What's new

Faheem Ashraf vs Amad Butt: The better all-rounder?

Faheem Ashraf versus Amad Butt: Who is the better all-rounder?


  • Total voters
    14

Canistani Hero

Senior T20I Player
Joined
Mar 3, 2012
Runs
17,862
The title says enough -- I suppose the question is ISLU specific with regards to PSL but both are somewhat knocking on the national team door so it does beg the question.

Mods can we have a poll?

Personally, I find Faheem hugely overrated with both bat and ball -- his batting has non-existent for most of his tenure with the national team and his bowling whist ordinary for Pakistan, has been surprisingly effective in the PSL. Ammad appears to be a much cleaner striker of the ball but lacks the consistency to exhibit he could an all-rounder in the mould of Razzaq as opposed to a Wahab or Tanvir, both of whom can cause some carnage on their day. Faheem's pace is in the 135-138 bracket whereas Ammad typically clocks 132-135. I like Ammad's willingness to use variation, he has a decent bumper and isn't afraid to try a cutter every once in a while whereas Faheem comes across as more of one-dimensional bowler.

Pakistan desperately needs a seam bowling A/R for LOI's - I guess the ship has sailed on the likes of Aamir Yamin, Anwar Ali and Bilawal Bhatti and it would be worth mentioning that Misbah can keep a much closer eye on these two..given his affiliation with Islamabad.

In the long term, I firmly believe Abbas Afridi has everything needed to blossom into the kind of player needed to fulfill that role but he will need atleast 2 years to hone his skills, until then if you had to pick one of these two in Pakistan's ODI and T20 squads, perhaps even as a squad player if not a starter, who would it be?
 
Both of than are trash tbh maybe, butt cause there was no investment on him
 
Depends if your looking for a bowling all rounder then defo faheem
If your looking for batting all rounder then ammad butt
 
exposed technically at international level vs to be exposed.Thats the kind of talent Pakistan is producing bar babar.
On PP:
player to be exposed >>>>already exposed
 
At the moment Faheem [MENTION=134608]Hawkeye[/MENTION]?

Amad Butt is a dud bowler. Or at least that's the impression he gave in his first high profile match and has never impressed before that either. Faheem is ahead here.

As for his batting, yet to see what he's capable of.

ISLU usually picks good young players so maybe he can turn out to be not totally useless.
 
Ammad is much better than Faheem overall....

Faheem has had an extended run with at times leading the attack in T20z ... where he has been reasonable okiesh

Ammad needs tht confidence and oppertunity .. i thinik he would come good.
 
3 wickets so far vs MS - doing really well.
 
Faheem has more pace but Ammad's slower balls are deadly, very hard to pick. Even outfoxed Moeen Ali
 
You can be nothing more than a street cricketer and be better than Faheem.
 
Love how the thread is about all rounder and almost all comments are on bowling prowess of the two individuals . . and that for me encapsulates it!

Faheem is in no way an all rounder . . people cite his innings against Ireland (in which he was dropped) . . yasir shah has a 100 against Australia in Australia against probably the best attack in the world today . . so yeah . . don't insult all rounders by calling Faheem an all rounder

Amad . . well haven't seen him bat yet, so can't comment . .

on bowling alone . . Faheem is better than Amad . . but then again, if you're playing bowlers . . then why would you play any one of these 2 over regular bowlers . . problem is. . Faheem has been playing under the garb of being an all rounder
 
Love how the thread is about all rounder and almost all comments are on bowling prowess of the two individuals . . and that for me encapsulates it!

Faheem is in no way an all rounder . . people cite his innings against Ireland (in which he was dropped) . . yasir shah has a 100 against Australia in Australia against probably the best attack in the world today . . so yeah . . don't insult all rounders by calling Faheem an all rounder

Amad . . well haven't seen him bat yet, so can't comment . .

on bowling alone . . Faheem is better than Amad . . but then again, if you're playing bowlers . . then why would you play any one of these 2 over regular bowlers . . problem is. . Faheem has been playing under the garb of being an all rounder

Ammad is better batesman and decent bowler
Ashraf is better bowler but a terrible batesman
 
I don’t think it is possible to be a worse cricketer than Faheem.
 
Faheem problem is that his batting was never good , never played any innings of substance , thus Butt is better.
 
Love how the thread is about all rounder and almost all comments are on bowling prowess of the two individuals . . and that for me encapsulates it!

Faheem is in no way an all rounder . . people cite his innings against Ireland (in which he was dropped) . . yasir shah has a 100 against Australia in Australia against probably the best attack in the world today . . so yeah . . don't insult all rounders by calling Faheem an all rounder

Amad . . well haven't seen him bat yet, so can't comment . .

on bowling alone . . Faheem is better than Amad . . but then again, if you're playing bowlers . . then why would you play any one of these 2 over regular bowlers . . problem is. . Faheem has been playing under the garb of being an all rounder

Because we are looking for Bowling A/R's not Batting A/R's -- bowling has to be first priority - we can't add an all-rounder who is a liability for the bowling attack but handy with the bat..would defeat the purpose
 
Because we are looking for Bowling A/R's not Batting A/R's -- bowling has to be first priority - we can't add an all-rounder who is a liability for the bowling attack but handy with the bat..would defeat the purpose

For everything other than T20 cricket (only because I don't care for it), we need a batting all rounder in my opinion and here's why . .

We play with 3 proper fast bowlers and 1 spinner usually . . something like this

1.) Imam
2.) Fakhar
3.) Babar
4.) Haris
5.) Batsman
6.) Rizwan
7.) All rounder
8.) Shadab
9.) Hasan
10.) Amir
11.) Shaheen, et al.

You can not have a bowling all rounder come in at number 7 . . our batting at the top is way too brittle . . you need a bowling all rounder who will hold his own in the middle overs . . and you're not in trouble at a 100/4 . . teams are batting so deep these days . .

Similarly for test cricket . . you go with 4 proper bowlers . . the 5th bowler is to complements the attack to give the 4 bowlers a rest . . hence again, we need a batting all rounder . .

but forget batting or bowling all rounder for a second . . what we both agree on is that we need an all rounder . . and Faheem Ashraf is absolutely NOT an all rounder . . he is an insult to those who can call themselves an rounders! Shadab (who isn't great with the bat is 10 times the batsman Faheem is)
 
I grew up watching Wasim Akram and then Abdul Razzaq.

These 2 are pale imitations.
 
So here's the answer.

Both are 2nd grade bowlers and will often fail their teams.

Both joined their hands together to lose the game for ISLU vs QG. Poor bowling.
 
If these 2 are the all-rounders of the future. God help us.
 
If these 2 are the all-rounders of the future. God help us.

Yes, this is what we have in the all-rounders department.

Amad Butt was being hyped up as our next savior (like all the others who've come before him but did nothing).

How will he be treated by Warner, Maxwell, Rohit, Dhawan. Goodness me.

Same goes for Faheem and Imad Waseem too - these fake allrounders are going to get smashed to every corner of the park in AUS.
 
Neither. Faheem's batting has always been useless and now his bowling too. Amad is hugely overrated, he is a blind slogger with the bat and his bowling is even less promising than Faheem's. We would be better off going with Wahab at 8. His bowling is a lot better and on most days he will get you more runs than these two.
 
Both Amad and Faheem are garbage. Amad is a poor man's Anwar Ali, and we all know how bad he was. Faheem can't ball, can't bat either. Both are bits and pieces and should never play for Pakistan.
 
Both pretty horrible, I would avoid them both especially given the huge gap between Faheem/Amad's bowling and Naseem/Shaheen/Husnain...

I'd rather invest in Shadab, Nawaz as the all-round options for T20 and ODI
 
To be honest, the fast bowling talent is so good right now, we can’t afford to play a mediocre pace all rounder anyway. Better to play the specialist pacers and have the spin all rounders.
 
pakistan have to stick with a spin allrounder as the fast bowling stocks are filled. the only spin all rounder pakistan has is shadab khan.


as bad as it sounds, shadab is the only choice for an all rounder pakistan have
 
pakistan have to stick with a spin allrounder as the fast bowling stocks are filled. the only spin all rounder pakistan has is shadab khan.


as bad as it sounds, shadab is the only choice for an all rounder pakistan have

Nawaz ?
 
Aamir yamin better fielder and batsman than these 2 , he can bat at 5-6

yamin has played 1 down in QAT
 
Both Amad and Faheem are garbage. Amad is a poor man's Anwar Ali, and we all know how bad he was. Faheem can't ball, can't bat either. Both are bits and pieces and should never play for Pakistan.

I reckon bowling wise they'll only exacerbate things if you have piled on pressure early on. I'm hesitant to add amer yamin as we haven't seen much from him (thanks to our management) and so my option would be anwar ali as i really rate him as a lower middle order batsman.

An alternate is a spin allrounder option is Muhammad Nawaz who is probably just as poor as Shadab in bowling but he can also hit some big shots.
 
Biggest problem for both of them (actually every all rounder since Bob Woolmer took charge) is that they can’t command a spot probably not even PAK A squad on either skill individually. Oblate, there has been a self destructive tendency to pick bits & pieces players and then trying to turn them into all-rounders.

Normally (in most cases), a top quality all-rounder makes the team first as bowler, then with experience & practice, add value to batting. Or other way, few are there who can’t take the work load of both skills and move to batting, almost leaving bowling (becomes part-timer, but a genuine bat). The reason for that is - bowling is natural, you have to be almost born as a bowler, but batting is a methodical, process oriented task, that needs systematic development.

If we look at the great all-rounders in history - from Noble, Gregory, Miller to great 6 of 80s (Procter & Stevenson other two) to recent days Shakib, Holder, each one were bowler first and then added batting. In other group consists of all rounders like Hammond, Sobers, Colie Smith, Kallis, Dexter, Steve Waugh, Stokes..... these players started career as specialist bowler or at least one of 5 men attack, but later moved to batting (Steve Smith as well), and they ended up as damn good batsmen - would have made the XI simply as batsman.

For last few years, I can see a desperate attempt to load team with 2/3 posedu all-rounders; for which I understand the logic - since Managment doesn’t have confidence on batting, there is an effort to lengthen the batting, without much compromising (apparently) on batting - WHICH will never work.

The root of this strategy started with Woolmer, who despite being one of the best ever coaches, came with the traditional English thought process, when it comes to all-rounder/bowler; I must say without digging deep into core of PAK cricket. The context of cricket in PAK & England is not same, neither the core philosophy of the team. PAK/UAE wickets are uncompromising for bits & pieces bowlers while in UK, bowlers like Ganguly can run havoc on their day. Besides, PAK as a team can’t play any combination game - it’s still a team that wins games on individual brilliance - 3 bowlers taking 7 wickets & adding 100 runs hardly wins game for PAK; rather it’s opposite - if PAK wins a game, we can often clearly identify who is MoM.

Faheem or Amad (Anwar, Bilawal) are wrong investment - instead of them, better return would have been to extract some extra batting from Gul, Wahab, Sohail, Amir, Yasir or Hasan Ali. And, it would have definitely worked because each of these guys had the batting fundamentals and they made the playing XI on bowling merit. What they needed was a bit desire and hard push by management- if Yasir can score 200 runs in Australia in 2 Tests, I don’t understand why each of these guys couldn’t end up good enough for averaging 18-19 in Test - that could have been easier to extract an all-rounder out of Faheem or Amad.
 
Better to coach some batting to Naseem, Shaheen and Hasnain rather than having these clowns as all rounders.
 
Waiting for [MENTION=150544]Rellu_Katta[/MENTION] to give his 'expert' thoughts .
 
It is a disgrace for them to be called ARs, they are more like clowns.
 
Waiting for [MENTION=150544]Rellu_Katta[/MENTION] to give his 'expert' thoughts .

lol ...u will get what u seek ....

for a game where experienced, expensive, in-demand, bla bla blu blu, playing around the globe bowler like Mills went for abt 9 an over, cutting for 11, a veteran of a decade long career sohail khan for 10 an over, you expected a rookie, who is trying to get his feet on the ground atm, to outball all of them?

everything takes time.... he needs the confidence which he will never get wit misbah ....
 
lol ...u will get what u seek ....

for a game where experienced, expensive, in-demand, bla bla blu blu, playing around the globe bowler like Mills went for abt 9 an over, cutting for 11, a veteran of a decade long career sohail khan for 10 an over, you expected a rookie, who is trying to get his feet on the ground atm, to outball all of them?

everything takes time.... he needs the confidence which he will never get wit misbah ....

So how is he in the team and being played constantly, genius?

The only team to give so many chances to local talent. Genius.

Don't blindly hate, give Misbah credit where due.
 
It is a disgrace for them to be called ARs, they are more like clowns.
Faheem has actually got a pretty impressive Test record.

[MENTION=79064]MMHS[/MENTION]
I disagree with your premise, to be honest.

A specialist Number 6 batsman will preferably average 40 with the bat but probably barely bowl.

Your top two fast bowlers in the country may average 28 with the ball, but a third will probably average 32 and a fourth will probably average 35+.

A specialist spinner will probably average 30 Asia and 40 outside.

I would prefer to have at Number 6 a guy worth 3/4 of a batsman and half a bowler, with Number 8 worth half a batsman and 3/4 of a bowler.

Consider what Bob Woolmer was trying to do with Shahid Afridi. He actually told me that outside Asia he didn’t need an Abdul Qadir or an Intikhab Alam: most of the time he’d rather have a Mushtaq Muhammad who was 90% of a batsman and who could bowl a few overs every day but had the skills to be dangerous with the ball on Day 5. That would allow him to also play a Razzaq or Azhar Mahmood and also three specialist quick bowlers.

I think that’s a great idea.

OUTSIDE ASIA
Your best 2 quicks
A third quick who can average 30 with the ball and 25 with the bat and bat at Nine.

A fourth bowler, a bowling all-rounder (quick or spinner) who can bat at 8 and average 30 with the bat and 30 with the ball.

A fifth bowler, a batting all-rounder, who can bat at 6 or 7 and average 35 to 40 with the bat and 40 with the ball.

For me, outside Asia, I’d be happy with

6 Rizwan
7 Shadab
8 Faheem (hopefully Amad in future)
9 Ehsan Adil if he can improve his batting (not bowling)
10 Naseem
11 Shaheen

In turning conditions I would go with

6 Rizwan
7 Shadab
8 Zafar Gohar
9 Sajid Khan
10 Naseem
11 Shaheen

The balance works. To me Shadab is never intended to be a specialist spinner - he’s a batsman who can bowl a bit. But if they have to play against England or Australia in Abu Dhabi he complements the offie and left-armer who are superior bowlers.

Faheem is the same. His job is to bowl into the wind and block up an end - same as Ehsan Adil. He’s not meant to do the same job as the Shahs.
 
Last edited:
So how is he in the team and being played constantly, genius?

The only team to give so many chances to local talent. Genius.

Don't blindly hate, give Misbah credit where due.

so being asked to bat at no 9 - explan that super genius

down the picking order all the time ...

there is a player played to be in the team, not just to make numbers..

giving misbah credit for wat? not getting to play Ammad or even Fahim at no 4/5 to see what skills they got? and pushing for all top 4 foreign batsmen?

and dont bring in the idea, that shadab got promoted, he is his blue eye boy... shadab is probably the worse hitter of the 3
 
so being asked to bat at no 9 - explan that super genius

down the picking order all the time ...

there is a player played to be in the team, not just to make numbers..

giving misbah credit for wat? not getting to play Ammad or even Fahim at no 4/5 to see what skills they got? and pushing for all top 4 foreign batsmen?

and dont bring in the idea, that shadab got promoted, he is his blue eye boy... shadab is probably the worse hitter of the 3

fahim and ammad batting is no better than liam plunkett or wahab.technique even worst.
 
fahim and ammad batting is no better than liam plunkett or wahab.technique even worst.

lets move forward with assuming u r right.. but would u want to test it on the field, giving proper chance to the player or just arial fire based on your larger than life amazing cricketing knowledge?
 
I was amazed that both were getting game time ahead of Zafar Gohar.

Finally someone at IU has woken up.
 
Any given day, I'll pick Gohar over these two All-rounders. Gohar comes with genuine 4 overs of bowling and I am not sure who is the better batsman of the 3; Gohar probably edges out both as fielder as well. Considering the struggle of modern players against genuine spin, particularly in T20s, it was elementary that Gohar should partner Shadab, but IU went for 16 overs of pace on absolute belters.
 
Any given day, I'll pick Gohar over these two All-rounders. Gohar comes with genuine 4 overs of bowling and I am not sure who is the better batsman of the 3; Gohar probably edges out both as fielder as well. Considering the struggle of modern players against genuine spin, particularly in T20s, it was elementary that Gohar should partner Shadab, but IU went for 16 overs of pace on absolute belters.

From what I have seen Gohar is better even with bat compared to faheem and Amad
 
Slim pickings. Aamer Yameen included.

Pakistan will have to learn to make due with spin-bowling all-rounders, of which there are only two: Imad and Shadab.
 
Well, both have been benched by IU.

Personally I would rather play Ammad ahead of Hussain Talat. Talat is a nothing bowler and a selfserving batsman, who takes time to get going, especially if Ronchi Munro Rizwan Shadab Ingram is your Top 5 -- its useless to have Talat after Asif the slogger, he will only face 2-3 overs, where Ammad can be more destructive and plus he gives you another option and can ball 2-4 overs depending on the day..the only time Talat's batting will come in handy is if your top order collapses which is a very negative mindset to take into a game..I have nothing against Talat but I suppose either play him in your Top 4 or dont play him at all and definetly don't give him the ball..I can't remember any time he's bowled an over which makes you think, okay "give him another over..."
 
Back
Top