Cricket legend Wasim Akram has criticised Pakistan’s bowling in death overs after their 60-run loss to New Zealand in the ICC Champions Trophy 2025 opener at National Bank Stadium in Karachi.
Pakistan conceded 113 runs in the final 10 overs, allowing New Zealand to post an imposing 320/5 in 50 overs.
Akram pointed to Pakistan’s inability to take wickets in the middle overs as a key reason for their struggles at the death.
With no breakthroughs in the middle phase, New Zealand’s batters capitalised in the final overs, leaving Pakistan’s bowlers with little control.
Death-overs bowling struggle
New Zealand’s late surge was led by Tom Latham (118*) and Glenn Phillips (61), who took full advantage of Pakistan’s inconsistent bowling.
Haris Rauf was the most expensive, conceding 83 runs in his 10 overs despite picking up 2 wickets. Naseem Shah (2/63) and Abrar Ahmed (1/47) were the only wicket-takers, while Shaheen Afridi (0/68) failed to make an impact.
Akram highlighted Pakistan’s poor bowling averages in the last 4 ODIs Pakistan has played:
- Haris Rauf: 35.33
- Shaheen Afridi: 44.50
- Naseem Shah: 49.00
- Abrar Ahmed: 54.00
- Salman Agha: 124.00
- Khushdil Shah: 167.00
"Pakistan cannot win ODIs with these averages," Akram said.
Concerns over domestic cricket setup
Beyond the bowling issues, Akram was joined in his criticism of Pakistan by former captain Waqar Younis. They criticised the overall squad quality and the upheaval surrounding domestic cricket structure in the last 5 years.
Akram pointed out that Pakistan’s domestic system has changed significantly in recent years, but the talent pipeline has not translated into consistent performances.
Waqar Younis echoed Akram’s concerns, urging Pakistan to invest in young talent.
"Looking back is not the answer—looking ahead is," he said.
Following the heavy defeat, Pakistan will need to bounce back quickly and address its bowling woes before Sunday against India.
COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ