Pakistan Cricket’s Struggles: Beyond Intent – A Call for Stability and Vision

Pakistan’s early exit from the Champions Trophy, a tournament held on home soil after 29 years, has left fans and analysts searching for answers. The common buzzword circulating in cricketing circles is “intent”, with many attributing the team’s downfall to a lack of aggressive mindset, particularly in batting. However, while intent is a crucial aspect of modern cricket, it is merely a symptom of a much deeper problem. The real issues afflicting Pakistan cricket stem from structural instability, psychological barriers, and short-term decision-making. This article delves into the fundamental challenges and explores how Pakistan can regain its former glory by focusing on long-term stability and a clear strategic vision. 

The Fear of Failure: A Mental Barrier

One of the primary reasons behind Pakistan’s passive approach in high-stakes matches is the fear of failure. This fear inhibits players from expressing their natural game, leading to overly cautious batting and defensive decision-making. The best athletes embrace failure as a stepping stone to success, but many Pakistani cricketers seem paralyzed by the pressure of making mistakes. 

Babar Azam, often hailed as a world-class batsman, is a prime example. In bilateral series and domestic competitions, he plays fearless cricket, effortlessly lifting spinners over cover for boundaries. However, in major tournaments, he becomes tentative, nudging the ball into gaps instead of dominating the bowling attack. This transformation is not due to a lack of ability but rather a psychological burden—the fear that one mistake could lead to criticism or even exclusion. 

Wayne Gretzky, the greatest ice hockey player of all time, famously said,“You miss 100% of the shots you don’t take.” In cricketing terms, a batter who hesitates loses the edge over the bowler. Pakistan’s inability to take calculated risks in crunch moments stems from a deep-seated fear of failure, which must be addressed through mental conditioning and a cultural shift in team philosophy. 

Self-Preservation Over Team Objectives

Another critical factor affecting Pakistan cricket is self-preservation—the need for players to safeguard their place in the team rather than play for collective success. This mindset directly results from frequent changes in leadership, selection panels, and coaching staff. When players operate in an environment of uncertainty, their primary concern shifts from winning matches to ensuring they remain in the squad. 

Pakistan cricket has seen a revolving door of chairpersons, head coaches, and selectors, each bringing their own vision and personnel. This instability prevents players from committing to a long-term playing philosophy. In contrast, teams like Australia and New Zealand have demonstrated that sustained success requires continuity in leadership and selection policies. 

When a player knows they are backed despite occasional failures, they play with freedom and confidence. However, when they fear being dropped after one or two poor performances, their focus shifts to minimizing errors rather than maximizing impact. Pakistan must move away from this short-term mindset and embrace a long-term approach that prioritizes stability over-reactive decision-making. 

 Lessons from New Zealand and Australia

New Zealand cricket was in a similar predicament 15 years ago—frequent leadership changes, inconsistent performances, and a lack of playing identity. However, once they established stability in administration, selection, and team leadership, they built a strong, resilient unit that has consistently performed well in ICC tournaments. 

Australia follows a similar philosophy. Even when star players go through poor phases, they are not discarded immediately. Instead, the system allows them to regain form without the pressure of constant scrutiny. This long-term vision enables teams to develop a winning culture rather than relying on sporadic individual brilliance. 

A Roadmap for Pakistan Cricket’s Revival

If Pakistan wants to regain its status as a dominant force in world cricket, the following steps are essential: 

1. Establish a Clear Leadership Structure – The chairman should appoint a director of cricket with a long-term vision (at least 3–4 years) and give them full autonomy. 

2. Back Players for an Extended Period – Team selection should be based on sustained performance trends rather than a handful of matches. 

3. Create a Fearless Team Culture– Players must be encouraged to take calculated risks without fearing immediate repercussions. 

4. Develop a Long-Term Playing Philosophy – Pakistan needs to modernize its approach, adopting a high-intensity, aggressive style of cricket that aligns with contemporary international standards. 

Conclusion

While discussions about “intent” will continue, it is crucial to recognize that intent is an outcome, not the root cause of Pakistan’s struggles. The real challenge lies in addressing mental barriers, administrative instability, and short-term decision-making. Unless Pakistan cricket shifts its focus from reactive changes to sustained structural stability, the team will continue to struggle, regardless of individual talent. 

Success in cricket, like in any sport, is built on confidence, continuity, and clarity of purpose. Pakistan does not need a complete overhaul of players but rather a well-thought-out strategy that fosters stability and long-term growth. Stability breeds confidence. Confidence breeds intent. And intent breeds success.

Thank You

Faisal Caesar

The Timeless Test: A Marathon of Endurance and Unfulfilled Resolution

Cricket, a game defined by its ability to blend patience, skill, and strategy, has produced many remarkable contests. However, few encounters in its history stand as uniquely as the Timeless Test of 1939 between England and South Africa. This match, lasting an astonishing ten days, was an unparalleled spectacle—one that defied logic, redefined expectations, and ultimately ended in an anticlimax dictated not by sporting competition but by logistical constraints.

The very concept of a Timeless Test—a game designed to continue indefinitely until a result was reached—seemed ideal for ensuring decisive outcomes. And yet, in an ironic twist, this very match proved the folly of such an approach. After days of gripping cricket, South Africa and England were forced to abandon the contest because the visiting team had to catch a train to Cape Town, ensuring their timely departure for England by sea. It was a moment that encapsulated both the enduring spirit of Test cricket and the practical limitations of a game unrestricted by time.

The Unprecedented Challenge: England’s Impossible Task

As the match entered its final phase, South Africa had placed England in what seemed like an insurmountable position. Needing 696 runs to win, England faced the most formidable fourth-innings target in history. To put this challenge into perspective, even in today’s era of high-scoring Tests, no team has ever successfully chased down a total of such magnitude.

At the time, cricket was played with a more defensive approach, and wickets were often designed to favor the bowlers. The idea of scoring nearly 700 runs in a single innings was, therefore, considered laughable. Most expected England to crumble under pressure and accept the inevitable defeat. However, what transpired over the next few days was nothing short of extraordinary.

Rather than resigning themselves to failure, the English batsmen produced one of the most valiant rearguards in Test history. Not only did they avoid outright collapse, but they took the chase seriously, defying both South Africa’s bowlers and the doubts of the cricketing world. As the innings progressed, it became evident that England was not just surviving; they were steadily moving towards a result that had once seemed unthinkable.

Yet, even as the records tumbled, fate had its own plan. With England needing only 42 more runs to achieve the greatest chase in cricket history, rain arrived to steal the finale. And, in an outcome as frustrating as it was surreal, the game was called off—not for cricketing reasons, but because England could not afford to miss their scheduled departure. The very concept of a "Timeless" Test had met its paradoxical end.

Edrich’s Redemption and Hammond’s Mastery

Amid this battle of attrition, individual performances shone brightly, none more so than Bill Edrich’s monumental 219. Before this match, Edrich had struggled to establish himself at the international level, often criticized for failing to deliver when it mattered most. However, thrust into this crisis, he played the innings of his life, combining grit with fluent stroke play to carve out his first Test century.

Edrich’s seven-hour marathon at the crease was a display of patience, resilience, and sheer determination. The South African bowlers, who had been so dominant earlier in the series, found themselves toiling against his unwavering defence. This innings not only rescued England from humiliation but also cemented Edrich’s reputation as a batsman of substance, ensuring his place in the team for years to come.

Alongside him, England’s captain Wally Hammond orchestrated a masterclass in controlled aggression. Already a giant of the game, Hammond added to his legend with a commanding 140, steering England ever closer to the unthinkable. His authoritative drives and precise leg-side strokes kept the scoreboard ticking even as South Africa tightened their fielding. It was a captain’s knock in every sense— a blend of leadership, patience, and calculated stroke-making.

Hammond’s 21st Test century equalled the great Don Bradman’s record at the time, a feat that underscored his stature as one of cricket’s finest batsmen. Yet, for all his brilliance, even he could not control the uncontrollable—the encroaching rain and the harsh reality of time slipping away.

The Battle of Attrition: A Test of Patience and Perseverance

While England’s fourth innings was a spectacle of courage and ambition, the rest of the match had been a slow-burning war of attrition.

South Africa’s first innings of 530, built painstakingly over multiple days, was a display of sheer discipline. Pieter van der Byl’s patient 125 became the cornerstone of their batting, while Dudley Nourse’s gruelling century in over six hours was the slowest ever by a South African in Test cricket. The innings was so lengthy that even boundary-hitting seemed an afterthought, with some batsmen spending over 40 minutes before scoring their first runs.

England’s first innings reply, 316 all out, mirrored the same cautious approach. South Africa’s bowlers, led by the unerring accuracy of Dalton and Gordon, kept a tight leash on England’s batsmen, making every run a struggle. But despite securing a 214-run lead, South Africa chose not to enforce the follow-on, preferring to set an unattainable target rather than risk batting last.

Their second innings of 481 was more expansive, with Melville’s elegant 103 and Viljoen’s aggressive 93 further tightening their grip on the match. By the time England was set 696 to win, the game appeared to be drifting towards an inevitable conclusion.

Yet, cricket thrives on the unexpected, and what followed was nothing short of historic.

The Unfinished Legacy of the Timeless Test

For all its records, milestones, and moments of brilliance, the Timeless Test ended without a winner. England, against all odds, had put themselves within touching distance of an unprecedented victory, only for the weather and logistical constraints to intervene.

The match raised fundamental questions about the practicality of the Timeless Test format. If a game could extend indefinitely, what happened when external factors—travel schedules, weather, or sheer exhaustion—intervened? Cricket administrators quickly realized that while unlimited Test matches were theoretically possible, they were unsustainable in reality.

Following this match, the concept of the Timeless Test was effectively abandoned. No Test match since has been played without a time restriction, making this contest a unique relic of cricket’s experimental past.

Yet, despite its unfinished ending, the Timeless Test remains an iconic chapter in cricket history. It was a match that:

Pushed the limits of human endurance, both for players and spectators.

Demonstrated the unpredictability of Test cricket, where even a lost cause can transform into an epic battle.

Showcased remarkable individual performances, including Edrich’s redemption, Hammond’s captaincy, and Van der Byl’s resilience.

Above all, it proved that cricket is more than just numbers and results—it is a sport where stories, emotions, and the sheer drama of the game often transcend the final score.

The Timeless Test may not have produced a winner, but it left behind something greater—a legend.

Thank You 

Faisal Caesar 

India’s Spin Mastery Over New Zealand: A Clinical Display in a Classic ODI Encounter

India's comprehensive victory over New Zealand marked a historic moment, as they defeated a team that had recently been a formidable challenge in their ODI encounters. It was India's sixth consecutive win against New Zealand, a side that had often proved to be a "bogey team" for them. This performance not only secured India’s top spot in their group but also saw Varun Chakravarthy rise to the occasion with a match-winning five-wicket haul. His redemption came on a pitch that had earlier seen him struggle against Pakistan in 2022, signaling the resurgence of a bowler whose international career had previously faced setbacks.

The match, which unfolded at a venue where traditional ODI tactics were evident, was defined by a balanced display of seam and spin bowling. India, having posted a competitive total of 249, proved their mettle by exploiting the conditions expertly, turning what initially seemed like a modest score into an unassailable target. With this victory, India now prepares for a semi-final clash against Australia, while New Zealand, along with South Africa, heads to Pakistan for their semi-final contest.

The First Innings: India’s Controlled Approach

The match began with conditions favorable to seamers, as the ball moved both in the air and off the pitch during the first innings. This swing and seam movement provided ample opportunity for the pacers to capitalize early. India's innings, however, was marked by a period of consolidation after Matt Henry's exceptional seam bowling reduced them to a fragile 30 for 3. Henry's five-wicket haul and the disciplined performance from New Zealand’s seamers—particularly with the ball swinging for Kyle Jamieson—put India on the back foot. The Indian batsmen struggled to find rhythm early on, with even the usually dependable Virat Kohli falling victim to a spectacular catch by Glenn Phillips.

Yet, it was Shreyas Iyer and Axar Patel who anchored the innings and demonstrated the virtues of traditional, patient ODI batting. While Iyer initially struggled to get going, he showed remarkable restraint, adopting a defensive approach for the first 63 balls. His innings was the epitome of measured aggression, slowly building momentum. Patel, playing a crucial role as an all-rounder, provided stability with a composed 42 off 61 balls. The two added 98 runs for the fourth wicket, despite going 51 balls without a boundary—a testament to their discipline and the difficult conditions.

While India's top order crumbled, Iyer and Patel's partnership ensured the innings remained relevant. Their patience was evident in their ability to rotate the strike effectively and to pick off singles, avoiding rash shots. The duo showed that playing risk-free cricket, without taking undue chances, was often the best way to build a challenging total on a difficult pitch.

India's lower order, led by Hardik Pandya (45 off 45 balls), ensured that India reached 249, a total that, while not overwhelming, was made more challenging due to the slowing pitch and the increasing grip for spinners. Pandya's quickfire innings, although not explosive, was vital in lifting India’s total from a precarious position.

New Zealand’s Chase: Spinners Dominate as India Tightens the Noose

New Zealand’s chase started with promise, but the Indian spinners, who were critical in the middle overs, systematically broke their resistance. The introduction of spin early in the second innings, particularly from Ravindra Jadeja and Varun Chakravarthy, soon put New Zealand on the back foot. The surface, which had already begun to grip, favored the spinners as India bowled 29 overs of spin in the middle phase. New Zealand found it difficult to counter the precision and variations of India’s spinners.

The turning point in the chase came when Jadeja bowled an exceptional delivery to dismiss Tom Latham. The ball pitched on the reverse-sweep line and turned sharply to hit the stumps, marking the beginning of New Zealand’s collapse. With India’s spinners in full control, the required rate climbed steadily, and wickets began to tumble.

India's bowlers continued to apply relentless pressure. Kuldeep Yadav removed Daryl Mitchell with an unplayable delivery that narrowly missed Mitchell’s inside edge, a ball that perfectly exemplified the challenges posed by India’s wrist spinners. As the required rate climbed to six an over by the 23rd over, the New Zealand batsmen were forced to take greater risks. However, the pressure exerted by the Indian spinners left little room for mistakes.

Kane Williamson, the New Zealand captain, was left with the daunting task of holding the innings together. His 80, although technically sound, came at a slow pace, reflecting the challenging conditions and the constant pressure created by the Indian bowlers. The slow rate of scoring left New Zealand’s chase vulnerable, with the asking rate creeping up with every passing over.

Chakravarthy’s Redemption: A Five-Wicket Haul to Seal the Victory

The breakthrough moments came from Varun Chakravarthy, who, after a modest start to his international career, delivered a match-winning performance. Chakravarthy’s variations were the key to New Zealand's downfall. He used a variety of deliveries, including the legbreak and the wrong’un, and kept the New Zealand batsmen guessing with his subtle seam changes. He took two crucial wickets in quick succession, including that of Mitchell Santner, who fell to a medium-paced cross-seam delivery. The ball, bowled at a pace of 113 km/h, shattered Santner's stumps, bringing the game closer to its conclusion.

As the chase continued to unravel, Williamson, despite his efforts, was eventually dismissed by Axar Patel, who bowled him with a straight delivery. The asking rate was now nine runs per over, and with New Zealand's middle and lower order crumbling, the game seemed all but over. Chakravarthy returned to clean up the tail, completing his five-wicket haul and further cementing his place as the match's standout performer.

The Tactical Masterstroke: India’s Spin-Bowling Triumph

India's strategy of relying heavily on spin proved to be a masterstroke, especially given the nature of the pitch and the lack of dew. While pacers like Pandya and Shami provided initial breakthroughs, it was the spinners who took control, tightening the noose around New Zealand’s batters. Jadeja, Yadav, and Chakravarthy bowled a total of 37.3 overs between them, claiming nine wickets for just 166 runs. The performance was a marked improvement from earlier matches, where India’s spinners had conceded runs at a higher rate.

Chakravarthy’s redemption arc was one of the defining stories of the match. Having struggled in past encounters, including his disappointing performance against Pakistan, he delivered a standout performance when it mattered most. His tactical use of different deliveries, including the scrambled seam and the straight seam for different variations, made him difficult for the New Zealand batsmen to read. The key dismissals of key batters like Will Young, Daryl Mitchell, and Kane Williamson showed his growing influence on international cricket.

Conclusion: A Comprehensive Team Effort

India’s victory was a result of a collective team effort, with contributions from the top order, middle order, and the spinners. Despite the early setbacks with the bat, the calm and composed innings from Iyer and Patel provided the necessary foundation for a competitive total. The spinners, led by Chakravarthy, then took charge and dismantled the New Zealand batting lineup with precision and accuracy.

This victory was a testament to India's ability to adapt to the conditions and execute their plans flawlessly. As they prepare for a semi-final clash against Australia, the confidence gained from this performance will serve them well. For New Zealand, it was a frustrating defeat, but one that exposed the vulnerabilities in their batting against quality spin bowling. As both teams move forward, the lessons learned from this match will certainly shape their approach to the upcoming challenges.

Thank You 

Faisal Caesar 

The Hybrid Model and the Unquestionable Advantage: This Is Not Cricket

Cricket, often celebrated as the great equalizer, has long been a game of conditions, adaptation, and strategy. But what happens when the very nature of its tournaments tilts the balance? As Rohit Sharma and his counterparts boarded their respective flights for the Champions Trophy, six of the eight captains had to engage in a meticulous study of conditions—venue dynamics, temperature fluctuations, dew factors, the pitch's temperament towards pace or spin, and even the vagaries of the weather. All this data would have either been supplied to them by their analytical teams or meticulously researched by the captains themselves.

Pakistan's skipper, Mohammad Rizwan, carried the natural advantage of home familiarity, an edge that historically defines the importance of hosting in cricket. The precedent is clear: in the last four 50-over World Cups, the host nation has either lifted the trophy or, at the very least, reached the final. Home conditions are not just an environmental factor; they shape selections, strategies, and ultimately, results.

However, a peculiar anomaly in this tournament has granted an even greater advantage—an unfair hybrid model that ensures Team India enjoys privileges unlike any other. This is not a veiled accusation but a stark reality. While Rizwan understands the nuances of Karachi, Lahore, and Rawalpindi, Rohit Sharma and his men remain stationed in Dubai, unburdened by travel, acclimatization, or venue-specific recalibration.

A Schedule Dictated by One

Consider New Zealand’s itinerary. Having just played India in Dubai, they must now undertake a cross-continental journey back to Pakistan for their semifinal. If they progress to the final and India does the same, they will once again board a flight back to Dubai. In stark contrast, India’s squad will merely return to their hotel rooms, wake up refreshed, and meticulously prepare for the finale in the comfort of a stable environment.

This logistical disparity is not a mere coincidence but a direct byproduct of the hybrid model. To be clear, India did not explicitly request this convenience. All participating teams, including Pakistan, signed off on the schedule before it was ratified by the ICC. Yet, the advantage persists, raising critical questions about fairness and the spirit of competition.

The Unquantifiable Yet Indisputable Edge

Michael Atherton, speaking on the Sky Sports Podcast, succinctly articulated this imbalance:

“What about the advantage India have in playing in Dubai, only in Dubai? Which seems to me to be a hard-to-quantify advantage, but an undeniable advantage.”

With India playing exclusively in Dubai, their selection strategy could be honed with precision. The inclusion of five frontline spinners was not an accident—it was a calculated decision based on Dubai’s slow and turning pitches. Nasser Hussain elaborated further:

“They were very smart in their selection. They probably knew what Dubai is going to be like. They picked all their spinners. There was a bit of debate with Indian media saying why don’t you have gone for an extra seamer? Why all these spinners? Now we can see why.”

Contrast this with England or Pakistan. England, if they reach the semis, will only have one specialist spinner. Pakistan, too, has just a solitary frontline spinner. The difference is glaring: while other teams must adjust to different surfaces in Karachi, Lahore, and Rawalpindi, India enjoys consistency, an uninterrupted focus on a single venue’s conditions.

The Politics of Cricket: A Larger Question

The uncomfortable truth is that cricket's global governing structure is increasingly skewed by financial power. Once India refused to tour Pakistan, an alternative had to be devised—one that protected India’s participation and the lucrative India-Pakistan contest. The ICC’s acquiescence to this arrangement only cements the notion that revenue, not fairness, governs modern cricket.

In this landscape, the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) looms large. With its financial clout, it dictates not only India’s itinerary but, indirectly, the logistical fate of all other teams. The argument that India deserves this advantage because it generates the most revenue rings hollow—it mirrors the logic of a monopoly, where power justifies privilege.

For over two decades, this growing imbalance has eroded the very ethos of cricket. The sport that once prided itself on being a contest of skill and adaptability is increasingly becoming a stage where certain teams are cushioned by systemic advantages. If cricket is to retain its democratic spirit, it must resist the temptation of structural favouritism. For in a game that reveres fairness, no team—no matter how powerful—should wield an advantage so blatant, so unchecked.

This is not cricket. This is something else entirely.

Thank You

Faisal Caesar 

England’s Champions Trophy Hopes End in Afghan Storm

England entered the Champions Trophy to reclaim their former dominance in ODI cricket. After their opening defeat to Australia, they consoled themselves with the belief that it was an unfortunate blip, a result of Lahore’s unpredictable conditions rather than their own shortcomings. However, their hopes were decisively crushed in a dramatic encounter against Afghanistan, whose clinical performance exposed the cracks in England’s game.

The eight-run loss, though narrow on paper, was far from a fluke. It culminated in Afghanistan’s superior strategy, discipline, and execution. More than just a victory, it signified Afghanistan’s rise as a force in world cricket and underscored England’s ongoing decline.

Afghanistan’s Innings: Zadran’s Masterpiece and a Late Surge

A Rocky Start

Afghanistan’s innings began on shaky ground as they found themselves struggling at 37 for three. England’s pace attack, led by Jofra Archer, initially dominated. Archer’s sharp burst accounted for three wickets in his first six overs, leaving Afghanistan with a mountain to climb. At the halfway mark, they had only managed 103 for three, and England seemed to have the upper hand.

Zadran’s Brilliance

Then came the transformation. Ibrahim Zadran played an innings of rare quality—177 runs off 146 balls, blending patience with explosive power. While wickets fell around him, Zadran remained composed, anchoring the innings and shifting gears at the right moments. His shot selection was impeccable, his placement clinical, and his temperament unshaken by England’s early dominance.

Explosive Finish by Azmatullah and Nabi

Zadran found crucial support in captain Hashmatullah Shahidi, who contributed a stabilizing 40, before the game-changing partnerships arrived. Azmatullah Omarzai, fresh from an early failure with the ball, unleashed a counterattack, smashing three sixes in a 31-ball 41.

Then, the veteran Mohammad Nabi joined the charge. His 41 off just 24 balls was an exhibition of fearless hitting. In the 47th over alone, he plundered 23 runs off Joe Root, accelerating Afghanistan’s total past the 300-mark. By the end, the duo had added 111 runs in just 55 balls, turning a solid total into a daunting one—325 for seven.

England’s Chase: A Mixture of Hope and Collapse

Early Wickets and Mounting Pressure

Chasing 326 under lights, England needed a strong start, but their top order crumbled under pressure. Phil Salt departed for 12 after a wild hack against Azmatullah Omarzai, while debutant Jamie Smith misjudged his shot selection and perished for nine, falling to Nabi’s first delivery.

Ben Duckett looked in good touch but was undone by Rashid Khan’s mastery, pinned lbw for 38. Meanwhile, Harry Brook continued his miserable run against spin, gifting a simple return catch to Nabi for 25.

Root’s Lone Resistance

Amid the wreckage, Joe Root stood tall. The former England captain played a masterful innings, crafting 120 from 111 balls. His strokeplay was a blend of precision and artistry, even producing an audacious “pancake-flip” six—an uncharacteristic yet remarkable shot.

For a time, Root and Jos Buttler threatened to turn the tide. Their partnership of 83 runs steadied the chase, keeping England’s hopes alive. But when Buttler fell for 38, top-edging a pull to deep midwicket in the 37th over, the writing was on the wall.

The Final Collapse

With Root left to shoulder the burden, England’s fate hung in delicate balance. But his dismissal in the 46th over, 39 runs short of the target, signalled the beginning of the end. Jamie Overton tried to stage a fightback with a brisk 32, but he too succumbed at the crucial moment.

Jofra Archer’s dismissal left England needing 13 off the final over. The task proved insurmountable, and when Adil Rashid fell off the penultimate delivery, Azmatullah Omarzai completed his five-wicket haul, sealing a historic win for Afghanistan.

England’s Bowling Woes: A Persistent Problem

Archer’s Mixed Day

Jofra Archer’s return to international cricket was a tale of two halves. His initial burst—three wickets for just 22 runs—gave England early control. But as the innings progressed, his impact faded. His last four overs went for 42 runs, mirroring England’s growing struggles in the death overs.

Wood’s Fitness Concerns and Middle-Overs Struggles

Mark Wood, battling a knee injury, was far from his best. His pace lacked its usual venom, and England’s attack suffered as a result. Meanwhile, their inability to take wickets in the middle overs remains a glaring issue. Ever since Liam Plunkett’s departure post-2019, England’s ODI bowling has lacked a cutting edge during this crucial phase.

Lack of Support for Adil Rashid

Adil Rashid was once again England’s most reliable spin option, but the lack of a second attacking spinner left England vulnerable. Afghanistan capitalized on this, ensuring that Rashid alone could not apply sustained pressure.

Afghanistan’s Evolution: No Longer an Underdog Story

This victory was not an upset in the traditional sense. Afghanistan are no longer the plucky underdogs—they are equals. Their batting depth, all-round strength, and fearless approach have turned them into genuine contenders.

Their bowling attack, spearheaded by the guile of Rashid Khan, the versatility of Azmatullah, and the experience of Nabi, is well-rounded and effective. Their fielding, once a weak point, has improved significantly.

With this win, Afghanistan’s semi-final hopes remain alive. They now face Australia in Lahore, a match that will test their credentials further.

England’s Future: A Period of Soul-Searching

For England, this defeat is more than just an early tournament exit. It raises fundamental questions about their ODI identity.

Buttler’s Captaincy Under Scrutiny

Jos Buttler’s future as captain is now under the microscope. His tactical decisions, batting form, and leadership will all be questioned in the aftermath of this failure.

The Batting Core: Aging or Adapting?

Joe Root’s century was a reminder of his class, but beyond him, England’s batting lacked adaptability. The new generation—Salt, Smith, and Brook—have yet to prove they can anchor innings in pressure situations.

Bowling Rebuild Needed

Without a reliable middle-overs enforcer and a fit pace attack, England’s bowling unit looks fragile. The absence of a second frontline spinner also continues to haunt them.

Conclusion: Two Teams, Two Directions

As England depart Lahore for Karachi, their journey has become one of introspection rather than ambition. Their match against South Africa is now a mere formality—a chance to salvage pride but little else.

Afghanistan, on the other hand, march forward with momentum and belief. Their next challenge against Australia will be another step in their remarkable journey—a team once born in refugee camps now challenging the world’s best on cricket’s grandest stages.

This was not just another match. It was a statement. A reminder that Afghanistan belong among the elite and that England, once kings of ODI cricket, are now searching for a way back.

Thank You 

Faisal Caesar