Image Credit- Getty
There are some topics that give rise to valid
discussion. However, they quickly stop being about reality. What counts is how
they make you feel, and before you know it, you’ve become so accustomed to
hearing your side of the story that it’s nearly hard to tell which side is
right. Facts sound politicised, phrases are scrutinised with a fine-tooth comb,
and discourse is reduced to yelling from opposing sides of an immovable fence.
Which leads us beautifully to the question of Sarfaraz
Ahmed vs. Mohammad Rizwan, specifically about which player for Pakistan should
start in the starting XI on Boxing Day. After the first Test in Perth, where
Sarfaraz may have been the least productive player of the two, scoring the
fewest runs for any batter on both sides, the problem has come into greater
focus. Despite his generally good wicketkeeping, part-time spinner Agha Salman
missed a critical stumping opportunity, allowing centurion David Warner to
escape with his wicket.
Much earlier in the opening session of the match, when
Australia was on a tear, Usman Khawaja skied a ball that first fell rather than
the wicketkeeper charging for it only to shell it; one may argue Sarfaraz
should have attempted to follow it after that. Given the advantage gloves
provide, the evidence indicates that slip fielders are twice as likely to lose
catches as wicketkeepers.
Who took the gloves off for Pakistan was one of the
most important questions before Perth, its urgency matched only by their
unwavering reluctance to participate in the discussion.
“Sarfaraz is not new to Australia,” Hafeez
said after the Perth defeat. “He’s played in Australia, England and South
Africa before, so you can’t say he’s new here and couldn’t adjust.”
Still, statistics have the audacity to state precisely
that. Since then, it has become somewhat of a trope to see Sarfaraz struggle to
score runs on Australian pitches and to a lesser extent in South Africa. He has
scored 239 runs at an average of 29.87 in ten innings in Australia thus far.
During the 2016–17 Pakistan tour, when Sarfaraz was at the top of his game both
at bat and in the field, he amassed a substantial amount of credit, scoring two
half-centuries and reaching double digits in all six innings. If South Africa
is included to that record, the average falls to 21.70 over 22 innings.
Let’s move on to Rizwan. It’s easy to forget that
Rizwan is no longer the first choice for red-ball wicketkeeping in Pakistani
cricket due to his elevated stature. Much of that can be attributed to his
exploits in Twenty20 cricket, where his near-superhuman ability to consistently
score runs at the top of the order has cemented his spot in the team despite
the presence of more purposeful top-order hitters. Even though those astounding
figures haven’t been reached in Test cricket, a wicketkeeper is never assumed
to be failing to do his share of the work with the bat if his test batting
average is just under 40.
Similar to Sarfaraz, he embarked on his first Test
tour in Australia, and it was the success of that series that secured him a
spot in the team for the ensuing three years. Rizwan was a rare bright point in
an otherwise miserable tour for Pakistan, showing his talent with a 95-run
second-inning performance in Brisbane. With a series total of 177 at 44.25, he
was Pakistan’s third-highest run scorer behind Babar Azam and, surprisingly,
Yasir Shah.
However, a large portion of Pakistan’s dilemma is
self-inflicted and may not have as much to do with straightforward
cricket-related issues as one might anticipate.
Hafeez strongly pushed back against any suggestions
playing Sarfaraz in Perth was a tactical misstep, and referred to that New
Zealand series as justification.
“Sarfaraz has performed brilliantly for Pakistan
in the past. His performance against New Zealand in Karachi was
outstanding,” Hafeez said after the Perth defeat. “Of course it’s
been about five or six months since then [12 months], but you have to give your
best performer in the previous series first priority. It’s not as if we start
thinking about someone else after one performance.”
But then, he appeared to do just that with the next
words he uttered. “Rizwan is an excellent cricketer and has played
brilliantly for Pakistan. His inclusion is also possible.”
Perhaps these statements won’t matter, because on the
day, this decision, as with nearly everything about this debate, seems to come
down to how it makes everyone feel.