da 888： Hope can be a dastardly sort of thing
The Wisden Verdict by Osman Samiuddin29-Dec-2004
Pakistan went down yet again, but not without a fight© Getty Images
Hope can be a dastardly sort of thing. Last Saturday,if you had said to a Pakistani, or one who still caredafter Perth, that Pakistan would set Australia atricky fourth-innings total to chase, he would havelaughed in your face. But yesterday morning, whenDanish Kaneria prised out Adam Gilchrist, there washope, and even dreams of an upset. At the end of theday, Pakistan’s admirable resistance having beenchipped away, hope had left without leaving a number.Don’t call me, I’ll call you. The fear, somehow moretangible than hope, was that they would be wiped outthe next day, had taken its place.Pakistan were competitive for considerable parts ofthe game, and that should be recognised, but with atop order still more in synch with the demands of a one-dayer rather than a Test, and a bowling attack heavily reliant on what is quickly becoming a modern-day, rougher-round-the-edges version of Imran Khan andAbdul Qadir, it was always going to be a struggle.When they crumbled yesterday, stung by Australia’sknockout blow, they still managed to get up today onwobbly knees, propped up by the bravery of ShoaibMalik and the enticing evolution of Kaneria later, andput up brief and eventually futile resistance. But at least itwas resistance.Kaneria and Shoaib Akhtar, in particular, providedsome. Not many legspinners – Anil Kumble is as anexceptional exception – can play against Shane Warneand not come off looking like Ian Salisbury. Hetroubled almost every batsman he bowled to and giventhat the line-up is as strong and deep as thisAustralian one, that is no mean feat. He experimented,he made mistakes, he out-thought some very good batsmenand above all, he never stopped coming. Even today,with a meagre total to play with, he bowled for awicket every ball, and on occasions was desperatelyunlucky not to claim one.Pakistan also resisted, to an extent, the otherlegspinner on display. Warne threatened – likeAustralia, he always will – but that sense ofinevitability about his bowling, that he will always pick upwickets when playing against Pakistan was diluted.Given that he had taken 27 in the lastthree-Test series between these two sides, thatrepresents progress. Youhana’s handling of Warne inparticular set the tone – confident, cheeky, dominantand at times dismissive, it was the antithesis of howPakistan’s batsmen have traditionally played him overthe years.But what do you really draw from this contest? Theresult was never really in doubt; even whenPakistan were in control at various stages, thereremained a nagging, lingering sense that one moment,one session would see Australia wrest the initiative.Yousuf Youhana’s stumping on the first day, and JasonGillespie’s resistance between lunch and tea on thethird provided the most crucial pivots, althoughnot the only ones here.Over the last few years Australia has done just this to every team, atevery location, with chilling efficiency. Last week after Perth, there wasincreasing concern among neutrals about the growing gulfbetween Australia and the rest of the cricketworld. Pakistan were much more committed here, andgenerally gave a better account of themselves. Yet they still lost by nine wickets inside four days – acomprehensive margin, if not quite as statisticallyhumiliating as Perth.Sri Lanka and India both fought harder than Pakistandid earlier this year, yet they were both conqueredwith impressive authority. New Zealand too arenobody’s whipping boys but Australia’s.Can we everhope that Australia’s dominance will come to an end,bearing in mind that all 11 Pakistanis on displaytoday have stood up to be counted at various stagesthrough this year? That just once, when theirauthority is questioned, they will not provide themost comprehensive retort? Should the rest of thecricket world simply take the path of leastresistance, the most inert one, which says thatdominance is a cyclical phenomenon and that time will,eventually, take its toll? That there will come a timesoon when the core of this vintage, relentless bowlingattack and some of the batting line-up – one in whicha Martyn, Langer, Hayden, Ponting, Gilchrist, Clarkeand even a Gillespie can turn a game – will retire? Thehope – that fickle and intangible emotion – is thatsomeone, somehow (England, are you listening?) willdefeat them soon. The fear – much more real andbelievable – is that Australia’s pre-eminence, untilthe core of this team succumbs to the ravages of time,is a foregone conclusion.