History
Main articles: History of cricket in Pakistan from 1947 to 1970, History of cricket in Pakistan from 1971 to 1985, History of cricket in Pakistan from 1986 to 2000, and History of cricket in Pakistan from 2001 See also: History of the Indian cricket team and Cricket in PakistanFollowing the Partition of India in 1947, and the establishment of the separate nation state of Pakistan, cricket in the country developed steadily and Pakistan was given Test Match status at a meeting of the Imperial Cricket Conference at Lord's Cricket Ground on 28 July 1952 following recommendation by India, which, being the successor state of the British Raj, did not have to go through such a process.
Pakistan's first Test match was played in Delhi in October 1952 as part of a five Test series which India won 2-1. Pakistan made their first tour of England in 1954 and drew the series 1-1 after a memorable victory at The Oval in which fast bowler Fazal Mahmood took 12 wickets. Pakistan's first home Test match was in Dacca in January 1955 against India, after which four more Test matches were played in Bahawalpur, Lahore, Peshawar and Karachi (all five matches in the series were drawn, the first such occurrence in test history).
The team is considered strong but unpredictable. Traditionally Pakistani cricket has had players of great talent but limited discipline, making them a team which could play inspirational cricket one day and then perform less than ordinarily another day. Over the years, competitions between India and Pakistan have always been emotionally charged and provide for intriguing contests, as talented teams from both sides of the border elevate their game to new levels to produce high-quality cricket. Pakistan's matches against India in the Cricket World Cup have seen packed stadiums and heightened atmospheres no matter where the World Cup has been held.
Read more about this topic: History Of The Pakistani Cricket Team
Famous quotes containing the word history:
“To summarize the contentions of this paper then. Firstly, the phrase ‘the meaning of a word’ is a spurious phrase. Secondly and consequently, a re-examination is needed of phrases like the two which I discuss, ‘being a part of the meaning of’ and ‘having the same meaning.’ On these matters, dogmatists require prodding: although history indeed suggests that it may sometimes be better to let sleeping dogmatists lie.”
—J.L. (John Langshaw)
“I am not a literary man.... I am a man of science, and I am interested in that branch of Anthropology which deals with the history of human speech.”
—J.A.H. (James Augustus Henry)
“When the landscape buckles and jerks around, when a dust column of debris rises from the collapse of a block of buildings on bodies that could have been your own, when the staves of history fall awry and the barrel of time bursts apart, some turn to prayer, some to poetry: words in the memory, a stained book carried close to the body, the notebook scribbled by hand—a center of gravity.”
—Adrienne Rich (b. 1929)