Back with a bang

Sarfaraz, among the first to get back to the team, made the most of the opportunity and justified his selection


January 08, 2023

print-news

A dream comeback, indeed! Three fifties and a century (86, 53, 78 and 118) in four innings: this was how Sarfaraz Ahmed fared on his return to Test cricket after a gap of four years. Sarfaraz’s tally of 335 runs — top score of the series from both sides — weighed heavily as Team Pakistan pulled off a draw in both Tests of the home series against New Zealand.

Just weeks back Sarfaraz — who was sacked as captain of all three formats of the game in October 2019 — did not even have a snowman’s chance under the sun of staging a comeback to the national team. However, a change at the PCB helm — with Najam Sethi replacing Ramiz Raja as chairman and Shahid Afridi taking over from Muhammad Waseem as chief selector — opened the doors for discarded senior players to get another chance to prove themselves.

Sarfaraz, among the first to get back to the team, made the most of the opportunity and justified his selection. On course, the 35-yearold became only the second Pakistani wicketkeeper to score 6,000 runs in international cricket, besides becoming the leading run-scorer as a Pakistani wicketkeeper, with nearly 3,000 runs, in the longest format of the game.

Sarfaraz’s heroics with the bat — for which he was declared Man of the Series — has set the stage for a healthy contest with Muhammad Rizwan, who was rested for the series due to poor form. Similar contests have been witnessed in Pakistan cricket in the past too, with Wasim Bari and Taslim Arif in the late 70s early 80s and Moeen Khan and Rashid Latif in the 90s trying to outdo each other for a place in the playing eleven.

The situation must not be easy to handle for the selectors too. A good solution could be to accommodate both in the team — Sarfaraz as batsman and Rizwan as wicketkeeper.

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