How our top 3 dictate team selection

[Grunge101]

This isn't something that's just become obvious after the final loss. It's been apparent for more than a year now atleast.Our opening pair of Babar and Rizwan has won us a lot of games, they are the first consistent pair we've had in the last 2 decades and on a good day, they can single handedly carry the whole batting lineup on their shoulders.

Our persistence with that pair however has given rise to a number of self defeating strateges to cope with their less than optimal strike rates.

When we have Babar and rizwan opening the batting, it makes

1) Us select players at 4,5 and 6 that are all supposedly "power hitters" to compensate for them. We realize well be trotting around 6-7 RPO by mid innings and we need a middle/lower order that can strike at 150-100 SR.

Sadly tho, we don't have a single one in our player pool that is good enough for that role. We keep ending with the same 3 or 4 being dropped and then selected again and again.

2) Us leave out players like Malik, Masood, Ghulam etc that are not explosive players but still good enough to be in the team. (Even Hafeez a few days on PTV sports said he retired because it was made obvious to him, he wouldn't be selected). I'm not a Malik ****** but it's quite clear based on his current form that he should easily make the team.

They're not even considered because they don't align with the top 3s approach. They can't score quickly from the get go and thus are dropped in favor of Asifs and Khushdils who click once every 10 games.



3) Us play Fakhar play at number 3, a position he's not suited for. He is is quite clearly a very black and white player. It's either a block or it travels. There is nothing in between. No nudging for singles, no gap play for 2s and 3s and no ground strokes to get boundaries with conventional shots. His first 15-20 runs are almost never above run a ball. The times he's succeeded in this position are odd ball chances when in exceptional touch, stroking them from ball 1 or making up for that slow start with later blows. The rest of the time, which is most of the time, he's only making the slow SR of the openers even worse.

His optimal use is as an opener where he can get away with a miscued shots with the field inside the circle and get going quicker. This is much more suitable role for him compared to number 3 where he needs to have a much more complete game.


In conclusion, whilst one may be wary of disrupting the only thing we have going consistently i-e our opening partnership, there is also a dire need to do exactly that. One of the two needs to step down lower down the order.

 

[ethan hunt]

This i agree with. The batting order and strategy is designed that way and needs to change.

 

[Markhor]

POTW (again) ! We've building a team around the limitations of two players, and it's unsustainable !

I feel this debate has taken on a circular logic. There's fans who argue the top-order are forced to bat cautiously because of the weakness of the middle-order, and another group arguing the middle-order are failing because our top-order are batting so cautiously they're forced to take excessive risks.

My view is the latter. The best time to bat in white-ball cricket are the Powerplay overs and Babar/Rizwan continually fail to maximise them because both wish to drop anchor. Babar's SR in the PP is only slightly above a run a ball. It's an approach that's especially dangerous when batting first as seen last year in the Australia SF on the best Dubai batting strip of the tournament, we were 71-1 after 10 whereas Australia were 89-3.

There was a cricinfo stat showing Pakistan's top 3 since last year's T20 WC consume 72% of deliveries yet none of them scored more than 8 RPO. That forces the much maligned middle and lower order, whose failures I'm not excusing, to accept more risk. It doesn't matter if you're the best powerhitter in the world, you cannot perform consistently in that situation !

Today the whole template we've followed for the last 2.5 years spectacularly imploded. Rizwan and Iftikhar let the asking rate to climb to 14 after 15 overs of batting and 7 wickets in hand which was criminal.

And how successful has this formula even been anyway that we're so loath to change ? It worked twice against India last year in a low scoring game and last week when Nawaz played a worldie, against depleted South African attacks, and declining/poor T20 teams like West Indies, Zimbabwe and Bangladesh. But have we forgotten we LOST to England last summer, lost the SF and the one-off in April vs Australia in April, and now 3 matches in this Asia Cup ?

So it's not like we've been invincible with this batting method. Hopefully this is the wakeup call needed before the World Cup.

 

[Grunge101]

I agree, it is somewhat of a circular logic. Cause and effect relationship. If we look at the other side of the argument i-e " this opening pair is a compensatory arrangement to problems elsewhere in the batting lineup", we'll come across two common claims

A) Rizwan and Babar had to do this because we had no other half decent openers".

The argument has some weight. These two first started together in Feb 2020, before Babar and Fakhar were out regula ropeners. It wasn't a good time with Fakhar having a spell of poor form in 2019. We tried others who were discarded after a few outings. So yes in that way the opening pair was a problem, but how was this a solution. Yah sure you now have two openers who don't give their wicket away but also won't be making more than 70 in the first 10. That is simply not compatible with modern T20 cricket. If we're the only team in the top 8 going with that approach, surely there is something wrong with it.
The second thing this did was push Fakhar down to number 3 , a position he is I'll equipped for to say the least. Either play him as an opener or drop him.

B) we need these two to shelter our fragile middle order.

This is the second argument, one that has very little going for it in my eyes. When this opening pair was formed we had Hafeez, Malik, Talat, Shadab, Nawaz along with Iftikhar/khushdil in various combinations. There are no great players in that list but it isn't exactly "fragile" either. If anything you have players in that list that don't give their wicket way although at the expense of not having the ability to blast from the word go.

The fact is if you had Hafeez and Malik playing together means you have two slowish starters in the middle order but ones that can accelerate later. .not a big fan of either but from the available pool, I can't see how one prefers iftikhar and Khushdil over them. The biggest problem however is that with Babar and Rizwan opening, you can't just have these two in the middle order. That's why one was pushed into retirement and the other was dropped.

Masood is another one who's been making truckloads of runs atn SR of 140 but again with our opening pair, all we can have in the later order are "power hitters".

 

[Saj]

I guess the argument is who to open instead of them?

 

[Grunge101]

I guess the argument is who to open instead of them?

1) Fakhar and Babar with Rizwan down the order.
2) Masood and Fakhar with Babar at three. Rizwan has to be pushed down the order.

 

[Gayle_Force]

I agree, it is somewhat of a circular logic. Cause and effect relationship. If we look at the other side of the argument i-e " this opening pair is a compensatory arrangement to problems elsewhere in the batting lineup", we'll come across two common claims

A) Rizwan and Babar had to do this because we had no other half decent openers".

The argument has some weight. These two first started together in Feb 2020, before Babar and Fakhar were out regula ropeners. It wasn't a good time with Fakhar having a spell of poor form in 2019. We tried others who were discarded after a few outings. So yes in that way the opening pair was a problem, but how was this a solution. Yah sure you now have two openers who don't give their wicket away but also won't be making more than 70 in the first 10. That is simply not compatible with modern T20 cricket. If we're the only team in the top 8 going with that approach, surely there is something wrong with it.
The second thing this did was push Fakhar down to number 3 , a position he is I'll equipped for to say the least. Either play him as an opener or drop him.

B) we need these two to shelter our fragile middle order.

This is the second argument, one that has very little going for it in my eyes. When this opening pair was formed we had Hafeez, Malik, Talat, Shadab, Nawaz along with Iftikhar/khushdil in various combinations. There are no great players in that list but it isn't exactly "fragile" either. If anything you have players in that list that don't give their wicket way although at the expense of not having the ability to blast from the word go.

The fact is if you had Hafeez and Malik playing together means you have two slowish starters in the middle order but ones that can accelerate later. .not a big fan of either but from the available pool, I can't see how one prefers iftikhar and Khushdil over them. The biggest problem however is that with Babar and Rizwan opening, you can't just have these two in the middle order. That's why one was pushed into retirement and the other was dropped.

Masood is another one who's been making truckloads of runs atn SR of 140 but again with our opening pair, all we can have in the later order are "power hitters".

I think the struggle is that Pakistan does not have a quality number 4 and 5. PSL is a great example for this as these positions are often occupied by overseas players. I would ague that having an unreliable number 4 and 5 puts pressure on Babar and Rizwan and forces them to play conservatively. I think the best bet is to have Malik and Shan Masood occupy these spots for the WT20 but we need to start developing specialist players for these spots.

 

[gazza619]

Excellent post!

In my view we should simply not disrupt the opening combo. Both Babar & Rizwan are more than capable of increasing their strike rate from 100 to 130 once the foundation is set. Fakhar is a headache but should be persisted with as its too late for WC.

Iftikhar & Khusdil need to make way for Malik & Shan. I will keep Asif as the x-factor. We must remember Pakistan will never be a team scoring 200+ in T20s.

 

[Grunge101]

I think the struggle is that Pakistan does not have a quality number 4 and 5. PSL is a great example for this as these positions are often occupied by overseas players. I would ague that having an unreliable number 4 and 5 puts pressure on Babar and Rizwan and forces them to play conservatively. I think the best bet is to have Malik and Shan Masood occupy these spots for the WT20 but we need to start developing specialist players for these spots.

That is implying they are capable of batting at a faster rate than what we've seen recently. Looking at career stats of both

Babar SR against opponent teams (min 5 games)

Srilanka 89
Bangladesh 108
Newzealand 118
West Indies 126
Australia 126
England 142
South Africa 148

-Average 122
-In last 12 months 122

Rizwan SR against opponent teams (min 5 games)

Srilanka 106
Bangladesh 91
Newzealand 123
West Indies 152
Australia 111
England 129
South Africa 143

-Average 122 ( 100 if we take out matches against West Indies)
- In last 12 months 117

So you basically have two openers going at 6.5 rpo. You have Fakhar coming in at 3 who has an even lower SR for the first 15-20 deliveries he faces. What youre left with are then number 4 to 7 which we've been recently filling up with dedicated sloggers.

so the theory that They bat that way to protect the lower order is questionable because their career stats show theyre probably not capable of higher SRs even if we had a solid middle order. This is specially the case with Babar i feel, as its becoming more and more obvious that he falters most times when hes looking to attack more from the word go.

 

[Saj]

I doubt if Babar will push Rizwan down the order.

Let's see but I'd be surprised if it happened.

 

[Gayle_Force]

That is implying they are capable of batting at a faster rate than what we've seen recently. Looking at career stats of both

Babar SR against opponent teams (min 5 games)

Srilanka 89
Bangladesh 108
Newzealand 118
West Indies 126
Australia 126
England 142
South Africa 148

-Average 122
-In last 12 months 122

Rizwan SR against opponent teams (min 5 games)

Srilanka 106
Bangladesh 91
Newzealand 123
West Indies 152
Australia 111
England 129
South Africa 143

-Average 122 ( 100 if we take out matches against West Indies)
- In last 12 months 117

So you basically have two openers going at 6.5 rpo. You have Fakhar coming in at 3 who has an even lower SR for the first 15-20 deliveries he faces. What youre left with are then number 4 to 7 which we've been recently filling up with dedicated sloggers.

so the theory that They bat that way to protect the lower order is questionable because their career stats show theyre probably not capable of higher SRs even if we had a solid middle order. This is specially the case with Babar i feel, as its becoming more and more obvious that he falters most times when hes looking to attack more from the word go.

I understand what you are saying but that is still not the core problem. Even if you change the top 3 and they score at a 150 S/R with 10 an over rr but end up 50/3 in 5 overs. We will still struggle massively because we dont have proper number 4 or 5 batsmen suited for T20. I understand our opening pair is not explosive but it is not our core issue.

 

[shamaan]

I doubt if Babar will push Rizwan down the order.

Let's see but I'd be surprised if it happened.

Babar should just drop himself go 3.

 

[hitthestump]

Iftikhar & Khusdil need to make way for Malik & Shan. I will keep Asif as the x-factor. We must remember Pakistan will never be a team scoring 200+ in T20s.

This is the key point. We're deluding ourselves if we think we have the firepower to achieve daddy scores in t20. Babar and Rizwan get us defendable scores most of the time and that's where our success has come from.

An all guns blazing approach only ends in tears given our batting line up and is hopelessly unrealistic.

 

[gazza619]

This is the key point. We're deluding ourselves if we think we have the firepower to achieve daddy scores in t20. Babar and Rizwan get us defendable scores most of the time and that's where our success has come from.

An all guns blazing approach only ends in tears given our batting line up and is hopelessly unrealistic.

Completely agree. We just don’t have hitters who can take on the new ball against seam/swing bowling. I rather be 42/1 in 6 overs, then 30/3.

We can occasionally send the likes of M Nawaz at 3/4 who does seem to have the game to be a pinch hitter.

 

[Sunny_majoka]

Beat place for rizwan is to play at 4 when field opens

 

[Rana]

Beat place for rizwan is to play at 4 when field opens

Rizwan is another Khushdil/Iftikhar at 4

 

[sl-fan-of-pak]

0. World cup is not played on slow pitches, so Pakistan has a good reason to leave out uncle Ifthikar. Bring Faheem Ashraf instead.

1&2. Babar is not that great with spin, that is probably why he is reluctant to come later on. I would bring in Sharjeel to open with Babar.

3&4. Pakistan can do what KKR did with Sunil Narine. Bring in Nawaz or Shadab to go berserk within the powerplay...if the opening combo doesn't work out well, Rizwan can come as No.4.

5. Have Shaan Masood at No. 5

6. Imad Wasim would have been an ideal No.6 along with his bowling... however, based on the options Pakistan's got, they will have to rely on Haider Ali (who doesn't look a very confident player to me) or Haris.

7. Nawaz / Shadab

8. Faheem or a fast bowling all-rounder (even Hasan Ali..just for his batting)

9. Naseem

10. Haris / Hasnain

11. Shaheen

 

[IMMY69]

All in all, when you break it down, it really wasn't the batting that lost us the final.
It was the inept captaincy ( as well as the dropped catches) that cost us the game.

We never should have been chasing 130 let alone 170 odd.

You can have a team of all time greats and still lose if you don't apply the basics in the field.

 

[Grunge101]

On how batting at 3 has affected Fakhar, the stats before and after tell a self explanatory story

Opening: 36 matches 812 runs Avg 22 SR 136

No 3: 22 matches 438 runs Avg 23 SR 117

* His average at 3 is inflated by 3 Not outs, without those its below 20

Fakhar has shown certain traits since his debut. Slow starter, can you a chance or two in the beginning and most importantly of all, he is not an accumulator. He is not very good at nudging it around, it always a 180 degree approach with him, hit big or block. Such a player is not a good fit for No.3 in anyway which is why you will not find a single top T20 team with such an arrangement.

so why was we demoted ?. it started in April 2021 against South Africa. Fakhar was not being consistent but that was nothing new and he had scores of 50, 1, 19, 5, 21, 27. in the last 6 matches with a SR between 135 and 155. Pretty usual stuff for Fakhar. Anyways he was shifted to number 3 and since then he has scored at a lower average (minus not outs) and a much lower SR

The point is if Fakhar was deemed not good enough or not consistent enough to open the innings, then he shouldve been dropped. He doesnt fit anywhere else. The fact that hes still been a part of the team suggests they think hes still good enough to play but he cant play at his preferred position because its been occupied.

 

[Rana]

On how batting at 3 has affected Fakhar, the stats before and after tell a self explanatory story

Opening: 36 matches 812 runs Avg 22 SR 136

No 3: 22 matches 438 runs Avg 23 SR 117

* His average at 3 is inflated by 3 Not outs, without those its below 20

Fakhar has shown certain traits since his debut. Slow starter, can you a chance or two in the beginning and most importantly of all, he is not an accumulator. He is not very good at nudging it around, it always a 180 degree approach with him, hit big or block. Such a player is not a good fit for No.3 in anyway which is why you will not find a single top T20 team with such an arrangement.

so why was we demoted ?. it started in April 2021 against South Africa. Fakhar was not being consistent but that was nothing new and he had scores of 50, 1, 19, 5, 21, 27. in the last 6 matches with a SR between 135 and 155. Pretty usual stuff for Fakhar. Anyways he was shifted to number 3 and since then he has scored at a lower average (minus not outs) and a much lower SR

The point is if Fakhar was deemed not good enough or not consistent enough to open the innings, then he shouldve been dropped. He doesnt fit anywhere else. The fact that hes still been a part of the team suggests they think hes still good enough to play but he cant play at his preferred position because its been occupied.

It would have been criminal and highly suspicious to drop Fakhar all together from the side. This is what happens when you give Babar all the control considering he doesn’t have the educational background to make a strong, strategic analysis.

Secondly, Babar is totally influenced by Rizwan in all of his key decision making. It’s the only reason why they are ‘backing’ Khushdil and Iftikhar who clearly do not look cut for their roles at international level

 

[Grunge101]

I understand what you are saying but that is still not the core problem. Even if you change the top 3 and they score at a 150 S/R with 10 an over rr but end up 50/3 in 5 overs. We will still struggle massively because we dont have proper number 4 or 5 batsmen suited for T20. I understand our opening pair is not explosive but it is not our core issue.

I actually agree with everything youve said about the middle order. Iftikhar, Khushdil, Nawaz, Asif. Its hapless, unreliable and impotent for the most part.

I would however disagree that our opening combination is a solution to that problem. If anything, its counter productive and only adds more to the issues. Why i think so is



I) The opening combination ultimately makes us select a middle order that is way worse that what we can manage without that pressure. The sub 120 SR of the openers means there is no room for more reliable players that will take longer to hit big but will do it more aften than these sloggers. There is no room for the likes of Masood, Malik, Hafeez or even Ghulam. In that way, Babar and Rizwan combo is not shielding the middle order, it is actually worsening it.

II) When the openers go long, it essentially means this middle order has to come in and go from ball one. This urgency turns partially useless players into utterly vain ones..Khushdil, Nawaz and Asif all have a better chance of performing when they have the luxury of taking a few balls to settle and then going for it.

III) When the openers get our early, our "power hitters" have to come in inside the 10 overs. Theyre asked to occupy the crease for a significant while , something they are not capable of. Which of these 4 , do you think can play this role better than Masood/Malik/Hafeez ? . Thus you have matches like the last final where Iftikhar will come in, make a 32 off 31 balls and then get out. it essentially seals the game right there and then.

So it can very well be argued that this particular solution to our middle order problem is actually adding to our woes rather than correcting any. And if anything, I feel theres a stronger case for that arrangement being the result of insecurities of our opening pair primarily rather than some sacrifice they have made for the middle order.

 

[Hextro]

The only reason Rizwan opened the innings in the first place was because we were looking for someone that could replace Fakhar. In his last 18 innings as an opener, Fakhar averaged 15.7 at an SR of 128.05.

The problem with Fakhar isn't his batting position, it's his overall form in T20s. You could make Fakhar open the innings and he will still fail consistently.

Fakhar's overall stats post his 91 against Australia in 2018:

Innings - 45

Average - 18.9

SR - 123.8

Fakhar's best batting position during that period was number 3, where he averaged 23.

 

[Gayle_Force]

I actually agree with everything youve said about the middle order. Iftikhar, Khushdil, Nawaz, Asif. Its hapless, unreliable and impotent for the most part.

I would however disagree that our opening combination is a solution to that problem. If anything, its counter productive and only adds more to the issues. Why i think so is



I) The opening combination ultimately makes us select a middle order that is way worse that what we can manage without that pressure. The sub 120 SR of the openers means there is no room for more reliable players that will take longer to hit big but will do it more aften than these sloggers. There is no room for the likes of Masood, Malik, Hafeez or even Ghulam. In that way, Babar and Rizwan combo is not shielding the middle order, it is actually worsening it.

II) When the openers go long, it essentially means this middle order has to come in and go from ball one. This urgency turns partially useless players into utterly vain ones..Khushdil, Nawaz and Asif all have a better chance of performing when they have the luxury of taking a few balls to settle and then going for it.

III) When the openers get our early, our "power hitters" have to come in inside the 10 overs. Theyre asked to occupy the crease for a significant while , something they are not capable of. Which of these 4 , do you think can play this role better than Masood/Malik/Hafeez ? . Thus you have matches like the last final where Iftikhar will come in, make a 32 off 31 balls and then get out. it essentially seals the game right there and then.

So it can very well be argued that this particular solution to our middle order problem is actually adding to our woes rather than correcting any. And if anything, I feel theres a stronger case for that arrangement being the result of insecurities of our opening pair primarily rather than some sacrifice they have made for the middle order.

In point number 3 you are highlighting the problem. Hafeez is retired, Malik is 40, and Masood is an opener who has just changed his position this year to a middle order batsman and hopefully he will be part of the playing X1.

 

[Saj]

Well Mohammad Wasim has already confirmed that Rizwan and Babar will open in T20Is against England.

Unless there is an absolute disaster, then it will be the same at the T20 World Cup.

 

[Gayle_Force]

Well Mohammad Wasim has already confirmed that Rizwan and Babar will open in T20Is against England.

Unless there is an absolute disaster, then it will be the same at the T20 World Cup.

Ramiz Raja confirmed the same in his live session today

 

[TeymurBlake]

Well Mohammad Wasim has already confirmed that Rizwan and Babar will open in T20Is against England.

Unless there is an absolute disaster, then it will be the same at the T20 World Cup.

I don't know what the condition of the pitches will be, but notoriously Pakistan pitches have always been batting tracks.

Even with a youthful England team, I still expect them to score a lot of runs.

 

[Grunge101]

The only reason Rizwan opened the innings in the first place was because we were looking for someone that could replace Fakhar. In his last 18 innings as an opener, Fakhar averaged 15.7 at an SR of 128.05.

The problem with Fakhar isn't his batting position, it's his overall form in T20s. You could make Fakhar open the innings and he will still fail consistently.

Fakhar's overall stats post his 91 against Australia in 2018:

Innings - 45

Average - 18.9

SR - 123.8

Fakhar's best batting position during that period was number 3, where he averaged 23.

I've discussed that average of 23 above. It's inflated by 3 low scoring Not outs, and without them, it's actually below 20.

As to his most recent performances as an opener, I agree, he wasnt firing. But again thats been the pattern for Fakhar, periods of short lives rich form interspersed between not so good form.
The Overall record containing all the peaks and troughs in both batting positions depicts a clearer picture. A strike rate of 136 in 36 matches opening vs a SR of 117 batting at 3 for 22 matches.

This isnt meant to be a defence of Fakhar Zaman, the batsman. Its more of an attempt to explain that if we want to get the maximum out of him, he needs to open. If we dont think hes good enough, then drop him altogether.

 

[Anis Shivani]

This isn't something that's just become obvious after the final loss. It's been apparent for more than a year now atleast.Our opening pair of Babar and Rizwan has won us a lot of games, they are the first consistent pair we've had in the last 2 decades and on a good day, they can single handedly carry the whole batting lineup on their shoulders.

Our persistence with that pair however has given rise to a number of self defeating strateges to cope with their less than optimal strike rates.

When we have Babar and rizwan opening the batting, it makes

1) Us select players at 4,5 and 6 that are all supposedly "power hitters" to compensate for them. We realize well be trotting around 6-7 RPO by mid innings and we need a middle/lower order that can strike at 150-100 SR.

Sadly tho, we don't have a single one in our player pool that is good enough for that role. We keep ending with the same 3 or 4 being dropped and then selected again and again.

2) Us leave out players like Malik, Masood, Ghulam etc that are not explosive players but still good enough to be in the team. (Even Hafeez a few days on PTV sports said he retired because it was made obvious to him, he wouldn't be selected). I'm not a Malik ****** but it's quite clear based on his current form that he should easily make the team.

They're not even considered because they don't align with the top 3s approach. They can't score quickly from the get go and thus are dropped in favor of Asifs and Khushdils who click once every 10 games.



3) Us play Fakhar play at number 3, a position he's not suited for. He is is quite clearly a very black and white player. It's either a block or it travels. There is nothing in between. No nudging for singles, no gap play for 2s and 3s and no ground strokes to get boundaries with conventional shots. His first 15-20 runs are almost never above run a ball. The times he's succeeded in this position are odd ball chances when in exceptional touch, stroking them from ball 1 or making up for that slow start with later blows. The rest of the time, which is most of the time, he's only making the slow SR of the openers even worse.

His optimal use is as an opener where he can get away with a miscued shots with the field inside the circle and get going quicker. This is much more suitable role for him compared to number 3 where he needs to have a much more complete game.


In conclusion, whilst one may be wary of disrupting the only thing we have going consistently i-e our opening partnership, there is also a dire need to do exactly that. One of the two needs to step down lower down the order.

Excellent analysis. The weight of my own argument is to hold the opening partnership responsible for the woes of the middle order. We're expecting too much of them, even if they have their own shortcomings, based on how the openers perform.

 

[Grunge101]

In point number 3 you are highlighting the problem. Hafeez is retired, Malik is 40, and Masood is an opener who has just changed his position this year to a middle order batsman and hopefully he will be part of the playing X1.

Hafeez retired because he received the clear message that he wasnt wanted anymore. He said as much on PTV sports.

Malik might be 40 but he is fitter than most of our current and is performing well.

Masood might have played as an opener most of his career but he has a game that would be suited for number 3 to 6 as well. He is currently batting at 4 for Balochistan and seems to be doing well.

I would prefer a middle order of Malik, Masood, Asif and Imad over the current one any day.

*To be clear im not a big fan of Malik, I know his political games in the past and that he cant be the best influence on the team. But if we want to play the best possible team in this upcoming WC, it has to include him.

 

[Gayle_Force]

Hafeez retired because he received the clear message that he wasnt wanted anymore. He said as much on PTV sports.

Malik might be 40 but he is fitter than most of our current and is performing well.

Masood might have played as an opener most of his career but he has a game that would be suited for number 3 to 6 as well. He is currently batting at 4 for Balochistan and seems to be doing well.

I would prefer a middle order of Malik, Masood, Asif and Imad over the current one any day.

*To be clear im not a big fan of Malik, I know his political games in the past and that he cant be the best influence on the team. But if we want to play the best possible team in this upcoming WC, it has to include him.

That’s not a bad middle order but I do see the logic of moving on from Malik and towards a younger batsman like Haider Ali. Also, Malik’s stats outside of subcontinent are not impressive. Also, Imad’s most important contribution in T20s was always the two overs in power play but he struggles to bowl the remaining two overs. Pakistan doesn’t need the opening overs anymore and Nawaz is a better bet to bowl out four overs. Also, Nawaz’s batting range is on par if not better than Imad.

I would probably go with Masood, Haider, Nawaz and Asif.

 

[Grunge101]

That’s not a bad middle order but I do see the logic of moving on from Malik and towards a younger batsman like Haider Ali. Also, Malik’s stats outside of subcontinent are not impressive. Also, Imad’s most important contribution in T20s was always the two overs in power play but he struggles to bowl the remaining two overs. Pakistan doesn’t need the opening overs anymore and Nawaz is a better bet to bowl out four overs. Also, Nawaz’s batting range is on par if not better than Imad.

I would probably go with Masood, Haider, Nawaz and Asif.

I would be perfectly ok with that middle order too. Nawaz vs Imad is a close call. I would probably tilt towards Imad because he would be an option if our opening seamers get tonked around in the first two overs. Also he's shown a few times that he can handle the pressure in crunch situations. Batting wise Nawaz has the edge.

I rate Haider. People tend to forget he made great runs in 4 day domestic cricket before he was pushed more into the t20 format. Behind those midwicket slogs, is a technically capable batsman. One that has been misused first and then under used later.

 

[Kroll]

Well Mohammad Wasim has already confirmed that Rizwan and Babar will open in T20Is against England.

Unless there is an absolute disaster, then it will be the same at the T20 World Cup.

Very sad news. They're going to have show far more intent and not just hang around eating balls up.

 

[Rana]

Very sad news. They're going to have show far more intent and not just hang around eating balls up.

Don’t worry brother

This too shall pass.

Just relax. Enjoy the next 18 games or so of Babar/Saqlain/Rizwan. Try to find comfort in the situation of our misery. Enjoy it as if it were a comedy rather than a depressing movie.

I have come to the conclusion that the best way out of this terrible phase in our lives as Pakistan cricket fans is to let this partnership run its course. Let the two players who have forsaken the whole of Pakistan cricket for their selfish means dig their own graves by continuing in this manner.

Any player that is to come between this duo between now and the World Cup exit is only going to be set up to fail, and his career ended for good.

 

[TeamPak95]

Don’t worry brother

This too shall pass.

Just relax. Enjoy the next 18 games or so of Babar/Saqlain/Rizwan. Try to find comfort in the situation of our misery. Enjoy it as if it were a comedy rather than a depressing movie.

I have come to the conclusion that the best way out of this terrible phase in our lives as Pakistan cricket fans is to let this partnership run its course. Let the two players who have forsaken the whole of Pakistan cricket for their selfish means dig their own graves by continuing in this manner.

Any player that is to come between this duo between now and the World Cup exit is only going to be set up to fail, and his career ended for good.

Genuine question, on a scale of 1-10 how much will you be supporting the team during the Eng series, Tri series and WC (10 being full support)? I get that there are glaring issues with the batting, but is it that bad to the point of zero support from you? Not retaliating here, just curious.

At the very least, I feel that despite the shortcomings, Pakistan aren't making full use of their players according to what they are capable of bringing to the table. Again, mainly its the batting as the bowling is pretty much covered.

 

[Rana]

Genuine question, on a scale of 1-10 how much will you be supporting the team during the Eng series, Tri series and WC (10 being full support)? I get that there are glaring issues with the batting, but is it that bad to the point of zero support from you? Not retaliating here, just curious.

At the very least, I feel that despite the shortcomings, Pakistan aren't making full use of their players according to what they are capable of bringing to the table. Again, mainly its the batting as the bowling is pretty much covered.

Honestly, I have no passion right now to support this side. I will probably forget that all against India, no way will I not support them against India but besides that, I have left it to their fate.

Probably 2/10 is my current passion to support them. It will become 0 if there are no clear changes for the sake of Pakistan cricket and not for the sake of individual performances after the world cup

 

[Hextro]

I've discussed that average of 23 above. It's inflated by 3 low scoring Not outs, and without them, it's actually below 20.

As to his most recent performances as an opener, I agree, he wasnt firing. But again thats been the pattern for Fakhar, periods of short lives rich form interspersed between not so good form.
The Overall record containing all the peaks and troughs in both batting positions depicts a clearer picture. A strike rate of 136 in 36 matches opening vs a SR of 117 batting at 3 for 22 matches.

This isnt meant to be a defence of Fakhar Zaman, the batsman. Its more of an attempt to explain that if we want to get the maximum out of him, he needs to open. If we dont think hes good enough, then drop him altogether.

Fakhar should open in the domestics and prove that he has the ability to open for Pakistan. I don't want the team management to waste the opening position on a player that will likely fail.

 

[Grunge101]

With Fakhar out through injury, the number 3 slot has opened up. Now that we know the opening pair will remain the same, the question is who will bat at 3. My preference would be Shadab Khan or Haider Ali. We would need someone to offset the expected SR of the openers.

It's about time we tested Shadab further up the order. I think he has the game for it, hes not a hit or block player like Fakhar and has shown he can play the gap game too.

Haider would also be good fit. He's batted at that position before. I just really hope he plays actual cricketing shots that he's shown he's capable of and not the leg side hoik every 3rd ball.

 

[Minnowbasher]

Since Pakistan are adamant that Babar and Rizwan must open, I would play Shan at 3 and then Asif at 4. Bring in the power hitting earlier on and if it fails you've got Shadab and Nawaz to stabilize in the middle order. Drop khushdil he would be rubbish in Australia.

Babar
Rizwan
Shan
Asif
Haider
Shadab
Nawaz
Shaheen
Naseem
Rauf
Hasnain

 

[sl-fan-of-pak]

[MENTION=147206]Minnowbasher[/MENTION] that seems to be the best option. I would however be inclined to replace Hasnain with Faheem Ashraf..just so that the batting would be a bit more stable.

 

[Minnowbasher]

[MENTION=147206]Minnowbasher[/MENTION] that seems to be the best option. I would however be inclined to replace Hasnain with Faheem Ashraf..just so that the batting would be a bit more stable.

Yeah I agree but is he even in the squad? I don't understand why Faheem was ever dropped a pace bowling all-rounder is crucial in SENA