that's not long term thinking though.
It's realistic thinking. Why don't people understand, we do not have good batsmen who are technically sound. We have an ugly one who scores runs and has weaknesses, but at least he scores runs, then we have pretty ones who don't score runs and whom we keep thinking will surpass the one who will.
"Fawad Alam cannot score in Australia" average of 39 with a 63 in a match. People will laud Shafiq for his 50, well a few years ago, a not even as good as he is now Fawad scored a 50 in Australia.
"Fawad Alam cannot score outside Asia and against non-trundlers" averages 38.5 so far. Small sample size or not he has 50s in England and Australia when he was a worse player than he is now.
If anything, Fawad looks like he plays better outside of UAE and Asian conditions.
"Fawad cannot hit with a high SR with high scores" 2 of his 50s are in SR's of 100 or more, is 60 against Australia was with an SR of 90, 59 against SA with 89 SR, and his century against SL with a SR of 85 (which again for Pakistan standards is good).
"Fawad Alam doesn't win matches" 4 of his 7 50+ are in wins.
Look guys, two doubles is equal to one boundary. He doesn't have the fire power of some, but what does that matter when he can do what they do at the same SR? If you have a player who say scores 10 RPO in the last 5 overs, but had an SR of 60 prior to that, his SR would get somewhere in the 80s. If Fawad gets continuously 5-6 RPO with his ticky tac method, then that makes both negligble. If you go at 3-4 RPO and someone else goes at 5-6 RPO, then that person is just consistent, whereas the other can turn it on, but wastes a lot of deliveries in the middle. I don't know why you can't try to work with both when one has been effective and the other has been inconsistent. Fawad isn't a #6 to come in and smack anyone around, he is a 3-4 to come in and pace an innings and keep partnerships going and the score ticking. It is what he did with Maqsood, Umar, and hell against SL in the Asia Cup final, he was the guy who put it on his own shoulders after Misbah disappeared. Fawad can get you two doubles in most overs in most matches. He had a bad series, and by no means is a star, but is still more useful than guys who average 25 in cricket. Fawad has 6 50s and a century in 35 matches, Shafiq has 9 50s in 49 matches.
One clearly produces more than the other. The other might be more talented, but talent means nothing without production.
There is not one argument someone can make to me that says Shafiq is the better investment for Pakistan. Do I think I would drop Shafiq? No. I think he merits selection given we don't have anyone better and he averages something like 35 at 3 where he does pretty well. He showed some promise and needs to keep it going, but the body of work shows Fawad is a better ODI player, there is nothing anything can say other than watch the match, and how ugly he looks, or look at these 3 matches, of which Shafiq didn't blow anyone out of the water either and only scored a 50 which people are lauding him for.
The thing that gets me the most is hypocrisy. "Man oh man Shehzad is so selfish and plays too slow", agreed, but then you cannot in turn say "that 50 by Shafiq was class". That was a 50 with an SR of 68.49. Before one argues that Shafiq is a 3 and Shehzad is an opener. Well, in Pakistan, we lose a wicket in the first 3 overs almost every match, so that #3 is pretty much an opener himself. They both in 50+ scores have an SR which is right around 80, and in Shehzad's case, overall his SR is quite a bit better than Shafiq.
I don't understand when people criticize a player for something, and then when it comes to another player whom they deem is "class" they totally ignore it. Whether it be SR, average, ability to hit the boundary, ability to rotate the strike. In the case of one, we will ignore that he cannot rotate the strike because he plays with a straight bat, not moving from the crease, and that will magically make him able to do so. No, it won't, especially when examining the body of work. One player cannot hit a boundary, but can rotate the strike, he is trash, needs to be dropped, the other cannot take a single for their life, but can hit a boundary, the one who actually rotates the strike has a better SR, yet somehow the boundary hitting ability makes the other one better because they can hit at the death. Asinine logic. If one doesn't waste so many balls in the middle, then it doesn't make it that one has to explode at the end to make a have decent score. Going at 5-6 by taking singles and doubles is better than going at 3-4.5 simply to pray one can have an unreal unslaught, just to get to that exact same 5-6 without having to go for broke.
Just the hypocrisy gets me. We don't have stars in our batting line up, and we won't for a while. We have a couple of decent prospects, but until they play internationally on a consistent basis and we see what they can actually provide, they are just that, prospects. In Pakistan, we always talk about the future and these great talents waiting in the wings, and then when they come to the international level, we're already on about the next lot because this lot was never that great to begin with. It's a cycle, and the same people uplifting those same players before they get to the international level, bury them in the ground and continue going back to the pool at home saying those next lot are going to be way better than this one.
Let's stop putting the cart before the horse.
We need to understand we don't have "classy" batsmen, we have to work with these batsmen, which have plenty of flaws, but with these flaws, just produce and have the ability to score runs. I think Shafiq should get a good run now at 3, and hopefully as a Pakistani I hope he comes good, as I believe he has the talent to do so, but my money would be on his failure, simply because again, the body of work speaks for itself.
Call XYZ ugly, pretty, awful, whatever you will, cricket has been, and will always be, about the guy who can put runs on the board, and our ugly ducklings seem to be able to do it, and the class that people keep referring to, let down time and time again.
Pakistan's abysmal tour of 2002 against Australia where we bundled out for 50s in both innings is still fresh in my mind so I wouldn't worry about Fawad esp. when none of the others could do much (Shafiq doesn't count as even Fawad would score runs higher up the order)
[MENTION=18398]IAJ[/MENTION]
