.6
Asad Shafiq	733	1,360	53.9
Younis Khan	673	1,333	50.5
Sami Aslam	618	1,580	39.1
Misbah-ul-Haq	543	1,132	48.0
Babar Azam	291	577	50.4
	4,056	8,551	47.4

Of course, this contradicts my reasoning for Azhar’s relevance. Once again, however, I must remind that Pakistan desperately needed a stable opening pair, which they seem to have found in Azhar and Sami. Agreed, the bowlers need quick runs. But if they do not get those quick runs, they will certainly prefer defending a high score over defending a low score.

However, once the top four, or five, or six help put up a decent score, Sarfraz will suddenly become relevant. Sarfraz has changed the course of a Test in a session; he can do better if he has a decent score by the time he walks out.

If you are still not convinced, here it is: Sarfraz averages more this year than Misbah and Babar. And his career average is the same as Shafiq’s and higher than Sami’s.

The evergreens

To put it bluntly, Pakistan’s ODI year has been abysmal. The numbers (5 wins, 6 defeats) sound harmless per se, but 3 of their 5 wins came against West Indies in UAE, and another against Ireland. In New Zealand they lost 0-2, and in England, 1-4. At Trent Bridge they suffered the ignominy of conceding 444 for 3 against England, the highest score in ODI history.

Babar’s three hundreds in three innings came against West Indies; however, he had 62 and 83 in New Zealand as well, crossed the 30-mark thrice against England. Sarfraz justified his relevance again, matching Babar in average (55 to Babar’s 60) and strike rate (93 to 95).

Sharjeel Khan, unstoppable on his day, biffed his way to an 86-ball 152, but that was against Ireland; however, his two fifties, along with several cameos, have come at astonishing paces, and he finished the year with 368 runs at a strike rate of 143. Put a 250-run cap, and Jos Buttler (130) has been the only one to have gone past the 110-mark.

Nawaz did not come off in the Tests, but he, along with (to a greater extent) Imad Wasim, has proved to be the fulcrum of the Pakistan line-up in the year.

	M	R	Ave	SR	W	Ave	Econ
Imad Wasim	9	193	48.25	99	12	27.67	4.63
Mohammad Nawaz	8	142	28.40	95	10	31.40	5.27

Unfortunately, both are spinners, and it is unlikely that both will play together in the Champions Trophy — more so because of the presence of the ageless Shoaib Malik. Anwar Ali will probably be the preferred option.

Malik got 313 runs in this year at an average of 39 and a strike rate of exactly 100. He bowled less than he used to, and barring the Trent Bridge carnage (where his 3 overs went for 44), he was never actually hit around. Take that innings away, and his 32 overs have gone at an impressive 5.09 apiece. He can probably do with more than 4 overs an innings.

Just like Nawaz, Aamer seemed more at home, with 12 wickets at 28.16 and an economy of 4.74. He was complemented by Hasan Ali, whose numbers (11 wickets, 31.18, 5.30) were not much inferior for someone in his first year. The senior men, Umar Gul and Mohammad Irfan, showed up in bursts, but it is unlikely that they will be a part of Pakistan’s long-term future.

Slam-bang showdowns

It is time to resurface that I-word again: Pakistan’s T20I year has been as turbulent as their Test year.

They have won 8 and lost 7. However, that does not tell the complete story: they had a hat-trick of defeats; later in the year, another hat-trick of defeats; and just when it seemed it was another terrible year, they won four in a row.

Pakistan started their year with a hard-fought win at Auckland: chasing 172 New Zealand were cruising at 89 for 1 before collapsing to 155. They lost the last 2 T20Is.

They were shot out for 83 in their opening match of the Asia Cup. Then Aamer, in what was probably the finest display of new-ball bowling in limited-overs cricket this year, took out 3 Indian wickets in his first 10 balls. Kohli made the Indian chase look easy once Aamer had bowled out, but the latter had proved a point.

UAE were shoved aside casually. Strangled by Bangladesh in the next match, Pakistan got to 129 for 7. Pakistan certainly had a chance when Bangladesh needed 18 from the last 2 overs. Then Mohammad Sami bowled two no-balls that resulted in a two, a four, and two free-hits; the over went for 15, and that was that. A consolation win against Sri Lanka did not amount to much.

Then, just when it seemed Pakistan were down and out, they took revenge on Bangladesh in the World T20 encounter. Afridi sprang back into action, smashing a 19-ball 49 and taking 2 for 27. Then they lost the remaining three matches, and Afridi has never played international cricket again.

Following their dismal show, nobody gave them a chance during their last 4 T20Is. After all, Pakistan were up against England and West Indies, finalists of the World T20.

Pakistan won all 4 matches. In the matches they chased, they won by 9, 9, and 8 wickets. The most they had taken to win a match was 15.1 overs. The other, they won by 16 runs.

Everything clicked. At Old Trafford England got to a mere 135 for 7. Imad took 5 for 14 as West Indies collapsed to 115 in the next match (they were 48 for 8 at one stage). Pakistan’s 16-run victory in the next match flattered West Indies: chasing 161 they first became 89 for 7 in 16 overs before the tail connected a few. And Imad bowled so well at Abu Dhabi that West Indies were restricted to 103 for 5.

Malik had another fantastic year, with 370 runs at 53 and a strike rate of 131 to go with an economy rate of 7.53. Imad was the pick of the bowlers, while Wahab, Aamer, Sami, and Mohammad Irfan did well on their days, while Sohail Tanvir did the most of his brief recall. Every single top-order batsman averaged over 20 with a strike rate of over 105, which will baffle analysts when they will try to assess Pakistan’s indifferent year.

And of course, there was Afridi. An average of 14 was not much, but he got them at a near-absurd strike rate of 181. On the other hand, his 9 wickets came at 31, and cost him less than 7 an over. The fire is probably still there in him, but PCB simply do not seem interested. It is a shame that T20 cricket came late in his career.

Of course, no story of Pakistan cricket, especially T20 cricket, can be complete without a mention of the star-studded first edition of PSL. The tournament, featuring international stars of the highest quality, was a grand success, Islamabad clinching the title.

All in all, it was a typical Pakistan year, one that involved exhilarating highs and embarrassing lows, adrenaline-pumping fast bowling and gritty batsmanship, war-hardened veterans and hardworking youngsters, and unique celebrations and emotional comebacks.

Towering above everything has been the I-word, which makes it impossible for fans of the sport to remain neutral to Pakistan cricket. Where would you find a group of men this mercurial?

• 
• 
•