Former England captain Nasser Hussain has taken aim at the sweeping changes Pakistan has made ahead of the final Test against England, arguing that the Pakistan Cricket Board's (PCB) decisions have turned the side into a "laughing stock". The criticism comes as Pakistan sit down 2-0 after heavy defeats at Headingley and Lord's, and have opted to drop seven members of the squad for the Edgbaston showdown scheduled to begin on September 9.
The list of exclusions includes opening batsman Imam-ul-Haq, wicketkeeper Mohammad Rizwan, left‑arm spinner Ali Usman and fast bowler Khurram Shahzad, among others. Only two of the seven newcomers – batsmen Saim Ayub and Abdullah Fazal – have ever played Test cricket before, underscoring the inexperience of the revamped line‑up. In addition to the player purge, the PCB has also dismissed head coach Sarfaraz Ahmed and his assistant Umar Gul.
White‑ball specialist Mike Hesson has been handed the reins for the remainder of the tour, a move that has raised eyebrows among analysts and former players alike. Hussain, who voiced his frustration after Pakistan’s 194‑run loss at Lord's, appeared on the latest Sky Sports Cricket Podcast alongside Michael Atherton and Cricinfo senior editor Osman Samiuddin. He described the PCB’s approach as "classic how you don’t build a team" and argued that fans deserve a more thoughtful strategy. "Great teams are built around a higher purpose," he said, referencing the West Indies teams led by Sir Viv Richards and Sir Clive Lloyd, and the Australian sides that played for the baggy green under Steve Waugh.
"You create a side by making players feel wanted. Sending senior players home – even if Rizwan has had a few poor shots – is a humiliation. He would give his heart and soul for Pakistan cricket." Hussain warned that the Edgbaston match, regardless of the result, would serve as a cautionary tale for any side that resorts to such drastic measures.
"The point of an administration is to alleviate pressure, not add more," he asserted. "I cannot see how an administration could overlook that.
This might be a stroke of genius, but it hasn’t worked before, so why should it work now?" Aaqib Javed, the PCB's director of high performance, echoed the sentiment of urgency in a televised interview, claiming that "the world is laughing at us because we can't even compete". Javed also launched a scathing attack on Imam-ul-Haq, insisting that the 30‑year‑old would face an inquiry after missing both innings at Lord's due to a calf injury. He questioned the legitimacy of the injury, saying, "Players in the past would play with casts.
How can a pulled muscle keep you out of batting entirely? He will have to answer for this. I can't say he faked it, but a muscle pull like that cannot stop you batting altogether." Hussain pushed back, clarifying that his earlier remarks at Lord's were not about mocking Pakistan but expressing frustration at the decline of a historically great cricketing nation.
"My rant at Lord's about them not fighting back, about India‑Pakistan games being one‑sided, and about a poor side playing poorly was not laughing at them. It was out of frustration. What they have done now is make them into a laughing stock. They have made it worse," he said.
Regarding the Imam controversy, Hussain condemned Javed’s public handling of the situation, calling it "ridiculous" and urging the board to protect its players. "I cannot believe how a director of high performance can go on telly, rightly or wrongly, and throw a player under the bus.
He is either injured or he is not. For any other touring side, the response would be, 'he has had a scan and will only bat if needed.' The whole handling of the Imam situation is absurd. You have to protect your players a little bit," Hussain added.
When asked whether a victory in Birmingham could vindicate the PCB’s radical approach, Atherton responded emphatically that it would not. "Not in this instance, no, because of the damage it will do longer term. This is no way to manage players and no way to build a long‑term vision at all. I feel it's a horrible position for a captain, Babar Azam, to be in – and what kind of authority does he or any captain of Pakistan have in this outfit?" Atherton highlighted the diminishing authority of captains in modern cricket, noting that while captains are no longer the sole decision‑makers they still need a degree of influence within the team.
"Given what's happened, how do you lead that team now?" he asked, pointing to the potential erosion of Babar Azam’s leadership credibility. The broader context of the PCB’s actions reflects a crisis of confidence that extends beyond the playing field. After two crushing defeats, the board appears to be grasping for a quick fix, perhaps hoping that a wholesale overhaul will shock the team back to life. Historically, such drastic mid‑tour changes have rarely produced positive outcomes.
Teams that have succeeded in rebuilding usually do so gradually, with clear communication, consistent coaching philosophies, and a stable core of experienced players. Critics argue that the PCB’s decision to sack the head coach and replace senior players mid‑series sends a message that performance is valued over loyalty and development.
It also raises questions about the role of the captain in a highly politicised environment. Babar Azam, widely regarded as one of the world’s premier batsmen, now faces the dual challenge of leading a side that has lost its senior figures while also navigating a board that appears to be micromanaging every aspect of team selection. The situation also shines a light on the pressures faced by cricket boards in the age of instant media scrutiny. Social media platforms amplify every mistake, and the PCB may feel compelled to act decisively to appease a frustrated fan base.
Yet, the risk of alienating players and creating a culture of fear could have lasting repercussions, potentially deterring talent from committing to the national side. In the coming days, the Edgbaston Test will serve as a litmus test for the PCB’s strategy. If Pakistan can muster a competitive performance, it may provide a short‑term morale boost, but the underlying structural issues will likely remain. Conversely, another heavy loss could deepen the crisis, prompting further calls for a more measured, long‑term rebuilding plan.
For now, the cricketing world watches with a mixture of curiosity and concern, wondering whether Pakistan’s radical experiment will be remembered as a bold gamble that paid off or as a cautionary tale of how not to manage a national team. The outcome at Edgbaston will be just one chapter in a larger story about governance, player welfare, and the delicate balance between ambition and stability in international cricket.