Zimbabwe A trounce Pakistan A by 105 runs

Hosts keep five-match series alive with emphatic win


Our Correspondent September 30, 2016
Musakanda’s unbeaten 99 anchored the innings for Zimbabwe A and helped the hosts claim a vital win to stay in the series. PHOTO COURTESY: ZIMBABWE CRICKET BOARD

KARACHI: Hosts Zimbabwe A roared back into their five-match series against Pakistan A with an emphatic 105-run win in their third match to halve Pakistan’s lead to 2-1.

Tarisai Musakanda, who made an unbeaten 99 off 130 balls, Sikandar Raza, who made 50 off 31 balls and then claimed 3-49 with the ball, and Tendai Chisoro who took 4-36 were the architects of that one-sided win for Zimbabwe.

Batting first, Zimbabwe scored 297-5 in their allotted 50 overs with the help of two strong partnerships, with Musakunda being involved in a 123-run stand with Malcolm Waller (72 off 68 balls) and an unbeaten 87-run stand with Raza.

Ehsan Adil claimed 2-53 in nine overs as the Pakistan bowlers were unable to stem the flow of runs, with Mohammad Asghar being the only bowler to go for less than five-an-over as he gave away 42 runs in his 10 overs but couldn’t take a wicket.

Raza took the game away from Pakistan at the end of the innings, pulling out some lusty blows as Zimbabwe motored along. And Raza took that boost in confidence into the second innings, dismissing openers Jaahid Ali (11) and the in-form Fakhar Zaman (31) with his off-spin to leave Pakistan struggling at 48-2.

Skipper Sohaib Maqsood was the only Pakistani batsman to score a half-century as he made a 51-ball 56 in a losing cause. His wicket sparked a collapse that saw Pakistan go from 135-2 to 192 all out as they lost eight wickets for just 57 runs to quickly wrap up proceedings.

Published in The Express Tribune, October 1st, 2016.             

Like Sports on Facebook, follow @ETribuneSports on Twitter to stay informed and join in the conversation.

 

COMMENTS

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ