If the Almighty ever created a Greek god of cricket, it most certainly would be Fakher Zaman. His 11 Herculean sixers, in an age when players loft deliveries over the boundary for a maximum just for fun, is unheard of.
What made Fakhar Zaman's batting in the match against New Zealand stand out was not that it was long overdue but that every shot he struck was from the middle of the bat. In a flawless display with not even a single mistimed stroke, the only regret was that we did not see more of it in a rain-hit match.
Pakistan had been asked to chase a daunting target of 400 runs - more than Pakistan's highest-ever total in One Day Internationals - against a highly resourceful Kiwi attack. On paper, this was an almost impossible task. While batting, the New Zealanders had thrashed Pakistan's bowling lineup, dispatching the bowlers to every nook and cranny.
With unpredictability almost like a superpower, the Pakistani team decided they would do the impossible and try and chase it down.
But if we take just one step back, the reason why Pakistan found itself in this predicament, where it is chasing an extremely challenging total, stemmed from the first sin, a wrong decision at the coin toss by Captain Babar Azam.
If Pakistan wanted to stay in the hunt for the semi-finals, they had to defeat New Zealand by a huge margin - either post a large total and bowl New Zealand out for a relatively smaller total or chase down the target in fewer overs. Instead of deciding to bat first and post a high total to then limit New Zealand and secure a margin win, he chose to field and proceeded to concede 400 runs, making a large margin victory impossible.
I have fallen in love with the wham-bang approach of the English. I do realise that this sounds paradoxical because love and wham-bang don’t always go together. But intent and aggression do, and these two were the quintessential ingredients of the new English approach.
However, the Fakhar Zaman show managed to win the match - even if by the Duckworth-Lewis-Sterm (DLS) system to save his team and captain, who has been really below par in this tournament.
In the past few months, I have established that Babar Azam is not a natural leader. I have covered every facet of his performance that strengthened my argument. Thus, it is time for me to move on to a new subject. But Fakhar Zaman first deserved praise for his super human-esque effort.
From individual brilliance to team strategy
It is time I explore the various templates different teams have adopted during the ongoing World Cup. Some have found success, while others have fallen flat like a soufflé with no gelatin.
Let us begin with England, the defending champions who revolutionised white and red ball cricket.
When the England team controversially won the 2019 edition of the World Cup against New Zealand, they did so by adopting a fresh approach to play the short format of the game.
Ever since, I have fallen in love with the wham-bang approach of the English. I do realise that this sounds paradoxical because love and wham-bang don’t always go together. But intent and aggression do, and these two were the quintessential ingredients of the new English approach.
This approach of playing the sport with hitherto unheard-of 'intent' has transformed our lazy, idyllic sport into a heart-pounding affair!
When teams like India, New Zealand and South Africa smash sixes at will, I want to thank Eoin Morgan's England side from 2019.
Ben Stokes and Bredon McCullum's 'Baz-ball' concoction transformed test cricket for the better. The last Ashes series made me realise that the transformation has been for the better, and England deserve all the credit for this 'gung-ho' approach that has made the sport so attractive. The game has suddenly become quite watchable, even for new fans of the game.
But in the World Cup of 2023, England appears unrecognisable from their counterparts four years ago. It appear to have failed in controlling the monster they created. Their 'intent' and 'aggression' appears lacklustre, bordering on insipid. Hence, they find themselves languishing at the bottom of the table.
India, which currently appears unstoppable, has adopted the novel model presented to the world by England. The leader of the Indian pack, Rohit Sharma, has decided to take it upon himself to perform the role of a catalyst by giving his side some blistering starts in the power play and setting up solid launchpads for his team. As a result, every successive batsman finds a much easier environment to come in and play an aggressive winning hand for the team or even take a little time at the crease if they need to.
The best way to beat India in this tournament is if a good attack can catch them on a bad day. The bowling attacks which possess such capability, in my mind, are K. Rabada and co., Shaheen Shah Afridi and co., and Pat Cummins and co
The beauty is that Rohit is equally comfortable smashing bowlers, whether India is batting first or is giving chase.
Once he has set the tone, he has world-class players like Virat Kohli, Shreyas Iyer and KL Rahul to propel India to scores of 325-350 in every match. Similarly, when they are chasing, these targets can be achieved with consummate ease.
We all know the magic of Indian batting, but in this tournament, their bowling attack has impressed even more. Irrespective of the conditions or opponents, they seem to cast a web of magic around the batters with their beautiful seam position, swing, and accuracy, all of which is done at pace.
How does a team beat India?
I believe the best way to beat India in this tournament is if a good attack can catch them on a bad day. The bowling attacks which possess such capability, in my mind, are K. Rabada and co., Shaheen Shah Afridi and co., and Pat Cummins and co.
I believe the Indians may have a bad day around the corner. Or it could be my wishful thinking as I am the king of wishful thinking, quite like the 'Go West' from 1990!
But what fuels my theory is the law of averages, that the Indian side can be undone.
Perhaps if a side can get Rohit, Virat and Rahul all out early, you may just be able to upset the Indian apple cart.
Apart from India being the tournament favourites, my two personal favourites for the tournament are South Africa and New Zealand. I would really want them to win unless Pakistan qualifies for the semi-final and final.
Pakistan's approach in the tournament has neither been modern nor totally medieval. It has been a bit confusing.
I believe that if Pakistan there is a chance where it can win the tournament, the likes of Fakhar Zaman, Mohammad Rizwan or Abdullah Shafique will have to lead the charge on the batting side. Shaheen and Wasim will have to do it all with the ball.
Personally, I feel this squad lacks the right kind of leadership apart from some lacking in the squad, but they have shown that on their day, they can be mighty dangerous. Unfortunately, that largely depends upon which Pakistan turns up on the day, whether it is an insipid and listless one or the spirited army of men possessed by the soul of Alexander the Great, who wants to win and conquer at every cost!
I really wish the Pakistan team had the right leader. Not a reactive one, but a proactive one so things could have been different.
For now, we will have to wait with bated breath and see who qualifies for the semis and whose approach will make enough difference to make it to the final four. Until then, let’s keep our theories flowing. It’s great fun - the procrastination!