England’s 3-0 sweep exposed Pakistan’s familiar Test weaknesses — but the reaction to defeat became almost as significant as the defeats themselves.
By the time Joe Root eased England over the line at Edgbaston, Pakistan’s tour of England had become about much more than three Test matches.
England had won the series 3-0, completing the whitewash with an eight-wicket victory. Pakistan had been bowled out for 171 and 135 at Headingley, 110 and 194 at Lord’s, and 133 in their first innings at Edgbaston.
But the scorecard tells only part of the story.
Between the second and third Tests, Pakistan released seven players, removed head coach Sarfaraz Ahmed and bowling coach Umar Gul, reshaped their squad and handed interim red-ball responsibility to Mike Hesson and Ashley Noffke.
A disciplinary inquiry followed, while Mohammad Rizwan and Imam-ul-Haq were subsequently questioned by the National Cyber Crime Investigation Agency (NCCIA) over alleged dressing-room leaks.
For a team already struggling on the field, the reaction to defeat became a story of its own.
How Pakistan Lost the First Two Tests
At Headingley, England’s decision to bowl first proved decisive. Pakistan’s top order struggled against movement and were dismissed for 171. England replied with 409 before Pakistan folded for 135, losing by an innings and 103 runs.
The basic problem was repeated throughout the series: Pakistan’s batters struggled to make sound decisions outside off stump, while England’s seamers maintained enough discipline to make every mistake costly.
Lord’s followed a similar pattern, despite Pakistan bowling considerably better and playing without Imam-ul-Haq, their opener who was injured.
Mohammad Abbas took 4 for 73 as England were restricted to 290. But Pakistan’s response lasted only 110 runs. England then built a commanding advantage and set Pakistan 389. Saud Shakeel’s 97 offered resistance, but England eventually dismissed Pakistan for 194 to win by 194 runs.
Two Tests, two heavy defeats and a familiar question: why could Pakistan’s batting not withstand sustained pressure in English conditions?
Then Came the Overhaul
Seven players were sent home after Lord’s, while Sarfaraz Ahmed and Umar Gul were removed from their coaching positions. Mike Hesson, Pakistan’s white-ball head coach, took charge for the final Test.
The changes were so sweeping that former captain Shahid Afridi called them the “most shocking decision ever” by a selection committee.
Nasser Hussain was even more critical of one particular selection decision: Saim Ayub’s return to the Test side after coming directly from T20 cricket.
Hussain described it as “disrespect and disregard for Test match cricket”, arguing that opening in England is one of the most difficult jobs in the game.
Criticism from Cricket Experts & Media
Hussain went further, arguing that sending senior players home could create a culture of fear: “The point of an administration is to alleviate pressure, not put more pressure on.”
“I don’t think after Headingley that the world was laughing at Pakistan. My rant at Lord’s about them not fighting back, about India vs Pakistan games being very one-sided, and that they were a poor side playing poorly wasn’t laughing at them.
It was out of frustration at seeing where this great cricketing nation is now. What they have done now is make them into a laughing stock. They have made it worse.”
The PCB announced an internal disciplinary inquiry against Rizwan and Imam due to the latter’s conduct and the former’s inability to bat because of a calf injury, as PCB Director of High Performance Aaqib Javed stated that he should have batted.
On the Imam situation, Hussain added: “I cannot believe how a director of high performance can go on telly, rightly or wrongly, and throw a player under the bus. For every other touring side, if we ask how a player is doing, they would say, ‘He has had a scan and will only bat if needed.’ The whole handling of the Imam situation is ridiculous.”
Aaqib had reportedly advocated Ubaid Shah’s inclusion for the second Test, and the decision not to play him became part of the reason why Sarfaraz Ahmed was removed. Aaqib argued that Pakistan needed changes in both personnel and mindset after failing to compete in the opening two Tests.
Yet, after Mike Hesson took charge, Ubaid was again left out for the third Test at Edgbaston. The contrasting decisions raised a broader question about selection consistency.
Jason Gillespie said: “It’s pretty clear they don’t have a selection strategy at all, particularly under Aqib Javed. They change their mind like they change their pants — daily. From the outside, it looks like they are playing with fear.”
Edgbaston: A Different Pakistan, Too Late
The third Test initially suggested that the changes had solved nothing.
Pakistan were 26 for 4 and eventually dismissed for 133. Josh Tongue took 4 for 42, while Ollie Robinson and Jofra Archer shared six wickets.
England then reached 453, establishing a 320-run lead.
At that point, Pakistan appeared certain to suffer another comprehensive defeat.
Instead came the most encouraging passage of their tour.
Shan Masood made 95, Babar Azam 76 and Azan Awais 59. Then Razaullah, a 21-year-old making his Test debut, produced an extraordinary 81 from 63 balls, including nine sixes.
His partnership with Mohammad Abbas turned a potential innings defeat into a fourth-innings target of 130.
England still won comfortably, reaching 130 for 2, with Root unbeaten on 62 and Jordan Cox on 59.
But Razaullah’s performance offered Pakistan something the first two Tests had not: a glimpse of a player who could alter the balance of a Test side.
His nine sixes matched Ben Stokes’ record for most sixes in a Test innings in England, and Tim Southee’s record of 9 sixes on Test debut.
The Real Problem Was Not Talent
That is perhaps the most frustrating conclusion from the series. Pakistan clearly have talent. The problem is turning individual ability into a stable Test team.
England’s advantage was not simply their aggressive philosophy. Their greater strength was clarity: established roles, continuity and a bowling attack capable of maintaining pressure.
Pakistan, by contrast, changed personnel and coaching structures when the series was already lost. That is why the most important question after the whitewash is not who should be dropped.
It is whether Pakistan can stop responding to every crisis by starting again.
What Next for Pakistan?
Pakistan’s WTC 2025–27 campaign is effectively over, as they can no longer qualify for the final. Pakistan’s remaining Tests are against Sri Lanka at home in November 2026 and New Zealand in early 2027.
Those four matches should serve two purposes: maximise available WTC points and establish a coherent Test side. Pakistan need to resist the temptation to make another wholesale correction.
They need a settled batting unit; a genuine red-ball pathway through domestic and A-team cricket; careful management of young fast bowlers; and, above all, defined responsibilities and authority between selectors, coaches and board officials.
Pakistan have discovered before that raw talent can excite a nation. The harder task is developing it into a career.
England’s 3-0 victory was therefore more than another overseas defeat. It was an audit.
The batting weaknesses were exposed. The preparation gap was exposed. The instability in selection was exposed. And the reaction to defeat exposed a deeper problem with how Pakistan cricket manages pressure.
