Wisden: Why are Pakistan this bad at test cricket?

[zen]

30 minutes ago, singhvivek141 said:

 

What I will say might seem an excuse, but it is what it is. 

 

1. Sports is a luxury, if a society is struggling, sports will be the last thing which will come to their mind. Cricket is popular because it has money, other sports are yet to catchup, why someone will pickup certain sport when their future is uncertain ?

 

2. As Indian GDP per capita and economy grows in, India will excel, coz more and more folks will have the "buffer" that even if they fail in the sports they love...its not a loss for their entire live..they can still earn decent money and survive.

 

3. South & West India, its traditionally been the richer end of country..hence they are the first to adapt to a sport which needed dedicated infra, make it popular and later North & east catches up to it. and propagate it globally. Ex. Lawn Tennis. .be it Leander Paes (primarily a Goan) or Mahesh Bhupathi or Sania Mirza or Rohan Bopanna...they all are from South or West part of the country.

 

4. India also has massive security risks which many countries don't, hence the focus is to secure itself first and then think about sports, coz Sports is still considered a luxury. 

Not necessarily. For example Afganistan has been in turmoil but has done relatively well in T20s. Iran does relatively well in football. And so on. Sports is not necessarily a luxury as it can also depend on culture of a region. We see many kids play football in African countries despite turmoil. 
 

India’s success is not necessarily GDP dependent. It also depends on % spent on sports to improve infrastructure. The world today is highly exposed with information flowing relatively freely so even in a poor village someone can access the best methods online, observe the best in the domain and even train himself/herself in a suitable sport. In this case, all one needs is motivation and access to internet. Kenyan runners in the past, iirc, were said to benefit from running in harsh environments naturally. 
 

If you look at medals, it is likely that more medals are won by states not in the top 5 GDP or GDP per capita in India such as Haryana, Punjab, Manipur, etc. Maharashtra could be the one where medals align with its top 5 GDP or GDP per capita status. 

 

Yeah, India is culturally not oriented towards sports relatively speaking. Cricket is an outlier. It is not a widely popular global sports and many top cricketing countries could be  seeing a declining interest (and cricket could not even be #1 sport there). 

Edited August 24 by zen

[Lone Wolf]

13 hours ago, Vancouver said:

if you want to identify one person who accelerated it, Zia-ul-Haq, born in Jalandhar, Punjab would be very high on the list. 

Man single handedly destroyed any hope of a economically stable & stronger Pak

 

God sent soul for India.  Jalandhar's greatest contribution to the land.

[New guy]

On 8/22/2026 at 7:27 PM, zen said:

Every country goes through a lean phase in one format or the other. The great WI have declined in tests as well - one of the reasons could be players’ disinterest in longer formats considering the amount of cricket being played now. 
 

 

 

Which teams have come back from such bad decline? West indies didnt for sure.

[New guy]

35 minutes ago, Lone Wolf said:

Man single handedly destroyed any hope of a economically stable & stronger Pak

 

God sent soul for India.  Jalandhar's greatest contribution to the land.

He introduced something guaranteed to destroy the future of any country, religious extremism.

[singhvivek141]

1 hour ago, Lone Wolf said:

Man single handedly destroyed any hope of a economically stable & stronger Pak

 

God sent soul for India.  Jalandhar's greatest contribution to the land.

Zia was from Jalandhar ?

[govinda]

21 minutes ago, singhvivek141 said:

Zia was from Jalandhar ?

He also studied at st Stephen new Delhi 

[Lone Wolf]

2 hours ago, singhvivek141 said:

Zia was from Jalandhar ?

Yes pre partition Muhajir 

[zen]

3 hours ago, New guy said:

Which teams have come back from such bad decline? West indies didnt for sure.

Aus of 1980s under Border for example. … England after it changed its approach. Was poor in the 80s as well … India in 2000s after being known as poor travelers.  

Pak does not need to the next WI or Aus. It just needs to be competitive. India in Tests itself is in a transition phase currently.  

 

[New guy]

8 minutes ago, zen said:

Aus of 1980s under Border for example. … England after it changed its approach. Was poor in the 80s as well … India in 2000s after being known as poor travelers.  

Pak does not need to the next WI or Aus. It just needs to be competitive. India in Tests itself is in a transition phase currently.  

 

Yeah but none of those teams had fallen as low as current Pakistan. They still had good international class players coming through

[Number]

Cricket is least of their worries when everything is running into dust there.

 

How do you run a country when one fine day you wake up and kill or chase away all the folks who were running your businesses, your education systems, your economy and administration. No transition period nothing.

 

They have survived on doles and some momentum from British built systems but over the years they were bound to deteriorate. 

[zen]

40 minutes ago, New guy said:

Yeah but none of those teams had fallen as low as current Pakistan. They still had good international class players coming through

Pak needs to go back to basics by identifying relatively technically solid players, and give them a long run without worrying about losses or wins. 

[deathmonger]

9 hours ago, zen said:

Yes, let’s keep adding factors to justify fitting things into basic models to paint everything with the same brush. 

 

While some countries may benefit from higher GDP (depending on what % they spend on sports, it’s sporting culture, etc) or GDP per capita,  it is NOT a necessary condition. There are tons of examples of relatively low GDP (or GDP per capita if you mean that) countries, including with low population (Cabo Verde in recent FIFA World Cup for example, many others provided previously) that do well in sports. 
 

PS Note that players like Bumrah (Tendulkar, etc) are not produced in a factory. If so, Australia, which dominated for a long time and still dominates, would have produced many Shane Warne, Bradmans, for example, by now. 

 

 

While some countries may benefit from higher GDP (depending on what % they spend on sports, it’s sporting culture, etc) or GDP per capita,  it is NOT a necessary condition. There are tons of examples of relatively low GDP (or GDP per capita if you mean that) countries, including with low population (Cabo Verde in recent FIFA World Cup for example, many others provided previously) that do well in sports. 

 

What you are pointing out are the EXCEPTIONS. For the vast majority of countries, richer countries do well. The table toppers, the WC winners - all rich countries.

 

PS Note that players like Bumrah (Tendulkar, etc) are not produced in a factory. If so, Australia, which dominated for a long time and still dominates, would have produced many Shane Warne, Bradmans, for example, by now. 

 

Australia produces a few ATGs every generation - Smith and Cummins are as good as it gets. 00s had Ponting, Gilchrist, McGrath, Warne.

 

Even India has reached that stage where they are producing really good players now. 

 

 

[zen]

49 minutes ago, deathmonger said:

While some countries may benefit from higher GDP (depending on what % they spend on sports, it’s sporting culture, etc) or GDP per capita,  it is NOT a necessary condition. There are tons of examples of relatively low GDP (or GDP per capita if you mean that) countries, including with low population (Cabo Verde in recent FIFA World Cup for example, many others provided previously) that do well in sports. 

 

What you are pointing out are the EXCEPTIONS. For the vast majority of countries, richer countries do well. The table toppers, the WC winners - all rich countries.

 

PS Note that players like Bumrah (Tendulkar, etc) are not produced in a factory. If so, Australia, which dominated for a long time and still dominates, would have produced many Shane Warne, Bradmans, for example, by now. 

 

Australia produces a few ATGs every generation - Smith and Cummins are as good as it gets. 00s had Ponting, Gilchrist, McGrath, Warne.

 

Even India has reached that stage where they are producing really good players now. 

 

 

Not necessary. While rich countries may do well, being rich itself does not guarantee more medals otherwise the richest would get all the medals. China has been doing well in Olympic, Asian games even before its economic rise. 
 

India cricket is rich but it hardly dominates around the world. It is yet to win WTC. Recently, it even lost tests at home. Last time it won ODI world cup was in 2011. 
 

Brazil and Argentina, with relatively low GDP per capita than the European counterparts have won tons of World Cup. Even when it comes to European countries, a relatively lower GDP/ GDP per capita country beat France in semis to go to win the World Cup. 
 

Every country produces great players, at least for their domain. Burman, Warne, Beadman, etc. are exceptional even among their respective country. 

While $$$s help, there is no stopping talented teams to make their marks (examples given already so there is no point in repeating those). 

[tapandrun]

On 8/22/2026 at 5:21 PM, Nikhil_cric said:

Akif hasn't played a T20I, yet .  He clocked 148 kph last PSL and hit 144 odd in the only ODI series he played.  But his pace dropped after his first spell. 

 

Hasnain clocked 155.7 in CPL as his fastest and did clock 150+ even in Asia Cup 2022 iirc.  But he had a problematic action and the pace went down after that. 

 

Psl speedometers are not calibrated properly.

 

Rauf was clocking 150+ kmph in psl took him sometime to crank-up same speeds in t20is, though he was bowling high 140skmph.

Even recently Shaheen clocking think 147 kmph in Psl , he struggles to reach upto 141 kmph in t20s

Ali bowled 147 kmph in psl, he clocks early 140s kmph in T20is.

 

Have not noticed such big variation on IPL speeds and T20is speeds.  The only team which seems to be getting higher speeds is GT but all their bowlers are pushing the speeds nt just 1.

 

 

 

[Sgattick10]

10 hours ago, Lone Wolf said:

Yes pre partition Muhajir 

Born in Jalandhar so must be a punjabi? If he is punjabi then he is apparently not a muhajir, only urdu speaking Muslims from UP, Bihar are called muhajirs. 

[mani sha]

8 hours ago, zen said:

Not necessary. While rich countries may do well, being rich itself does not guarantee more medals otherwise the richest would get all the medals. China has been doing well in Olympic, Asian games even before its economic rise. 
 

India cricket is rich but it hardly dominates around the world. It is yet to win WTC. Recently, it even lost tests at home. Last time it won ODI world cup was in 2011. 
 

Brazil and Argentina, with relatively low GDP per capita than the European counterparts have won tons of World Cup. Even when it comes to European countries, a relatively lower GDP/ GDP per capita country beat France in semis to go to win the World Cup. 
 

Every country produces great players, at least for their domain. Burman, Warne, Beadman, etc. are exceptional even among their respective country. 

While $$$s help, there is no stopping talented teams to make their marks (examples given already so there is no point in repeating those). 

Being rich gets u get - 

infrastructure support , dietary support 

sustained support from environment 

access To modern training methods . 
 

Pak is actually a v v good example . Their poor gdp prevents them from spending more on their junior and club cricket . They don’t have a centre of excellence . Afghan team is not gonna top the charts and remains dependent on indian infrastructure. They developed once they started training in india and playing in IPL . 
 

New Zealand is an example of how gdp gets u good players . They have good stadiums . Coaches and in general , their average New Zealand is taller , fitter and better at sports than an avg subcontinental player . 
 

India has now started having taller fast bowlers - not a coincidence . Avg height in India is increasing with gdp growth . 
 

I grew up in mumbai . I was a decent leg spinner - I bowled at Shivaji park and then a bit for my college Xavier’s . No coaches . Learnt to bowl looking at tv . 
 

Post 12th grade , I had to decide to make cricket a career or get into academics .  Chose latter as we were dirt poor . Today I have enrolled my son and daughter into cricket and tennis . 
 

I have lived both worlds. I have seen both sides . It’s not possible to become class an athlete if u get basic meals in a kitchen in a chawl . My kids have access to amazing clubs , pool , food and coaches . And I am only middle class in usa 

 

Edited August 24 by mani sha

[deathmonger]

9 hours ago, zen said:

Not necessary. While rich countries may do well, being rich itself does not guarantee more medals otherwise the richest would get all the medals. China has been doing well in Olympic, Asian games even before its economic rise. 
 

India cricket is rich but it hardly dominates around the world. It is yet to win WTC. Recently, it even lost tests at home. Last time it won ODI world cup was in 2011. 
 

Brazil and Argentina, with relatively low GDP per capita than the European counterparts have won tons of World Cup. Even when it comes to European countries, a relatively lower GDP/ GDP per capita country beat France in semis to go to win the World Cup. 
 

Every country produces great players, at least for their domain. Burman, Warne, Beadman, etc. are exceptional even among their respective country. 

While $$$s help, there is no stopping talented teams to make their marks (examples given already so there is no point in repeating those). 

India cricket is rich but it hardly dominates around the world. It is yet to win WTC. Recently, it even lost tests at home. Last time it won ODI world cup was in 2011. 

 

India has an HDI of 0.685. Wait 15 years and India will win almost everything.
 

Brazil and Argentina, with relatively low GDP per capita than the European counterparts have won tons of World Cup. Even when it comes to European countries, a relatively lower GDP/ GDP per capita country beat France in semis to go to win the World Cup. 

 

0.8 HDI is the sweet spot post which there are diminishing returns. Argentina is a bonafide first world country. Brazil is almost there and have a huge population.

 

While $$$s help, there is no stopping talented teams to make their marks (examples given already so there is no point in repeating those). 

 

You are pointing out the EXCEPTIONS, not the NORM.

[deathmonger]

1 hour ago, mani sha said:

Being rich gets u get - 

infrastructure support , dietary support 

sustained support from environment 

access To modern training methods . 
 

Pak is actually a v v good example . Their poor gdp prevents them from spending more on their junior and club cricket . They don’t have a centre of excellence . Afghan team is not gonna top the charts and remains dependent on indian infrastructure. They developed once they started training in india and playing in IPL . 
 

New Zealand is an example of how gdp gets u good players . They have good stadiums . Coaches and in general , their average New Zealand is taller , fitter and better at sports than an avg subcontinental player . 
 

India has now started having taller fast bowlers - not a coincidence . Avg height in India is increasing with gdp growth . 
 

I grew up in mumbai . I was a decent leg spinner - I bowled at Shivaji park and then a bit for my college Xavier’s . No coaches . Learnt to bowl looking at tv . 
 

Post 12th grade , I had to decide to make cricket a career or get into academics .  Chose latter as we were dirt poor . Today I have enrolled my son and daughter into cricket and tennis . 
 

I have lived both worlds. I have seen both sides . It’s not possible to become class an athlete if u get basic meals in a kitchen in a chawl . My kids have access to amazing clubs , pool , food and coaches . And I am only middle class in usa 

 

Exactly.

 

Cricket has just become more professional hence countries that relied on talent like WI, Pak, SL have fallen to the wayside while the first world countries have risen (Eng/NZ) as well as India with massive population and economic growth.

 

Same happened in football with like of Uruguay and Hungary who dominated in early years falling to the wayside.

 

Of course, poor countries can have good players/atheletes but that is the exception, not the norm.

 

Relying on exceptions is not a good strategy.

[zen]

8 hours ago, deathmonger said:

India cricket is rich but it hardly dominates around the world. It is yet to win WTC. Recently, it even lost tests at home. Last time it won ODI world cup was in 2011. 

 

India has an HDI of 0.685. Wait 15 years and India will win almost everything.
 

Brazil and Argentina, with relatively low GDP per capita than the European counterparts have won tons of World Cup. Even when it comes to European countries, a relatively lower GDP/ GDP per capita country beat France in semis to go to win the World Cup. 

 

0.8 HDI is the sweet spot post which there are diminishing returns. Argentina is a bonafide first world country. Brazil is almost there and have a huge population.

 

While $$$s help, there is no stopping talented teams to make their marks (examples given already so there is no point in repeating those). 

 

You are pointing out the EXCEPTIONS, not the NORM.

Again trying to fit sports into a model that you know. 

[zen]

10 hours ago, mani sha said:

Being rich gets u get - 

infrastructure support , dietary support 

sustained support from environment 

access To modern training methods . 
 

Pak is actually a v v good example . Their poor gdp prevents them from spending more on their junior and club cricket . They don’t have a centre of excellence . Afghan team is not gonna top the charts and remains dependent on indian infrastructure. They developed once they started training in india and playing in IPL . 
 

New Zealand is an example of how gdp gets u good players . They have good stadiums . Coaches and in general , their average New Zealand is taller , fitter and better at sports than an avg subcontinental player . 
 

India has now started having taller fast bowlers - not a coincidence . Avg height in India is increasing with gdp growth . 
 

I grew up in mumbai . I was a decent leg spinner - I bowled at Shivaji park and then a bit for my college Xavier’s . No coaches . Learnt to bowl looking at tv . 
 

Post 12th grade , I had to decide to make cricket a career or get into academics .  Chose latter as we were dirt poor . Today I have enrolled my son and daughter into cricket and tennis . 
 

I have lived both worlds. I have seen both sides . It’s not possible to become class an athlete if u get basic meals in a kitchen in a chawl . My kids have access to amazing clubs , pool , food and coaches . And I am only middle class in usa 

 

Cricket is not a global sport, nor it is necessarily the #1 sport in countries where cricket is relatively popular. 
 

“Higher GDP = better performance” is a generic statement. In some cases it can apply, in some it could not. No amount of GDP growth or infrastructure can make India competitive in Football for example. No amount of relatively lower GDP can stop African countries from making a progress. Relatively lower GDP countries win medals in Olympics and other such events. 

“Higher GDP = more this or that” is the story that many Indians have told themselves since time immemorial in many fields. Ask many to improve waste management, they will say we lack resources (when even lower GDP countries can be cleaner). Ask them to stop corruption, you get similar answer. It is almost a cultural thing!