How can we expect anyone to solve the lower order hitter dilemma when no one ever has?

[mominsaigol]

1.Razzaq
2. Afridi
3. Malik
4. Kamran

These guys were more than decent as lower order hitters. Razzaq in his zone was one of the most dangerous players to bowl at in the world. Afridi wasn’t as consistent but his cameos could turn games, he had that power.

Guys who could have been good but not invested in properly:

1. Sohail Tanvir
2. Azhar Mahmood
3. Shoaib Akhtar (underrated, he was a good ball striker on his day)

I agree with tanvir and azhar mahmood but I think Akhtar should have remained as a bowler. Focusing on batting + Intense pace isn't a great combo

 

[mominsaigol]

true.. infact most stylish hitter he was down the order... still remember his inning which he played against England in WC 2003.

It was good, but I still believe Akhtar should have focused entirely on bowling

 

[BouncerGuy]

We have tried multiple options in the form of haider, khusdil, asif, Iftikhar etc but all of them proved to be a nobody. Out of all these guys, Iftikhar was the most overrated guy who was not ven a power hitter as people think he was.

As he said himself, he is a tail-ender who can bat a bit.

 

[FastBowlingAllrounder]

Bro wants his #8 to average 40 with an SR of 140+. That low down the order, especially in T20s (which is all that is given relevance outside of the CWC), all you need is a pinch hitter (who is primarily a bowler) because someone who can bat long and build an innings won't have enough time to play with anyway... unless of course they play for Pakistan and the top order folds in which case I guess the question is a valid one.

 

[sweep_shot]

I dont know what was it like pre 2003, was it always as bad? Who has been Pakistan best lower order batter? Imran, Wasim?

Before 2003, Pakistani lower order could hit better.

Wasim Akram was a good hitter. Even guys like Waqar, Shoaib etc. could hit well.

Shoaib scored a fast 43 against England in 2003 World Cup.

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

Pakistan should try what India did, no joke.

India during the old era when Dhoni came in was actually the opposite.

Their top order was extremely aggressive with Sachin, sehwag, Ghambir and yuvi going bang bang mode.

Dhoni ironically is not aggressive like people claim him to be. He actually took the game deep and finished it, similar to Bevan.

It might be a good idea to have bang bang openers and middle order while the lower order takes it deep and tries to finish games.

It worked for Australia and India. It didn't work for England though

Both Sachin(post 2003) and Gambhir were balanced batsman, they weren't out and out aggressive players.

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

Razzaq was literally the best #7 in ODI cricket , bro.

He took it deep because he knew could explode at the death like no other .

And if a #7 is forced to take it deep, It signified the failure of the top order anyway.

Flintoff is well ahead of Razzaq, a better bowler and batsman, I know he played mostly at 6, but even 7 wont be a problem.

 

[Jazx]

1.Razzaq
2. Afridi
3. Malik
4. Kamran

These guys were more than decent as lower order hitters. Razzaq in his zone was one of the most dangerous players to bowl at in the world. Afridi wasn’t as consistent but his cameos could turn games, he had that power.

Guys who could have been good but not invested in properly:

1. Sohail Tanvir
2. Azhar Mahmood
3. Shoaib Akhtar (underrated, he was a good ball striker on his day)

I think Azhar Mahmood got many chances, but he could not cash them. He was also promoted up the order sometimes, but failed on those occasions. Though he looks to be very pleasant when he is in full flow.