
Put in to bat, Hawks — who won their first match against Wapda — only managed 252 in 49.1 overs. The Hyderabad side lost both their openers on ducks as Ali Shan stumped Zeeshan Gul and Haris Khan on Naseer Akram and Ashraf’s deliveries respectively.
Muhammad Sadam then stayed on the crease for a while to build a partnership of 57 with captain Azeem Ghumman, who was run out by Asif Ali on 23, while Sadam was caught and bowled by Sadaqat Ali on 46.
Faisal Athar, who is the top scorer of the tournament, managed to add 46 before he was bowled by Jahandad Khan.
However, Lal Kumar made a quick 71 off 55 balls, while Muhammad Awais was sent packing by Ashraf on five. Ashraf also bowled Nasir Awais on a duck. Shoaib Laghari was dismissed by Akram and Mir Ali by Imran Ali, while Babar Khan was run out by Asif.
In reply, Wolves despite losing opener Iftikhar Ahmed on four, reached the target with three wickets in hand and two balls to spare as Ashraf struck 71 off 80 balls. Ashraf built a partnership of 118 with Hasan Mahmood, scoring 62 runs off 103 balls.
Jahandad (27), Hamza Zaheer (23), Akram (22), Asif (18) and Waqas Asif (12) also helped the Wolves, while Mir, Kumar, and Awais took two wickets apiece for Hyderabad.
After the match, skipper Ashraf said that he is happy with his contribution in the win. “I am glad that I played an important role,” Ashraf told The Express Tribune. “We are not looking forward to our next match against Wapda as they have experienced players. It will be a tough game. We will have to win in order to make it to the final.”
Meanwhile, Ghumman said he is happy that his side is in the final despite the loss. “We did not perform as well today as we had against Wapda, but since we had won the first match with a good margin, we will be in the final.”
Published in The Express Tribune, February 6th, 2015.
Like Sports on Facebook, follow @ETribuneSports on Twitter to stay informed and join in the conversation.
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