After years as the butt of the cricketing world’s jokes, and after all the false hopes, England had reached number one.
What’s more, they had done it in the form of the game they invented, Test cricket, the one where their humiliations have been most pronounced.
In their tour to Australia, the side which had so often wilted looked utterly invincible; to say they simply beat Australia would be to drastically short change them. Then in their own summer they mopped up an admittedly ailing Indian side 4-0. With that, they had reached the top of the world rankings.
So who would have thought that an innocuous tour to the Middle East to play Pakistan would bring them undone?
Matches in places like Abu Dhabi and Dubai are usually colourless affairs played in front of vacant stadiums against flimsy Pakistan outfits. If this was what England expected, they, like most of us, made a staggering miscalculation.
Pakistan have not beaten England 3-0 because England were inept. They did not crush them. They simply played better cricket in the clutch moments of each match. Against all likelihood, this is a Pakistan side of great quality and great spirit, and one which should give hope to any sportsmen or sporting team which thinks the game is up.
Let’s have a look at what Pakistan have seen in the last few years.
Going back a decade and a bit, there was Salim Malik. Captain of his country, quality player, fixing matches. Despite all the trials which Malik’s sins brought to his nation in the mid-1990s, Pakistan clambered their way into the final of the 1999 World Cup.
Shane Warne and his associates knocked them over for 132, and Australia got the runs in a trot. Far from being heroes for their rise to the final, the Pakistan players returned home to see effigies of themselves burned for their defeat.
After that, threats of terrorism meant that opposing teams wouldn’t play in Pakistan anymore. They still don’t, hence the smattering of matches in the United Arab Emirates and the like. Pakistan has effectively become a black hole, where international cricket will no longer venture.
Then there was the chaos of 2007, one of the saddest and most mysterious incidents in the game’s history. Pakistan are knocked out by Ireland of all teams, and the next morning coach Bob Woolmer is found dead in his hotel room. Still nobody knows what happened to him. The stink around Pakistan cricket was suddenly even more rancid.
Then there was spot fixing. Mohammed Asif was a fine bowler. Though undoubtedly mercurial, when in the right form he was the equal of any other bowler in the world with his swing and seam. Salman Butt was a bold batsmen and leader, establishing him despite being young for the captaincy. Mohammed Aamer was a blindingly bright prospect. On his tour to Australia in 2009/10 his papers were marked: this young man was going to be a superstar.
I use the past tense in each of these instances and the players in question may never play again, and in my view they shouldn’t be allowed back. Their greed showed a disrespect for the game which hurt all cricket fans.
But imagine what it did to those in Pakistan. This was the final indignity for a nation pummelled by ignominy, mystery and scandal in the past two decades.
Yet they have picked themselves up. They have come to the United Arab Emirates, with a new captain, a new spine for their team and a new desire. And they have played superb cricket.
Azhar Ali’s 157 from 442 balls in the third test represents this perfectly. Think back to the way Pakistan squandered a similar winning position in Sydney in 2010, and the shots played by the likes of Umar Akmal. Now think of Azhar Ali, standing in front of a nearly empty ground in a dead-rubber game showing pride in his wicket, and a determination to put his team in position to win the game.
Pakistan have shown a strength of national character which we should never have doubted.
We must hope that this band of players stick together, and that Pakistan can get the clear air needed to return to their rightful position as a powerful and formidable cricketing nation.
Nav
Guest
Ajmal has gone through all the testings and unlike Botha or Murali, his flex came out to be well under the limit of 15 degrees, think it was 8... I am a pak fan so naturally support him, however i also had some questions about his action but after the testings were done i think no one should question him anymore
Jason
Guest
Can they add the Sri Lankan spinner that played last night as well.
jameswm
Guest
Yep - conditions that Pattinson, Cummins and Harris will love
jameswm
Guest
Let's just make it baseball then
jameswm
Guest
Botha still does
jameswm
Guest
dasilva even a 10 degree flex would rule out the dart-like doosras. I'd take a 10-degree flex for everyone - it's better than what we have now.
Vas Venkatramani
Guest
I'd like Ajmal submitted in for biomechanical testing to see what his flex is. Of course, there may be some tweaking of his action to ensure he remains within the 15 degree limit, but I'd prefer him to go through the tests that can potentially clear him and for us to stop throwing stones at him. As for his spirit alone, he makes fine viewing. We need more players like him in world cricket.
Viscount Crouchback
Guest
Ajmal is clearly a chucker but we ought not to forget that his fellow Pakistani spinners were extremely handy too, and no one has yet raised any concerns about them. I wouldn't read too much into England's loss by the way. Going down to spin on the subcontinent is a little like Federer losing on clay - a pity, but one ought not to read too much into it. Fortunately the 2013 Ashes will be played in more amenable conditions.
dasilva
Guest
I think it's ridiculous to have one rules for fast bowler and another one for spinners. There needs to be an absolute flex rule for all bowlers. A spinner doesn't need more than a 5-7 dergree flex. Then again bowlers don't need a 8-10 flex either. They just need it to bowl fast. If a bowler needed more flex to be able to bowl fast. Then you can create an argument that they have to slow down their speed, perhaps to even medium pace so they can bowl without flexing as much as other bowler to avoid breaking the law (that's why before medium pacers had a limit of 7.5) Of course that wouldn't happen because that ruin the spectacle of the game because major part of the entertainment is fast bowlers. The administrator set the flex limit so that bowlers can legally bowl fast and entertain the crowd. Similarly, arbitrarily making spinner have a less flex limit restrict the amount of spin and variation in their bowling. Wouldn't it be more entertaining for cricket if it is set at the same level of pace bowlers and let the spinners be able to spin the bowl more and have special deliveries to increase the entertainment Maybe 15 is too high of a flex limit and perhaps it should have been 10. Nevertheless I do believe it should have been the same for all bowlers. It's up for the bowlers to innovate and do what they can within that limit. .
Lancey5times
Guest
With the bats being used now and the roads being prepared in some countries I say 15 degrees makes it a somewhat level playing field -- Comment left via The Roar's iPhone app. Download The Roar's iPhone App in the App Store here.
formeropenside
Guest
Johan Botha used to throw it as well. Can I say that? And note that I agreed Lee threw the odd one.
Ian Whitchurch
Guest
Jameswm, In both cases, its umpires allowing bowlers to push the laws.
Renegade
Guest
Fair enough mate. Well i'd still like to see Pakistan play against the top nations with Ajmal....just makes the contest all the more interesting.
jameswm
Guest
fos it's racist to say the Pakistani spinners chucked, as much as it was deemed racist for Aussies to complain about Murali's action.
jameswm
Guest
"you can get as technical as you like but" is the same as disregarding a technical argument. The technical side is the point. I'm saying go and discuss chucking with cricket nuts, and most will give you a similar answer to me. The 15-degree law is a joke, allowing chucking by spinners, who only need a 5 degree flex. It only becomes relevant when you play against a team whose spinner should be banned.
jameswm
Guest
Sorry Ian I don't see any correlation between intimidatory short-pitched bowling and spinners over-flexing their elbow. If they need to chuck to bowl the doosra, then they don't bowl the doosra, like Murali. Credit to him for that (and I have a lot of time for the guy). The laws on short pitched bowling are stricter now, like the over-rate law, another one that was ignored during the WI reign. Problem is - they cleared Murali, so now there's a spate of copycat chuckers. Ask someone who has seen junior tours on the subcontinent - they're everywhere.
formeropenside
Guest
Ian, re intimadatory bowling, it was an issue for at most a decade before the protective equipment evolved sufficiently that the chance of injury is now extremely low. But Terry Jenner came back to the crease, and Thommo's throat balls were the danger, not the head high bouncer. Also, the bean ball has always been either banned, or no-balled, or disapproved of. Thats the truly dangerous delivery. I do agree that Brett Lee threw the odd one, and should have been banned for a while to sort it out. Or altogether if it came to that. Both Pakistani spinners were atrocious, with a pause and dart-throwing action. That should be stamped out of the game.
Renegade
Guest
It's not passe to me, it just didn't look like it was chucking. Your the first person i've heard bring this up so i'm not sure where the other 80% of cricket nuts are.... I'm also struggling to find where you quoted "don't get technical" as i clearly wrote "you can get as technical as you like". And even if i didn't understand what you were saying, it doesn't actually mean you know what you're talking about. Anyways history will show Pakistan beat England 3-0. I'm with Red Kev, let's get them over here for a series next year!
Ian Whitchurch
Guest
A real part of my resentment about this is that, starting from Snow, Lillie and Thompson, fast bowlers made a mockery of the intimidation laws for decades. The law was on the books, but it was ignored. Murali takes wickets with an utterly safe delivery that is incapable of killing anyone in club or school cricket and chucking is suddenly a blight on the game. Sure, I should be stroppy that offspinners get a delivery that goes the other way, while legspinners are stuck with their less-accurate base action, but really, the game is still cricket. But systematic cheating via intimidatory short pitched fast bowling aimed mostly at the throat and as a variation at the wickets ? That was part of cricket for decades.
jameswm
Guest
Look Renegade most of the series win was due to good hard play by Pakistan and outplaying England. However Ajmal's bowling (and action) threw England from the start. The chucking accusations might be passe to you, but to 80% of the cricket nuts I talk to, they remain a blight on the game, which rears its ugly head occasionally. You can't simply say "don't get technical". If you don't understand what I'm, saying, that's your problem. Most us us know what a chuck looks like, regardless of how the ICC alter the laws to make them legal. I don't simply accept the ICC's call on the issue. They have it wrong.