It was surely one of the greatest games in any form of cricket and when Immad Wasim bravely lifted the hapless Binura Fernando over wide long on certainly the greatest comeback victory since Sharjah 1986 had been achieved by Pakistan. Then, too, a single by last man Tauseef Ahmed to short cover had counted for Javed Miandad to be at strike; this time a single from last man Mohammad Irfan also to short cover brought Immad on strike. The result was the same: a six to clinch a one-wicket win though in this case four balls were remaining as against none when Miandad lifted Sharma over square leg 29 years ago.

But then Immad had to go for it as another single could have meant exposing the fragile Irfan to getting out or consuming vital deliveries. So for Immad it was in a way the last ball.

So an inspiring win has wrapped up the Sri Lankan tour and Pakistan are clearly a rejuvenated side. I cannot remember when was the last time that Pakistan won a series in three formats on the same tour, let alone under three different captains. That should at least be the first in the latter category.

Shahid Afridi had the distinction of not losing any game as against two that Azhar Ali lost and one that was conceded by Misbah-ul-Haq. But until Anwar Ali went ballistic even the fight back that Afridi himself had carved out from 40-5 looked insufficient to stop Sri Lanka from leveling the series. It has been pleasing to see Anwar get his reward. Credit to coach Waqar Younis for persevering with him and redefining his role as new ball bowler in which he has improved. Also full credit to Anwar, who excelled when all seemed lost. It was not just that he held his nerve but the quality of his shots was outstanding.

As such it is sad to see the Twenty20 series mired in needless controversy when the inexplicable decision to ‘rest’ Sarfraz Ahmed was taken. Indeed the axing of Sarfraz from the two games after his buildup of runs in earlier Tests and ODIs has become such a high profile occurrence that even commentator Dean Jones brought up the issue when he asked Afridi at the toss for the second T20I whether Sarfraz was playing.

The answer that Afridi gave was a mix of arrogance and evasiveness but more importantly and poignantly was his contention that he had an eye on the World Twenty20 (in India in March 2016) and was planning for that. It was mindboggling; a captain revealing that he was leading the strategy toward team selection for an event eight months away! Till that game it wasn’t even sure if he deserved a place in the side based on his recent performances with bat or ball. And after giving a statement earlier that he might retire from Twenty20 Internationals if he didn’t see his form coming back.

And what is this plan that doesn’t see Sarfaraz in the scheme of things? Since the discussion was on the wicketkeeper did it not indicate that a replacement was being worked upon, which in this case is Mohammad Rizwan?  Does that mean that Afridi has already made up his first XI in his mind and has slotted in Rizwan for Sarfaraz?  Why else try out Rizwan as the glovesman and keep Sarfraz out of the team?

It’s such a ridiculous excuse. If experiments are to be done you do not replace your permanent team members, in fact the vice-captain who is in form, but the fringe players and seek out who is best among them. As such it should have been Nauman Anwar playing instead of Mukhtar Ahmed or Ahmed Shahzad. Or Yasir Shah or Zia-ul-Haq for someone like Sohail Tanvir.

I say even if Rizwan was to be tried (and to be fair Rizwan has earned a place in the team due to his batting and fielding in the ODIs previously) he could have come in as a specialist batsman in place of Hafeez who cannot bowl and when it comes to batting is inferior in this format to both Rizwan and Sarfraz. In fact sending in Sarfaraz at No.3 would have been ideal given his penchant for accelerating the strike rate and that he has excelled as opener more times than not in the limited over format. Rizwan could have batted where he did in the game.

I just feel that it has not so much to do with strategy than a concerted effort to keep Sarfraz at an arm’s length wherever possible. Waqar Younis can say what he wants that it has nothing to do with likes and dislikes. It has become quite blatant now. In previous cases there was some weakness behind the stumps but on this tour Sarfraz has kept well and caught and stumped with alacrity.

Was it that Afridi was a bit hesitant to play Sarfraz given his own failing form (partly revived in the second T20I)and felt  that Sarfraz is indeed a threat considering he has been named vice captain of the T20 side? Is it that Waqar is equally fearful that if Sarfaraz has a permanent place in the T20 side then after Afridi’s retirement (or if he is sacked earlier to that) Sarfraz will take up the captaincy? Can his bruised ego take that after Sarfaraz showed him up in the World Cup?

Certainly PCB chief Shaharyar Khan and the selectors should take this development seriously. There have been vibes that his exclusion will be discussed behind closed doors at the Gaddafi Stadium but I think it is about time that the chairman and the selectors come out in open support of Sarfraz and ensure he is given a straight run. If men like Hafeez can be given long periods to reestablish themselves and if Umar Akmal and Malik can earn recalls at the earliest opportunity, then how can the lad from Karachi be dropped when he in fact is in great form?