Sachin ODI Dismissal Stats

These stats are interesting too. Vaas is not too much of a concern, nor Razzaq, as you can see his averages are not that bad against them. But you can conclude that Razzaq dismisses a set Tendulkar, and that’s a bit dangerous. I remember a 93 in Aus, and of course the recent 95 when Razzaq dismissed Sachin. On the other hand, Pollock has always dismissed Sachin early. It can also be viewed that Pollock can’t dismiss Sachin except early! So maybe, Sachin should not open against SA. It’s always possible to draw dumb conclusions from statistics, but we can make useful interpretations at times! Walsh again appears to have had an upper hand with Sachin. I am surprised that Cronje has dismissed Sachin only thrice — at one point it appeared that he was picking Sachin every single game!

Statsguru – SR Tendulkar – ODI Batting – Bowlers/fielders dismissed by

SR Tendulkar (Sachin Tendulkar) [Player Page] – RHB; LBG
Born: 1973-04-24 (present age: 32y 299d)

ODIs: India 1989/90 – 2005/06 (16y 238d – 32y 298d)
Also: Test Player 1989/90 – 2005/06.

Filter: none.
Sort order: total dismissals (descending).


                     Mat    I  NO  Runs HS1  HS2  HS3     Ave 100  50   0
overall              362  353  33 14146 186* 152  146   44.20  39  72  16

Bowler Dis bwd c fi c wk st lbw hit Ave 0 Team WPUJC Vaas (LFM) 9 2 4 2 0 1 0 20.88 1 SL SM Pollock (RFM) 7 2 2 2 0 1 0 6.28 1 SA HH Streak (RFM) 7 1 4 2 0 0 0 32.28 0 Zim Abdul Razzaq (RFM) 6 2 1 2 0 1 0 51.50 0 Pak Azhar Mahmood (RFM) 6 1 3 1 0 1 0 25.83 0 Pak GD McGrath (RFM) 6 0 4 2 0 0 0 26.16 1 Aus CA Walsh (RF) 6 1 3 1 0 1 0 8.66 2 WI Aaqib Javed (RFM) 5 0 3 1 0 1 0 3.20 1 Pak AA Donald (RF) 5 1 3 0 0 1 0 22.60 0 SA DW Fleming (RFM) 5 1 1 3 0 0 0 54.60 0 Aus ST Jayasuriya (SLA) 5 1 2 0 2 0 0 48.20 0 SL DNT Zoysa (LFM) 5 0 3 1 0 1 0 47.40 0 SL AC Cummins (RFM) 4 1 3 0 0 0 0 30.00 0 WI PS de Villiers (RFM) 4 1 3 0 0 0 0 15.50 0 SA CZ Harris (RM) 4 0 3 1 0 0 0 69.75 0 NZ JH Kallis (RFM) 4 1 3 0 0 0 0 74.75 0 SA B Lee (RF) 4 1 3 0 0 0 0 17.25 0 Aus TM Moody (RM) 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 16.25 0 Aus DK Morrison (RFM) 4 1 3 0 0 0 0 12.75 0 NZ M Muralitharan (OB) 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 46.25 0 SL Shoaib Akhtar (RF) 4 0 2 1 0 1 0 36.00 0 Pak Waqar Younis (RF) 4 1 2 1 0 0 0 34.25 1 Pak NW Bracken (LFM) 3 0 1 2 0 0 0 58.00 0 Aus WJ Cronje (RM) 3 0 2 1 0 0 0 28.33 0 SA TJ Friend (RFM) 3 0 1 1 0 1 0 24.66 0 Zim L Klusener (RFM) 3 0 2 1 0 0 0 24.66 0 SA GR Larsen (RM) 3 1 0 0 1 1 0 49.33 0 NZ CR Matthews (RFM) 3 0 0 3 0 0 0 15.66 0 SA Mohammad Sami (RF) 3 0 1 2 0 0 0 14.33 1 Pak DJ Nash (RFM) 3 1 2 0 0 0 0 18.00 0 NZ Shoaib Malik (OB) 3 1 2 0 0 0 0 114.00 0 Pak SA Thomson 3 0 1 2 0 0 0 25.00 1 NZ DR Tuffey (RFM) 3 0 2 1 0 0 0 5.66 0 NZ Wasim Akram (LF) 3 1 2 0 0 0 0 5.00 0 Pak SR Waugh (RM) 3 0 2 0 0 1 0 59.33 0 Aus GP Wickramasinghe (RFM) 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 17.33 0 SL CEL Ambrose (RF) 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 24.00 0 WI Ata-ur-Rehman (RFM) 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 27.50 0 Pak N Boje (SLA) 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 90.50 0 SA EA Brandes (RFM) 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 9.50 0 Zim CL Cairns (RFM) 2 0 1 0 0 1 0 2.50 1 NZ CE Cuffy (RF) 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 33.00 1 WI KSC de Silva (LFM) 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 20.50 0 SL M Dillon (RFM) 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 36.50 0 WI CJ Drum (RFM) 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 1.50 0 NZ CRD Fernando (RFM) 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 19.00 0 SL A Flintoff (RF) 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 43.00 0 Eng GW Flower (SLA) 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 42.00 0 Zim JN Gillespie (RF) 2 0 1 0 0 1 0 31.50 0 Aus MN Hart (SLA) 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 72.00 0 NZ M Hayward (RF) 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 21.50 0 SA PW Jarvis (RFM) 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 14.50 0 Eng MS Kasprowicz (RFM) 2 0 1 0 0 1 0 71.00 0 Aus CC Lewis (RFM) 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 18.50 0 Eng BM McMillan (RMF) 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 39.50 0 SA Mohammad Rafique (SLA) 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 51.00 0 BD Naved-ul-Hasan (RMF) 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 2.50 0 Pak ML Nkala (RFM) 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 28.00 0 Zim RJ Ratnayake (RFM,LB) 2 1 0 0 0 1 0 44.50 0 SL Saqlain Mushtaq (OB) 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 83.50 0 Pak Shahid Afridi (RM,LBG) 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 68.00 0 Pak MA Suji (RMF) 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 11.50 0 Ken A Symonds (RM,OB) 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 74.50 0 Aus ME Waugh 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 76.00 0 Aus
Advertisements

Sachin ODI Bowling Stats

Sachin dismissed Inzi for a record 7th time — he’s not dismissed anyone more times; also, only Jayasuriya (does Inzi have a weakness for part-timers?) and Prasad have dismissed Inzi more times (8) (see below). I myself remember several times Sachin dismissing Inzi. Also note that he’s been breaking partnerships, considering the high scores batsmen have been on (reflected by the averages) — Andy Flower seems to clearly indicate that.
Statsguru – SR Tendulkar – ODI Bowling – Batsmen dismissed/fielders effecting dismissals

SR Tendulkar (Sachin Tendulkar) [Player Page] – RHB; LBG
Born: 1973-04-24 (present age: 32y 299d)

ODIs: India 1989/90 – 2005/06 (16y 238d – 32y 298d)
Also: Test Player 1989/90 – 2005/06.

Filter: none.
Sort order: total dismissals (descending).


(6 ball overs)       Mat    O       R   W   BB1    BB2     Ave  Econ    SR 4w 5w
overall              362 1224.5  6194 142  5/32   5/50   43.61  5.05  51.7  4  2

Batsman Dis bwd c fi c wk st lbw hit Ave 0 Team Inzamam-ul-Haq (RHB) 7 1 2 2 0 2 0 35.57 0 Pak A Flower (LHB) 4 0 2 1 1 0 0 74.00 0 Zim Abdul Razzaq (RHB) 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 27.00 0 Pak DPMD Jayawardene (RHB) 3 1 2 0 0 0 0 10.33 1 SL BC Lara (LHB) 3 1 1 0 0 1 0 47.66 0 WI CD McMillan (RHB) 3 0 2 1 0 0 0 32.33 0 NZ A Ranatunga (LHB) 3 0 1 1 0 1 0 14.66 0 SL SR Waugh (RHB) 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 16.66 0 Aus MG Bevan (LHB) 2 1 0 0 1 0 0 36.50 0 Aus N Boje (LHB) 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 12.00 0 SA SP Fleming (LHB) 2 0 1 0 0 1 0 41.00 0 NZ MJ Horne (RHB) 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 59.00 0 NZ Khaled Mashud (RHB) 2 0 0 1 0 1 0 11.00 0 BD L Klusener (LHB) 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 12.50 0 SA DS Lehmann (LHB) 2 0 1 0 0 1 0 4.50 0 Aus RS Mahanama (RHB) 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 29.50 0 SL DR Martyn (RHB) 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 13.00 0 Aus Mohammad Sami (RHB) 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 1.50 0 Pak Moin Khan (RHB) 2 1 0 0 1 0 0 21.00 0 Pak JN Rhodes (RHB) 2 1 0 0 1 0 0 23.50 0 SA Saeed Anwar (LHB) 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 137.00 0 Pak Shoaib Malik (RHB) 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 92.00 0 Pak PV Simmons (RHB) 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 58.00 0 WI ME Waugh (RHB) 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 98.50 0 Aus SC Williams (RHB) 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 60.50 0 WI

Statsguru – Inzamam-ul-Haq – ODI Batting – Bowlers/fielders dismissed by

Inzamam-ul-Haq [Player Page] – RHB; SLA
Born: 1970-03-03 (present age: 35y 351d)

ODIs: Pakistan 1991/92 – 2005/06 (21y 264d – 35y 350d); Asia XI 2005 (35y 167d – 35y 171d)
Also: Test Player 1992 – 2005/06.

Filter: none.
Sort order: total dismissals (descending).


                     Mat    I  NO  Runs HS1  HS2  HS3     Ave 100  50   0

overall              355  330  49 11230 137* 123  122   39.96  10  82  19


Bowler Dis bwd c fi c wk st lbw hit Ave 0 Team ST Jayasuriya (SLA) 8 0 6 1 1 0 0 37.37 0 SL BKV Prasad (RMF) 8 1 5 1 0 1 0 34.25 1 Ind SR Tendulkar (LBG) 7 1 2 2 0 2 0 35.57 0 Ind WPUJC Vaas (LFM) 7 1 2 2 0 2 0 34.57 0 SL NJ Astle (RM) 6 0 3 1 2 0 0 17.16 0 NZ SK Warne (LBG) 6 1 0 0 2 3 0 14.16 1 Aus AB Agarkar (RFM) 5 2 0 2 0 1 0 39.00 0 Ind GD McGrath (RFM) 5 0 1 2 0 2 0 10.00 2 Aus M Muralitharan (OB) 5 1 2 1 1 0 0 40.80 0 SL JH Kallis (RFM) 4 2 1 1 0 0 0 38.00 0 SA L Klusener (RFM) 4 0 0 2 0 2 0 20.50 0 SA C Pringle (RFM) 4 0 3 0 0 1 0 26.75 0 NZ RR Singh (RMF) 4 0 2 2 0 0 0 31.50 0 Ind CL Cairns (RFM) 3 1 0 0 0 2 0 24.66 1 NZ WJ Cronje (RM) 3 1 0 1 1 0 0 53.66 0 SA M Dillon (RFM) 3 0 1 2 0 0 0 12.66 1 WI SC Ganguly (RM) 3 0 1 2 0 0 0 15.00 0 Ind CH Gayle (OB) 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 31.66 0 WI CL Hooper (OB) 3 0 2 1 0 0 0 23.33 0 WI GR Larsen (RM) 3 1 1 1 0 0 0 29.66 0 NZ S Lee (RM) 3 0 2 0 0 1 0 8.33 0 Aus A Nehra (LMF) 3 1 2 0 0 0 0 42.33 0 Ind CPH Ramanayake (RFM) 3 1 2 0 0 0 0 58.00 0 SL A Ranatunga (RM) 3 0 2 0 0 1 0 18.00 0 SL HH Streak (RFM) 3 1 2 0 0 0 0 15.33 1 Zim CA Walsh (RF) 3 0 2 0 0 1 0 29.33 0 WI

Inzi, Moin, sporting spirit and all that obscure stuff

Sporting spirit: Inzamam-ul-Haq’s whinge about his Obstructing-the-field dismissal at Peshawar divided opinion across the world. Some panned him for his lack of awareness of the game’s rules, while others – including several former Indian cricketers – supported his contention that the Indian appeal had been less than sporting. But while Inzamam deserved some sympathy in the wake of what had happened to him against England at Faisalabad, Moin Khan – his former team-mate – stepped in to win the hypocrisy stakes. The man who once caught Sourav Ganguly on the second bounce in a Test match not only questioned Rahul Dravid’s integrity, but went on to suggest that Ganguly would have behaved different. About as rich as the Australians imploring players from other nations to “walk” when out.

— Dileep Premachandran on cricinfo

Moin caught Saurav on second bounce — the umpire (that blind V K Ramaswamy — perhaps that Tamil comedian with the same name could have made a better decision) deemed that it came of the short leg’s leg (my foot!). There was so much dust puffed up by the ball striking the turf and it took 11 dishonest players and 2 blind umpires to make that abhorrent decision.
Perhaps it would be prudent to stop Moin from writing, since he’s been suffering from the foot-in-mouth disease all the time. Perhaps, he too, like Jayawant Lele, has mastered the art of walking on one foot! Constant and consistent garbage — he should soon become the editor of TOI Sport!

Australia just whipped SL today, after being 10-3 in 3.0 overs. Good job, Ponting and Symonds. Murali missed his 100, with the ball though (10-0-99-0) [See here].

As for “Australians and walking”, it’s a big joke. When Gilchrist walked so (in)famously in the World Cup semi-final (I still don’t understand what SL were doing in the semis after losing to Kenya), no one spoke to him in the dressing room till the match concluded. I remember him saying that he wished that someone would at least abuse him! Secondly, people made a big hue and cry appreciating Gillespie (or probably Kasprowicz) walking in the last India series. Give me a break! You don’t need people like Venkatesh Prasad or Kaz to walk — they’d get out anyways. The bottomline is that “selective walking” is very dangerous. It can trick umpires, i.e., if Lara, who has a reputation of walking, does not walk after a nick, chances are that the umpire would not give him out. It’s better to consistently not walk instead. After all, why are umpires there for?

Back to the Inzi issue, Osman Saimuddin echoed many of my own feelings in his column:

Inzamam’s reaction leaves a bad taste

Osman Samiuddin

February 10, 2006

If you haven’t seen the incident referred to, then google.com has a video clip of it

Inzamam-ul-Haq makes his way off after being given out at Peshawar © AFP

It should first be clear that, by obstructing the field at Peshawar, Inzamam-ul-Haq was out.

Law 37 (1) states that a batsman is obstructing the field if he willfully obstructs or distracts the opposing side by word or action. It is also obstruction if a batsman willfully, and without the consent of the fielding side, strikes the ball with his bat or person – other than the hand not holding the bat – after the ball has touched a fielder. And Law 37 (2), on accidental obstruction, states it is for either umpire to decide whether any obstruction is willful or not. Inzamam patting the ball back appeared willful and, in any case, both umpires consulted each other before ruling him out. That incident and its aftermath, however, revealed two disturbing aspects.

The first was that Inzamam wasn’t aware of the law. Given the abundance of rules and subsections governing the game, it is futile – though not unfair – to expect captains to be intimately aware of their minutiae. At least, knowledge of those concerning dismissals is prerequisite for every captain and player. Granted, it is an uncommon mode of dismissal – he was only the third man in ODI history to be dismissed in such a manner – but rarity should not justify ignorance.

Inzamam wrote in his column for The News: “Such not very common laws need to be explained properly and in detail.” Is it not incumbent upon a player to know them himself? And if they need explaining to one with a 100-plus Tests and 350 ODIs, in a career spanning nearly 16 years, it reveals more about the player than the laws. That Inzamam should have known the law brooks no argument, defense or justification.

It wasn’t the first time either that he has been caught unawares; in Pakistan’s seven-wicket win at Wellington, in 2003-04, he shunned the extra half hour on the fourth day 28 runs from victory. Showers and inconsistent weather were expected on the final day and the decision bemused and shocked observers. To Pakistan’s horror, play was delayed on the final morning but, luckily, only for an hour. The win was duly completed. In quite a different way, that situation also reflected a similarly dangerous lack of awareness of situation and circumstance.

But more regrettable than his ignorance are comments in the aftermath which only compound his folly. By publicly accusing India of acting outside the spirit of cricket he raised a question, of sportsmanship and spirit of the game, when it needn’t have been invoked. The match was delicately poised in favour of Pakistan, Inzamam’s was a crucial wicket and India needed it. The mode of dismissal was legitimate and the appeal as sporting or unsporting as any for an edge, leg-before, stumping or run-out. Incidentally, the appeal was also as genuine as the one Pakistan made when Sachin Tendulkar was run out at Eden Gardens in 1999, another dismissal that sparked debate about the spirit of cricket.

Tendulkar appeared to have grounded his bat before colliding with Shoaib Akhtar inadvertently, causing him to lift his bat when the bails were dislodged and being given out; Pakistan could have withdrawn the appeal given the accidental collision but chose not to, which was their right. In Inzamam’s case, the decision didn’t even involve considerations of a collision as a loophole.

Ultimately both decisions were correct according to law and that, not ensuing debate in both cases about sportsmanship, is what matters. Moin Khan, who played in that match, called Inzamam’s dismissal deplorable, citing it as an example of India’s desire to win by hook or by crook and launching a scathing personal attack on Rahul Dravid. Conveniently, Moin forgets Tendulkar’s dismissal. Was appealing for it then not outside the spirit of the game as well? In a realm as grey as ethics, such accusations are damaging and unnecessary and though they hold less significance than Inzamam’s, Moin’s words are incendiary, misjudged and possibly hypocritical.

Worse still, Inzamam further implied it could affect relations between the two sides. Mostly, this series has been played in a cordial spirit, aside from some niggles at Faisalabad. Inzamam has thus not only made an issue from nothing, within the context of India and Pakistan, he has acted irresponsibly. As captain of a side in a series where so much is always at stake, where words must still be uttered cautiously, his comments are unnecessarily provocative; for a ravenous media on either side of the border not strangers to hyperbole and context-removal, they are gold-dust.

Already India has been compelled to issue a counter-statement, and although they have correctly called for the issue to be put to rest, it is unlikely that it will so easily. Inzamam claimed he has, “asserted on my boys not to make much of the Peshawar incident … however, in my personal opinion the appeal was not made in a sporting manner. Instead, it just might have left a bad taste in the mouth.”

How, though, can he expect his side not to make much of it when he himself has already done so? The bad taste has already been left in the mouth and it is not the Indians’ doing.

Wonder if Dravid should have appealed against Shoaib Malik in yesterday’s match, for the same reason! Guess public pressure/media made him decide otherwise. Gavaskar made a good point saying that Indian cricketers should be allowed to at least write, if not talk to the media, since it gives Pakistan an unnecessary advantage (of manipulating public opinion?).

Let these issues take the backseat. More cricket, please!!

End of the Endulkar talk: my prophecy comes true :D

The end of “Endulkar” talk?: After India’s biggest newspaper asked the question: Endulkar?, the pressure on Sachin Tendulkar to deliver in the one-day series was more than immense. He responded with a bloody-minded century at Peshawar, a match that India lost on the Duckworth-Lewis method, and an entertaining cameo of 42 in a thumping win at Rawalpindi. His accomplice in the stunning turnaround was Rana Naved-ul-Hasan, who bowled him off a no-ball when Tendulkar was on 20 at Peshawar. An errant foot may just have given the one of the most illustrious careers a new lease of life.

— Dileep Premachandran on cricinfo.

I need to disagree at least on “India’s biggest newspaper”. It’s actually worth being India’s most colourful toilet paper. The no-ball might just be the indication that destiny favours Sachin, much like Azza, who would fight back from the brink (Harsha Bhogle had written a wonderful article on this, about how “Azza was much of a ‘Child of Destiny’ and when he did choose to make his own [the fixing issue], his choice was certainly not as good as his Creator’s”) and would have invariably had a life early in that decisive face-saving (or place-saving) knock.

Also see my previous entry, prophesying as much!

Sachin, eikon non-pareil

Enough can never be written about Sachin Ramesh Tendulkar. Nor can enough be said. But, I’ve read and heard enough. It’s just like the whole world gunning for his head, now that sufficient success has been met with Saurav Ganguly. It’s appalling to see all kinds of people speak various kinds of garbage on a man who has never had a real equal on the cricketing arena. I don’t mean to say that he was the best — even among his contemporaries — but in terms of his sheer unique genius and style, and the way he captured the imagination of billions, he was, is and will be peerless.

From Moin Khan to market gurus, everyone has an opinion. Call it the curse of free speech or whatever. Just like an unbelievable amount of analysis (analysis paralysis) has gone into the farcial test series (which I did not even consider worth adorning my blog) on bizzarre pitches, reading much too far into the lone loss (whatever the manner be) that we had, there’s an even more obnoxious discussion on, on Sachin and others.

When you do look at the footage of the games, even Saurav seems to be comfortable and belongs, leave alone Sachin. But, it has become rather fashionable to talk about young guns and related crap, (to recall Siddhu, the “fragrance and exuberance of youth“) and the axing of anyone who’s not in their early 20s.

I don’t need to argue that Sachin unleashed several fluent strokes before being dismissed in either knock at Karachi — he’s certainly expected to do much more. But my primary crib is that people have just gone over the top already.

But the media is that way, like it or not. I am hurriedly writing this blog before the next match, since if Sachin does get the 91 runs that would take him to 14,000 ODI runs, you would have cover stories and front pages, with weird headlines and accoladed for the ‘Little Master’, ‘Master Blaster’ and so on.

Sachin doesn’t need mouthpieces, and I am not one. He only needs his willow-piece. To recall, in the 2003 World Cup, Sachin lay to dust all pre-series predictions and rose to glory (doing all but winning the final for us). Mathew Hayden was the bookies’ favourite for the top scorer, and I think he struggled to one 50 during the whole competition. And yes, Sachin (and Lara too..) rarely gets umpiring assistance as does Ponting (out on both his 100s in his 100th test, on lower scores; plumb lbw to Dinesh Mongia at 69 in the WCC 2003 final). I can hardly recall a series that passed without a controversial decision against Sachin.

The game’s bigger than individuals, and that holds for Sachin too — in the sense that the game’s bigger to him than these Moins and other intellectually challenged experts [sic] whose cricketing acumen has plunged abysmally during this Indo-Pak series. He’ll make a hell of a statement in the next week. Watch on…

Chennapunji!

It’s embarrassing that in one of the least rainiest of the cities in India, we’ve had three matches spoilt by rain. Of course, I must say that Chennai has been a very rainy city this year, with so many rainy days, though not too much of rain, save the deluge of Oct 27.

With two matches to go and 1-1, it’s indeed interestingly poised, though a 2-2 results is very much on the cards, unfortunately!

The most interesting development in cricket over the last 24 hours was the appointment of Rahul Dravid as captain for tests. All this is fine to me, but the only dissappointing thing in the whole issue is how we’ve treated one of out top ten greatest cricketers and that it needed a damned foreigner to intervene in the whole issue. Comebacks are always heartening — let’s see if Ganguly makes one; the fact that the next game is in Kolkata is going to have a big say!

Karma in cricket

“As you sow, so you reap”

Inzi was run out today in horrible fashion: Sambit Bal has a brilliant article at http://content-ind.cricinfo.com/pakveng/content/story/226638.html on this. More interestingly, he has pointed out to the Sachin’s dismissal at Kolkata in 1999, when Shoaib had elbowed him. Inzi was run out with the score at 369-5 and this really made a whole lot of difference. Of course, it may not be as costly as Sachin’s dismissal with regard to the outcome of the match, but it’s despicably stupid.

More importantly, in the last game, which everyone chose to happily overlook, the result really depended on a crucial run out decision, given wrong by the third umpire (Asad Rauf). How atrocious that was! It was in a partnership between Inzi and (I think) Shoaib Malik and it probably made a big difference to the outcome of the match.

Maybe, it’s just the law of karma catching up with Pakistan. If it does catch up with Aus, they might never win a home series against West Indies, given what happened in WI’s previous tour! (What about Sachin in Aus?!!)