Developing (batting) bench strength - all talk, no action? A Pakistani mystery...

[mak36]

There's been a lot of talk from Mickey and the selectors about developing bench strength in the build up to WC19, particularly in terms of batting. They've identified the need to find and develop young aggressive batsmen, and they promised young talent would be given opportunities in upcoming tours. Sounds good so far.

As the saying goes though, actions speak louder than words.

I'll start this by saying I like and respect Inzi, so this isn't a dig at him or his colleagues. I'll also add that the squad for the "Independence Cup" is pretty good overall. However, I can't help but think that the selectors have followed the trend of being bold(er) with bowling selections but somewhat more conservative with their batting selections (Babar is a notable exception). The omission of "fringe" batsmen for this tour would also suggest that we can't expect to see too many new batsmen in any of the upcoming tours.

So my question is: why is Pakistan more afraid of trying out new batsmen than they are bowlers? We've seen the selectors willing to give young bowlers a go on the international stage and succeed (think of Shadab, Hassan Ali, Rumman, Amir etc.) yet that approach does not seem to have been mirrored when it comes to batting. Why?

A couple of observations:

1. For starters, they've only selected six specialist batsmen in the squad (including Sarfaraz). Given it is a squad of 16, is that really the best the selectors could muster? What makes the squad balance all the more strange is that in terms of the playing XI the bowling line up is pretty set in stone and it is the batting which has some spaces up for grabs. Yet they only select six specialist batsmen in a squad of 16!

2. Only one "new" batsman has been brought in: Umar Amin. Now with the greatest respect, why on earth have they selected yet another anchor? His only saving grace is the fact he is a left hander. Of the six specialist batsmen, four/five will be playing very similar roles- ie. an anchoring role at a S/R of 115. Why not give some more aggressive batsmen a chance. What's there to lose?

3. I know people will mention the likes of Ashraf and Yamin etc. but I would say two things: (i) they are unlikely to feature as top order batsmen and (ii) they are all rounders. In this modern era, teams should be looking to score from ball 1, not just in the last five overs.

4. It's great to see Hafeez out of the squad, but why keep selecting Shehzad? He has shown time and again that he cannot/will not bring his "A" game to the international stage, and instead chooses to bat selfishly. This series was a perfect chance to try out a few younger alternatives, yet the selectors have taken the "safer" route. Why?

No doubt some posters will ask who should have been selected. Talat is someone that both Mickey and Azhar have praised as being a very good aggressive batsman. Sure, his bowling is undercooked but why not select him as a specialist batsman for now?

Sahibzada Farhan is another contender: he has passed every test given to him with flying colours. He is clearly someone they are keeping an eye on, yet they refuse to select him. Why hold him back?

 

[Abdullah719]

Good post. Not sure why we keep persisting with LOI failures such as Shehzad. We really need a (proper ) aggressive opener after Sharjeel's departure.

The likes of Malik and Hafeez should also be given some competition.

 

[msb314]

Good post. Not sure why we keep persisting with LOI failures such as Shehzad. We really need a (proper ) aggressive opener after Sharjeel's departure.

The likes of Malik and Hafeez should also be given some competition.

Whatever happened to Mukhtar Ahmed?

I refuse to believe someone can be discarded so easily after failing in 2 games - seems outrageous to me.

Deserves another chance atleast for several T20 games on the trot to see if he has it in him to succeed in international cricket.

 

[Abdullah719]

Whatever happened to Mukhtar Ahmed?

I refuse to believe someone can be discarded so easily after failing in 2 games - seems outrageous to me.

Deserves another chance atleast for several T20 games on the trot to see if he has it in him to succeed in international cricket.

Not sure, he doesn't seem to have played any professional cricket this year...

He is in FATA's squad for the National T20 Cup though.

 

[o_ahsan99]

Ahmed Shehzad should consider himself extremely lucky. I was not expecting Shehzad to get picked. There are only two openers in the squad so Shehzad will get to play all three games. There is pressure of being dropped after the first game. The games are being played in Lahore so he has easy wickets to bat on. And most importantly, apart from Morne Morkel, there aren't any good fast bowlers in the World XI. I agree with OP that Shehzad has failed to score meaningful runs in any major international tournaments and is now getting this golden opportunity to score some easy runs. Talat Hussain or Sahibzada Farhan should have been tried instead.

 

[mak36]

Good post. Not sure why we keep persisting with LOI failures such as Shehzad. We really need a (proper ) aggressive opener after Sharjeel's departure.

The likes of Malik and Hafeez should also be given some competition.

Yes exactly, although i'm not sure Kami fits the bill.

I really do hope they give some fringe batsmen a chance in our upcoming tours, but I somehow doubt it.

 

[Justcrazy]

Its valid point , specially when Inzamam was himself a batsman.

 

[mak36]

Its valid point , specially when Inzamam was himself a batsman.

Exactly. Plus Inzamam himself only made his name after being picked from relative obscurity (as I mention in the POTW thread), which is all the more reason he should be a little bolder when it comes to batting selections.

 

[Canistani Hero]

There's been a lot of talk from Mickey and the selectors about developing bench strength in the build up to WC19, particularly in terms of batting. They've identified the need to find and develop young aggressive batsmen, and they promised young talent would be given opportunities in upcoming tours. Sounds good so far.

As the saying goes though, actions speak louder than words.

I'll start this by saying I like and respect Inzi, so this isn't a dig at him or his colleagues. I'll also add that the squad for the "Independence Cup" is pretty good overall. However, I can't help but think that the selectors have followed the trend of being bold(er) with bowling selections but somewhat more conservative with their batting selections (Babar is a notable exception). The omission of "fringe" batsmen for this tour would also suggest that we can't expect to see too many new batsmen in any of the upcoming tours.

So my question is: why is Pakistan more afraid of trying out new batsmen than they are bowlers? We've seen the selectors willing to give young bowlers a go on the international stage and succeed (think of Shadab, Hassan Ali, Rumman, Amir etc.) yet that approach does not seem to have been mirrored when it comes to batting. Why?

A couple of observations:

1. For starters, they've only selected six specialist batsmen in the squad (including Sarfaraz). Given it is a squad of 16, is that really the best the selectors could muster? What makes the squad balance all the more strange is that in terms of the playing XI the bowling line up is pretty set in stone and it is the batting which has some spaces up for grabs. Yet they only select six specialist batsmen in a squad of 16!

2. Only one "new" batsman has been brought in: Umar Amin. Now with the greatest respect, why on earth have they selected yet another anchor? His only saving grace is the fact he is a left hander. Of the six specialist batsmen, four/five will be playing very similar roles- ie. an anchoring role at a S/R of 115. Why not give some more aggressive batsmen a chance. What's there to lose?

3. I know people will mention the likes of Ashraf and Yamin etc. but I would say two things: (i) they are unlikely to feature as top order batsmen and (ii) they are all rounders. In this modern era, teams should be looking to score from ball 1, not just in the last five overs.

4. It's great to see Hafeez out of the squad, but why keep selecting Shehzad? He has shown time and again that he cannot/will not bring his "A" game to the international stage, and instead chooses to bat selfishly. This series was a perfect chance to try out a few younger alternatives, yet the selectors have taken the "safer" route. Why?

No doubt some posters will ask who should have been selected. Talat is someone that both Mickey and Azhar have praised as being a very good aggressive batsman. Sure, his bowling is undercooked but why not select him as a specialist batsman for now?

Sahibzada Farhan is another contender: he has passed every test given to him with flying colours. He is clearly someone they are keeping an eye on, yet they refuse to select him. Why hold him back?

Pretty sure Farhan will get a go against WI or SL. The World XI is more glamour anyway so selfie stick makes sense.

 

[mak36]

Pretty sure Farhan will get a go against WI or SL. The World XI is more glamour anyway so selfie stick makes sense.

I very much hope that is the case, but I am not sure it will happen that way. If they were going to test out bench strength I would have thought it would be more likely in the World XI series.

Plus, here is what Inzi said recently about inducting new players into the team:

When asked whether to retain the Champions Trophy winning combination for the Sri Lanka series or the top performers of
this National T20 will also be considered for the upcoming series, the chief selector said: “Whenever a player performs very well
in a national tournament, we can’t take him to the national team very next day. We need to observe top performers for at least
one year, and if they succeed in giving consistent performances, then they must be considered for the national team.


“And secondly, if during the series, we need a player, then we will have a very good back-up and in that case, we can surely
give the top performers a transparent chance in the national team,” he added.

 

[SarfiBabarHaris]

Some very good points.

I will add that I am really unhappy how we are treating young batsmen in PSL too.
You hardly see young batsmen in PSL rather teams are filled with overseas batsmen or uncles/old names like Misbah, Rafat Ullah, Hafeez etc while kids like Saif , Talat etc hardly make it to teams. Newcomers like Fakhar who were given chances have performed.

Unfair to the batsmen. Then they say we dont have batsmen. Bhai jab chance he nahi do gai to develop kaisay hun gai?

 

[cricketerB94]

It all happens step by step. If you observed the recent inclusion of Pakistan players, you will see a pattern. Firstly, all those players performed in domestic, then picked up for A tours or PSL and an extraordinary performance there made them available for national selection. Examples are Fakhar, Babar, Hasan, Ruman, Amir e.t.c. All these players have gone through this pattern.

Inzi is right in not picking up batsmen like Sahibzada Farhan yet. You can't expose a player to international cricket from Pakistan domestic system directly. You have to nurture them, make them feel good in pressure situations and international environment and then you include them in national team according to their performance.

Now tell me which batsman do you want to see in series against World XI who has gone through this pattern?

 

[mak36]

Some very good points.

I will add that I am really unhappy how we are treating young batsmen in PSL too.
You hardly see young batsmen in PSL rather teams are filled with overseas batsmen or uncles/old names like Misbah, Rafat Ullah, Hafeez etc while kids like Saif , Talat etc hardly make it to teams. Newcomers like Fakhar who were given chances have performed.

Unfair to the batsmen. Then they say we dont have batsmen. Bhai jab chance he nahi do gai to develop kaisay hun gai?

Thank you bhai.

You have hit the nail on the head regarding the PSL. The PSL seems to perpetuate the idea that Pakistani batsmen are an endangered species, as shown by the fact that the (young) domestic players tend to be bowlers whilst the overseas/old names tend to be batsmen.

There are plenty of batsmen waiting in the wings for a chance but they aren't being given opportunities. For example:

• Saif didn't play at all, not even in their final group stage game (when it was impossible for LQ to qualify);
  
• Talat was given two games by IU, and he only played those because they lost their main batsmen to the spot fixing investigation; and
  
• Khushdil Shah was thrown into the Final and expected to perform

Currently each PSL team is required to play at least one emerging player (EP) in the playing XI, but as we have already noted most of these EPs tend to be bowlers. My own view is that the EP requirement should be increased to 2 players, with a requirement that at least one of them is a batsman. The effect of this will be fourfold:

(i) it will reduce the number of domestic TTFs in the playing XI of each PSL team;

(ii) it will give increased opportunities to young Pakistani batsmen and increase their exposure;

(iii) it will increase competition for spaces in PCT and therefore put pressure on the "experienced" batsmen to perform and

(iv) it will serve the needs of the national team: it will help develop bench strength in an area which needs strengthening.

 

[mak36]

I thought I would wait until the series finished before commenting, but I have to say I was disappointed by the management's approach yet again. The result is irrelevant. The World XI series was a perfect illustration of the problem I highlighted in the OP. That is to say the underlying problem, conservative batting selections, very much remains.

Seriously, what is the point is selecting positive stroke-makers like Ashraf and Yamin in the squad and then not playing them?