Zimbabwe reached 170 for 3 in 34.3 overs, chasing Afghanistan's total of 169 all out in 43.3 overs. The result rested on one side's efficiency with the bat and the other's inability to bat out its overs. The figures below frame the contest.
Innings summary| Team | Score | Overs | Approx. run rate |
|---|
| Afghanistan | 169 all out | 43.3 | 3.89 |
| Zimbabwe | 170 for 3 | 34.3 | 4.93 |
Zimbabwe scored roughly one run more per over than Afghanistan. They also lost only three wickets, against Afghanistan's ten.
Afghanistan Innings: 169 All Out in 43.3 Overs
Afghanistan were dismissed with 6.3 overs unused, assuming a standard 50-over format. That equates to 39 balls of batting potential left unspent. A side that fails to use its full quota usually finishes well short of a competitive total.
Their scoring rate of 3.89 runs per over sat below the typical par for a 50-over innings. The lineup included Rahmanullah Gurbaz (wk), Ibrahim Zadran, Sediq Atal, captain Rahmat Shah, Hashmatullah Shahidi, Azmatullah Omarzai, Mohammad Nabi and Rashid Khan. It also had AM Ghazanfar, Bilal Sami and Fazalhaq Farooqi.
Balls faced and scoring rate
Afghanistan faced 261 balls and scored 169 runs, a rate of about 0.65 runs per ball. That is a modest return for a lineup with this much experience at the top and middle of the order. Without extra scoring detail, the headline figures are the best guide to how the innings unfolded.
Afghanistan innings metrics| Metric | Value |
|---|
| Total | 169 |
| Wickets lost | 10 |
| Balls faced | 261 |
| Runs per ball | 0.65 |
| Overs unused (of 50) | 6.3 |
Zimbabwe Innings: 170 for 3 in 34.3 Overs
Zimbabwe passed the target with 15.3 overs in hand, which is 93 balls remaining on a 50-over basis. They lost three wickets and finished on 170. Their chase ran at 4.93 runs per over against a required rate of 3.40 at the start.
The lineup featured Brian Bennett, Tadiwanashe Marumani, Tafadzwa Tsiga, Brendan Taylor (wk), captain Sikandar Raza, Ryan Burl and Wessly Madhevere. Brad Evans, Newman Nyamhuri, Wellington Masakadza and Blessing Muzarabani completed the squad.
Chase efficiency
The chase needed about 0.82 runs per ball for 207 balls. Zimbabwe therefore scored faster than the required rate throughout. Losing only three wickets also left seven in reserve, so batting depth was never tested.
Zimbabwe chase metrics| Metric | Value |
|---|
| Target | 170 |
| Score | 170 for 3 |
| Balls used | 207 |
| Balls remaining (of 300) | 93 |
| Required rate at start | 3.40 |
| Achieved rate | 4.93 |
| Wickets in hand | 7 |
Key Comparisons and Trends
The gap between the sides showed in both speed and survival. Zimbabwe consumed 54 fewer balls than Afghanistan to reach a marginally higher total. They also lost seven fewer wickets.
Head-to-head performance comparison| Category | Afghanistan | Zimbabwe |
|---|
| Runs | 169 | 170 |
| Wickets lost | 10 | 3 |
| Overs used | 43.3 | 34.3 |
| Run rate | 3.89 | 4.93 |
| Balls faced | 261 | 207 |
What the numbers suggest
A total near 170 is generally chaseable in 50-over cricket when the chasing side keeps wickets in hand. Zimbabwe's seven remaining wickets meant they could absorb early pressure without altering their approach. Afghanistan's batting, by contrast, ended with no wickets and unused overs.
For Afghanistan, the main analytical question is conversion. A lineup of this depth would normally be expected to bat out most of its overs and post a higher total. The margin of 93 balls remaining indicates the shortfall was substantial.
Conclusion
Zimbabwe won the contest by a clear margin, based on the scorecard totals provided. They chased 170 in 34.3 overs, lost three wickets and kept 93 balls in reserve. Afghanistan's 169 all out in 43.3 overs left too little to defend.