Jofra Archer vs Naseem Shah: A detailed analysis

[Smudger]

Mark of true greatness.

Savage

 

[Mamoon]

And since the Ashes, he’s averaging 45 with the ball in his last 7 Tests. Yet, most aren’t calling him a mediocre or nothing bowler because they can see the natural ability that’s there. While with barely 50 wickets to his name across formats, you have already branded him as the best (or one of the best?) bowler in the world.

On a side note, if Naseem had half the attitude of Jofra “this isn’t a pitch for me to bend my back on” Archer then everyone knows what you’d be saying about him.

They can see it because he has shown it. He has produced some incredible performances in his first year in international cricket against top sides.

If he is going through a lean patch now, they can see that it is simply a loss of form rather than an illustration of his capability.

On the contrary, the only thing that Naseem has shown so far is that he fails with flying colors whenever he plays against a big team.

He failed in Australia and he failed in England, and if he continues to bowl like this, he will fail against everyone not called Sri Lanka or Bangladesh.

But he certainly does talk like a great bowler though. Unfortunately, he doesn’t seem to have the ability to translate that talk into performances.

 

[MenInG]

They can see it because he has shown it. He has produced some incredible performances in his first year in international cricket against top sides.

If he is going through a lean patch now, they can see that it is simply a loss of form rather than an illustration of his capability.

On the contrary, the only thing that Naseem has shown so far is that he fails with flying colors whenever he plays against a big team.

He failed in Australia and he failed in England, and if he continues to bowl like this, he will fail against everyone not called Sri Lanka or Bangladesh.

But he certainly does talk like a great bowler though. Unfortunately, he doesn’t seem to have the ability to translate that talk into performances.

Even you should be able to see how silly that is.

There is a lot of cricket to be played in both cricketers lives before we make judgements.

 

[Afhan Ali]

Archer is World Champions , Naseem is not.

Archer was good against No 1 team in Test series, Naseem Failed against No 1 team as well as England.

Archer bowls 145+ in tests, Naseem doesn't bowl that fast.

Archer is taller than Naseem.

Point out 1 thing in which Naseem is better than Archer?

 

[Abdullah719]

They can see it because he has shown it. He has produced some incredible performances in his first year in international cricket against top sides.

If he is going through a lean patch now, they can see that it is simply a loss of form rather than an illustration of his capability.

On the contrary, the only thing that Naseem has shown so far is that he fails with flying colors whenever he plays against a big team.

He failed in Australia and he failed in England, and if he continues to bowl like this, he will fail against everyone not called Sri Lanka or Bangladesh.

But he certainly does talk like a great bowler though. Unfortunately, he doesn’t seem to have the ability to translate that talk into performances.

Why compare Archer’s home performances with Naseem’s first tours of Australia and England? It’s not exactly a new thing for a young Asian bowler to have below-par returns during his first tours of Australia, England, South Africa, or New Zealand. Everyone saw Archer’s performances in New Zealand earlier where virtually every bowler from both sides fared better than him.

The fact is that you’re so infuriated by Naseem’s age saga and the unreasonable ‘hype’ by some people that you are simply incapable of doing any factual or reasonable analysis with regard to him. The neutral people, i.e., the foreign commentators or people analyzing the game who aren’t exposed to the Pakistani side regarding the age and hype have all said that he certainly has the ingredients to be a good fast-bowler.

 

[Grunge101]

Id love to see Naseem under the guidance of an aggressive mentor who simply tell him to go bowl as fast as he can for 3 over spells. Mix up nasty short stuff with the pitched up stuff and primarily look to have the batsmen at their back foot all the time.

I am positive well see a very different bowler than what weve seen in this series. A mixture of him last year against Australia with some disciplined length stuff to balance it with.

 

[Abid Z]

This is a really good thread and well done op for the detailed analysis. Was def POW material but is ultimately flawed. Let me explain


Height.
I think op is right archer is much taller than 6ft. Therefore let’s say archer is a tall right hand seamer very much in the mould of broad, hazlewood, cummins, pattinson, holder, dare i say McGrath and ambrose. Now I don’t mean to say JA is as good as any of these but certainly he’s that type and quite front on with less left arm leverage but rapid speed. So to compare him with Naseem or shaheen is just wrong. I don’t see JA swinging it at all but yes he might get a bit of movement when the cloud comes in. Yes he seams it around He’s got great change of pace a fantastic bouncer. BUT! when the seam is flat and the sun is out he demonstrates his lack of experience as he’s only 11 tests old with an average of 30 playing the lowest ranked teams this summer. He should be licking his lips. The fact is he is toiling.

Naseem on the other hand is a shorter swing bowler who can occasionally use the new ball seam. He’s very much in the mould of waqar gough dare I say steyn or Shane bond. He’s nowhere near as good as any of these and the comparison of course is about bowling attributes. What I notice about Naseem though is that he doesn’t seem to be regularly targeting below the shins (Yorker) or above the ribs bouncer. He doesn’t have a snorter. He has a lovely away swinger but in a match he’s either bowling an awayswinger or an inswinger without mixing or matching any of his bowling. This of course is all about experience and I hope in time he develops the away swinger that starts on leg and takes out the top of off like steyn or bond. He has all the attributes to do this.

Conditions. Archer is playing at home in conditions that suit him on grounds he knows with a supportive management that will tend to his every need. Naseem is a young pup by no means does he have any of the support of archer but you expect him to do more with dukes ball under the clouds but of course he’s not exactly running through the sides nor do we expect. Naseem as we watch is being ground into the ground of very flat pitches as part of a four man attack. Archer is part of a five man attack that gets to rest and rotate.

Team composition

Archer is alongside the greatest bowling partnership bowling to lower ranked teams that have suspect technique.

Naseem is part of a rookie attack that’s still in teens bowling to some of the best batsmen of the era (root and stokes at least) in home conditions. It’s bound to be a tough tour.

So given all the above it’s a non issue to say archer is better than Naseem like the infamous derailer is trying to attempt. It’s more the case that so early in their careers comparisons don’t factor, they should just get a few tours out of the way and then we can see for sure exactly what they are both made of.

 

[ataullah]

Archer speeds are down and nobody is mentioning it eventhough hes been used in short bursts and given the enforcer role. Naseem is just as quick on average speed. I would like to know average speeds after this test

 

[Abid Z]

Archer is World Champions , Naseem is not.

Archer was good against No 1 team in Test series, Naseem Failed against No 1 team as well as England.

Archer bowls 145+ in tests, Naseem doesn't bowl that fast.

Archer is taller than Naseem.

Point out 1 thing in which Naseem is better than Archer?

The outswinger

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

If he is not good enough ....he should be dropped so that he can improve by playing domestic.
The hatred some posters are showing for a teenager is nauseating.
You can't tell how well he will do in his career just yet..this same hatred was shown for Rishabh pant but atleast he has played 50 international games ..this guy is just a newbie.

 

[Hasan123]

Archer is a class above Naseem. It's a shame the PCB and Pakistani coaching staff have put a lot of pressure on Naseem. He should have been eased in and played a lot more first class cricket instead of playing every single test regardless of conditions.

 

[topspin]

Archer is World Champions , Naseem is not.

Archer was good against No 1 team in Test series, Naseem Failed against No 1 team as well as England.

Archer bowls 145+ in tests, Naseem doesn't bowl that fast.

Archer is taller than Naseem.

Point out 1 thing in which Naseem is better than Archer?

Looking the batsman in the eyes

 

[Yk313]

Id love to see Naseem under the guidance of an aggressive mentor who simply tell him to go bowl as fast as he can for 3 over spells. Mix up nasty short stuff with the pitched up stuff and primarily look to have the batsmen at their back foot all the time.

I am positive well see a very different bowler than what weve seen in this series. A mixture of him last year against Australia with some disciplined length stuff to balance it with.

Sadly Waqar did not have the reputation of being aggressive in his pomp or I am sure he could have helped Naseem. Btw, this is no dig at you, just feel Waqar puts new meaning to the words incompetent and useless.

 

[Forum363]

They can see it because he has shown it. He has produced some incredible performances in his first year in international cricket against top sides.

If he is going through a lean patch now, they can see that it is simply a loss of form rather than an illustration of his capability.

On the contrary, the only thing that Naseem has shown so far is that he fails with flying colors whenever he plays against a big team.

He failed in Australia and he failed in England, and if he continues to bowl like this, he will fail against everyone not called Sri Lanka or Bangladesh.

But he certainly does talk like a great bowler though. Unfortunately, he doesn’t seem to have the ability to translate that talk into performances.

So lets do a comparison.

Archer

First series - brilliant at home (strong opposition)
Second series - rubbish in NZ
Third series - rubbish in SA
Fourth series - rubbish at home
Fifth series - rubbish at home

Naseem

At least five years young, less first class experience, loses his mother days before his debut, part of a weaker team.

First series - Rubbish away
Second series - Brilliant at home (weak opposition)
Third series - Rubbish away

Yes, I see Archer has completely proved himself as a test bowler. The very arguments that you use (rightly) against people who overhype Naseem, you are using to hype Archer to the moon.

 

[Mamoon]

So lets do a comparison.

Archer

First series - brilliant at home (strong opposition)
Second series - rubbish in NZ
Third series - rubbish in SA
Fourth series - rubbish at home
Fifth series - rubbish at home

Naseem

At least five years young, less first class experience, loses his mother days before his debut, part of a weaker team.

First series - Rubbish away
Second series - Brilliant at home (weak opposition)
Third series - Rubbish away

Yes, I see Archer has completely proved himself as a test bowler. The very arguments that you use (rightly) against people who overhype Naseem, you are using to hype Archer to the moon.

Yes let’s pretend the World Cup didn’t happen.

Archer has scaled heights in 1 year that Naseem won’t in his entire career.

This is a completely ludicrous comparison between two bowlers who are at completely different levels.

 

[Mamoon]

Archer is World Champions , Naseem is not.

Archer was good against No 1 team in Test series, Naseem Failed against No 1 team as well as England.

Archer bowls 145+ in tests, Naseem doesn't bowl that fast.

Archer is taller than Naseem.

Point out 1 thing in which Naseem is better than Archer?

Some people’s logic is that since Naseem is Pakistani, he must be more talented.

If the shoe was on the other foot and Archer was Pakistani and Naseem English, people would be laughing at this ridiculous comparison.

Naseem is not even worthy of meriting a comparison with Finn let alone Archer.

 

[Shazzam]

Point out 1 thing in which Naseem is better than Archer?

He has age on his side. He is still a teenager who will grow leaps and bounds by the time he reaches Archers age.

 

[ataullah]

Just in this game Archer has been a big disappointment. Naseem beat the bat of better players on more occasions than Archer. How can Archer be so poor against mediocre pak batsmen in english conditions? If Naseem bowled for England he would have definitely got 4/5 wickets in an inning. If Archer bowled to Crawley and co he would look like an amateur.

 

[ManFan]

Some people’s logic is that since Naseem is Pakistani, he must be more talented.

If the shoe was on the other foot and Archer was Pakistani and Naseem English, people would be laughing at this ridiculous comparison.

Naseem is not even worthy of meriting a comparison with Finn let alone Archer.

You’re embarrassing yourself. Just stop.

Certain things we all must accept and your bias against Naseem and for Archer is spectacular for someone so renowned for rationality.

Naseem has had bone tests to determine his age and it has been confirmed. So no matter what you and I may think, he’s 17. Leave it.

Yes, the hype has been excessive. But a 16-year-old with a five-wicket-haul and a hat-trick is an exciting prospect for any side.

I cannot mention how many times the English fans and media have hyped their players to the moon only to be brought back down to Earth. It’s a fickle sport with each ball a new story unfolding.

So, please get off your high-horse where you are intellectually superior to every Pakistani fan. We recognize that Pakistan is a mediocre current side but it becomes redundant to emphasize it every time you post.

 

[Mamoon]

You’re embarrassing yourself. Just stop.

Certain things we all must accept and your bias against Naseem and for Archer is spectacular for someone so renowned for rationality.

Naseem has had bone tests to determine his age and it has been confirmed. So no matter what you and I may think, he’s 17. Leave it.

Yes, the hype has been excessive. But a 16-year-old with a five-wicket-haul and a hat-trick is an exciting prospect for any side.

I cannot mention how many times the English fans and media have hyped their players to the moon only to be brought back down to Earth. It’s a fickle sport with each ball a new story unfolding.

So, please get off your high-horse where you are intellectually superior to every Pakistani fan. We recognize that Pakistan is a mediocre current side but it becomes redundant to emphasize it every time you post.

Please provide a source for the “bone Tests”.

Naseem himself confirmed to Saj last year that he was not 16 years old.

In fact, PCB called him 16 years old back in 2016. You can google the Andy Roberts article from September 2016 when he worked at a training camp in Karachi.

If Naseem is 17, I am the President of United States of America.

Finally, I don’t need to be biased to assert that a Naseem vs Archer comparison is completely ridiculous.

Naseem has achieved zilch in his career so far, and Archer already has achieved more in 1 year than most bowlers do in a very long time.

 

[ManFan]

Please provide a source for the “bone Tests”.

Naseem himself confirmed to Saj last year that he was not 16 years old.

In fact, PCB called him 16 years old back in 2016. You can google the Andy Roberts article from September 2016 when he worked at a training camp in Karachi.

If Naseem is 17, I am the President of United States of America.

Finally, I don’t need to be biased to assert that a Naseem vs Archer comparison is completely ridiculous.

Naseem has achieved zilch in his career so far, and Archer already has achieved more in 1 year than most bowlers do in a very long time.

Suleiman Qadir, his coach, has confirmed that he has undergone bone tests and he was 16 as of last year. He came to his academy when he was 12 and he denies Robert’s claims in the same sound bite.

Unfortunately, you need a reality check because you are biased regarding both Archer and Naseem.

Naseem has not done much in his career and Archer has out-achieved him. But what has the latter done since the Ashes? Nothing.

 

[Abdullah719]

Suleiman Qadir, his coach, has confirmed that he has undergone bone tests and he was 16 as of last year. He came to his academy when he was 12 and he denies Robert’s claims in the same sound bite.

Unfortunately, you need a reality check because you are biased regarding both Archer and Naseem.

Naseem has not done much in his career and Archer has out-achieved him. But what has the latter done since the Ashes? Nothing.

Played 7 matches and averaged 45 with the ball.

1/100 in New Zealand in two matches, so 2/200 overall.

A five-fer in South Africa where he went at 6 RPO due to SA being on the attack. They went on to comfortably win.

4/200 against West Indies in two Tests at home.

4/150 against Pakistan in two Tests at home. 3 of the wickets were Yasir, Abbas, and Naseem.

And in between, all he had to say was, “This pitch isn’t really one where you’ll bend your back.”

Now imagine this was a Pakistani bowler.

Once again, some people unfairly conflate this with criticism of Archer as a bowler. From my side, it’s only the attitude that I find a bit strange at times. I think as a bowler he has a lot of ability and will serve England well. Calls to drop him or to go back to Country cricket are premature because he’s shown that he belongs at this level. Players have lean periods. Especially young and inexperienced ones.

 

[Firebat]

Played 7 matches and averaged 45 with the ball.

1/100 in New Zealand in two matches, so 2/200 overall.

A five-fer in South Africa where he went at 6 RPO due to SA being on the attack. They went on to comfortably win.

4/200 against West Indies in two Tests at home.

4/150 against Pakistan in two Tests at home. 3 of the wickets were Yasir, Abbas, and Naseem.

And in between, all he had to say was, “This pitch isn’t really one where you’ll bend your back.”

Now imagine this was a Pakistani bowler.

Once again, some people unfairly conflate this with criticism of Archer as a bowler. From my side, it’s only the attitude that I find a bit strange at times. I think as a bowler he has a lot of ability and will serve England well. Calls to drop him or to go back to Country cricket are premature because he’s shown that he belongs at this level. Players have lean periods. Especially young and inexperienced ones.

Yet people will tear apart Naseem's overseas performances, one of them in one of the hardest countries to bowl in (Aus 2 greatest bowlers had better averages away from home), and completely disregard his actual home performances.

 

[Mamoon]

Suleiman Qadir, his coach, has confirmed that he has undergone bone tests and he was 16 as of last year. He came to his academy when he was 12 and he denies Robert’s claims in the same sound bite.

Unfortunately, you need a reality check because you are biased regarding both Archer and Naseem.

Naseem has not done much in his career and Archer has out-achieved him. But what has the latter done since the Ashes? Nothing.

So we should believe Naseem’s coach but not Naseem himself. Apparently, Naseem doesn’t know that he is 17 but his coach does. Interesting.

 

[Mamoon]

Yet people will tear apart Naseem's overseas performances, one of them in one of the hardest countries to bowl in (Aus 2 greatest bowlers had better averages away from home), and completely disregard his actual home performances.

His actual home performances have come against Sri Lanka. Archer’s actual home performances have come against Australia and of course the World Cup.

The difference between the two is clear: Archer has proved himself to be a top bowler but he is going through a lean patch at the moment.

Naseem so has far has proved that he is not good enough to bowl against top sides.

 

[Ab Fan]

Archer is better. He just needs more consistency.

Naseem is a nobody at this point of his career.

 

[Firebat]

His actual home performances have come against Sri Lanka. Archer’s actual home performances have come against Australia and of course the World Cup.

The difference between the two is clear: Archer has proved himself to be a top bowler but he is going through a lean patch at the moment.

Naseem so has far has proved that he is not good enough to bowl against top sides.

Naseem doesn't get to choose who comes to Pakistan to play. Just because he hasn't had the chance to play top sides at home, doesn't mean he has proven he can't perform against them. The chance he got to play at home, he exceled.

Meanwhile, you believe Archer has proven himself to be a top Test bowler based on one home series vs Australia. Every series since then, including 2 series at home against sides that, as you remind us often, are painfully mediocre (and who you'd consider on par with Sri Lanka), his performances have been less than impressive.

I'm not saying that Naseem is better than him, or has proven he is a top Test bowler either. Archer is the better bowler, however neither so far have proven they are consistent top Test bowlers, and the gulf in class between them is not as wide as you'd like to believe.

 

[Savak]

Archer has done nothing for England since the Ashes series. In fact he has looked slower and England at one point had even dropped him for Mark Wood. He is slowly getting exposed for being over hyped. You can't keep living off the 2019 Ashes series for long.

 

[ManFan]

Played 7 matches and averaged 45 with the ball.

1/100 in New Zealand in two matches, so 2/200 overall.

A five-fer in South Africa where he went at 6 RPO due to SA being on the attack. They went on to comfortably win.

4/200 against West Indies in two Tests at home.

4/150 against Pakistan in two Tests at home. 3 of the wickets were Yasir, Abbas, and Naseem.

And in between, all he had to say was, “This pitch isn’t really one where you’ll bend your back.”

Now imagine this was a Pakistani bowler.

Once again, some people unfairly conflate this with criticism of Archer as a bowler. From my side, it’s only the attitude that I find a bit strange at times. I think as a bowler he has a lot of ability and will serve England well. Calls to drop him or to go back to Country cricket are premature because he’s shown that he belongs at this level. Players have lean periods. Especially young and inexperienced ones.

Agreed.

Archer had a very typical Pakistani-pacer like start and now has to adjust to international cricket.

To call him, “one of the best in the world”, is a bit premature.

 

[ManFan]

So we should believe Naseem’s coach but not Naseem himself. Apparently, Naseem doesn’t know that he is 17 but his coach does. Interesting.

Send the link to his interview and I will accept I was wrong and he is not 17.

Regardless, you are letting this “age” issue get in the way of your judgment, whether you like to or care to admit it.

 

[Smudger]

One thing people are not looking into is that Archer probably had a great start to international cricket. He probably is'nt as good as people are thinking. Hassan Ali too won Pakistan the CT. Not many people do that over their careers. But see what happened.
Archer is'nt as good as some believe here. He is getting exposed a bit. You cant succeed in International cricket with just a short ball

 

[Varun]

Naseem Shah is tracking the same as any other Pakistani fast bowler (or batsman for that matter).

Everybody will be behind him for the next 1.5 years through thick and thin before they see the light, dump him and move on to the next 17-year old.

 

[MenInG]

Send the link to his interview and I will accept I was wrong and he is not 17.

Regardless, you are letting this “age” issue get in the way of your judgment, whether you like to or care to admit it.

Dont get sidetracked on age issue - this is a usual tactic by some here when they run out of things to say.

 

[Afhan Ali]

Archer vs Naseem

Matches 11 vs 7

Wickets 38 vs 16

Average 30.95 vs 34

Economy 2.98 vs 3.4

Archer is faster, Taller and impact player whereas Naseem is nothing of the above 3.

 

[Smudger]

Archer vs Naseem

Matches 11 vs 7

Wickets 38 vs 16

Average 30.95 vs 34

Economy 2.98 vs 3.4

Archer is faster, Taller and impact player whereas Naseem is nothing of the above 3.

Naseem is Pakistani so obviously he is more talented, Because he has got special DNA .

You acting as if Archer has eye popping numbers. Both are average test bowlers at this stage

 

[Mamoon]

Send the link to his interview and I will accept I was wrong and he is not 17.

Regardless, you are letting this “age” issue get in the way of your judgment, whether you like to or care to admit it.

Please read Saj’s posts on Naseem’s age in this thread.

http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/s...first-class-international-or-just-let-them-be

I am not letting age get in the way of my judgement. I have seen enough of Naseem yo conclude that he is an average bowler who is laughably overrated.

Now why is he laughably overrated? Well there are two majors:

(1) Pakistani fans have a hard time accepting the bitter fact that Pakistan has become a small, weak and mediocre cricket nation.

In 2020, we are closer in stature and quality to the likes of West Indies, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh than we are to India, England, Australia, South Africa and New Zealand.

As a result, we overhype every young or new player out of desperation because we try to find a savior in them - someone who would change the fortunes of Pakistan.

We overhype mediocre players and when they fail to live up to the expectations that we created in our heads, we initially try to make excuses and look for scapegoats (e.g. Naseem is inexperienced, he had a personal tragedy, he hasn’t been coached properly by Waqar, we ran him into the ground because of a lack of 5th bowler etc.)

Furthermore, once we make peace with the reality, we latch onto another batch of mediocre young players and try to find a savior in them and the cycle repeats.

If Pakistan was a top side, would regularly find itself in the top 2-3 rankings, would have several established top quality pacers, no one would bat an eyelid over someone average like Naseem and he wouldn’t be anywhere near the squad at this point.

(2) The second reason for why he is laughably overrated has to do with his age. PCB marketed him as some bowling version of Tendulkar who was Test class at 16, and that fake age - with everyone commentator calling him “16 year old Naseem Shah” which has now become “17 year old Naseem Shah” - has become a selling point.

If PCB called him for what he is, a 19/20 year old, he wouldn’t have made the headlines because then there would be no selling point.

His bowling itself is not a selling point at all. You look back to Amir in 2010 and he took the game by storm because of his bowling and not because PCB decided to advertise him for something that wasn’t true.

But since our fans have allowed themselves to be fooled by PCB’s lie, they are now excited and think that if this 16-17 year old could get an international call up at this age, he must turn into something special over the next 3-4 years.

But this stunt is not new for PCB. They sold Afridi and Hassan Raza as a 16 and 14 year old in 1996.

 

[Mamoon]

Naseem doesn't get to choose who comes to Pakistan to play. Just because he hasn't had the chance to play top sides at home, doesn't mean he has proven he can't perform against them. The chance he got to play at home, he exceled.

Meanwhile, you believe Archer has proven himself to be a top Test bowler based on one home series vs Australia. Every series since then, including 2 series at home against sides that, as you remind us often, are painfully mediocre (and who you'd consider on par with Sri Lanka), his performances have been less than impressive.

I'm not saying that Naseem is better than him, or has proven he is a top Test bowler either. Archer is the better bowler, however neither so far have proven they are consistent top Test bowlers, and the gulf in class between them is not as wide as you'd like to believe.

It is as wide as I think and much, much wider than what Pakistani fans in general think, and it will become evident over the next 3-4 years.

As I explained in my previous post, the main issue is that Pakistani fans are not ready to accept that real status of Pakistan cricket and where we stand in the game today and where we are heading.

That is why we overrate mediocre players because we try to find saviors who will turn our fortunes around. When they fail, we make excuses, look for scapegoats and then eventually latch onto another batch of mediocrities.

Yes every small, weak and mediocre cricket nation can produce a gem every now and then. We have also managed to produce Babar lately, but I can assure you that Naseem isn’t the gem people think he is.

You can say I am wrong and I will be proven wrong, so let’s wait for 3-4 years and see where Archer is by 2023-24 and where Naseem is.

Even today, the statement that they are both at the same (or similar level) in Test cricket is strictly not true. In spite of having a couple of bad series, Archer would get into a lot of playing XIs in the world and certainly every single squad.

On the other hand, Naseem would not get within a mile of any top team plus West Indies who have a better pace attack. And I am mean the squad not the playing XI.

 

[Firebat]

[/b]

It is as wide as I think and much, much wider than what Pakistani fans in general think, and it will become evident over the next 3-4 years.

As I explained in my previous post, the main issue is that Pakistani fans are not ready to accept that real status of Pakistan cricket and where we stand in the game today and where we are heading.

That is why we overrate mediocre players because we try to find saviors who will turn our fortunes around. When they fail, we make excuses, look for scapegoats and then eventually latch onto another batch of mediocrities.

Yes every small, weak and mediocre cricket nation can produce a gem every now and then. We have also managed to produce Babar lately, but I can assure you that Naseem isn’t the gem people think he is.

You can say I am wrong and I will be proven wrong, so let’s wait for 3-4 years and see where Archer is by 2023-24 and where Naseem is.

Even today, the statement that they are both at the same (or similar level) in Test cricket is strictly not true. In spite of having a couple of bad series, Archer would get into a lot of playing XIs in the world and certainly every single squad.

On the other hand, Naseem would not get within a mile of any top team plus West Indies who have a better pace attack. And I am mean the squad not the playing XI.

Thank you for specifically arguing none of the actual points ) Generic comments on Pakistan cricket, their fans etc, "we will see what happens", your opinion on which team would take what player.

Please point out where I said you will be proven wrong. Your rating of Archer with respect to Naseem is based on nothing but your subjective assessment of each, entirely unfounded on the actual results they have produced in their careers thus far.

 

[Mamoon]

Thank you for specifically arguing none of the actual points ) Generic comments on Pakistan cricket, their fans etc, "we will see what happens", your opinion on which team would take what player.

Please point out where I said you will be proven wrong. Your rating of Archer with respect to Naseem is based on nothing but your subjective assessment of each, entirely unfounded on the actual results they have produced in their careers thus far.

Archer has delivered against a top side (Australia) and let’s not even talk about what he did at the World Cup.

Naseem has failed with flying colors whenever he has played against top sides. You say that it is not his fault that he has only played weak sides at home, but we cannot assume that he would do well against the top sides considering how poor his bowling is.

If it was the other way around with Naseem being English and Archer being Pakistani, our fans would be in fits at this ridiculous comparison between a player who basically took the game by storm in his first year and a complete nobody.

Only Pakistani fans have the gall to compare their mediocre nobodies with top players from other teams.

 

[topspin]

Archer has delivered against a top side (Australia) and let’s not even talk about what he did at the World Cup.

Naseem has failed with flying colors whenever he has played against top sides. You say that it is not his fault that he has only played weak sides at home, but we cannot assume that he would do well against the top sides considering how poor his bowling is.

If it was the other way around with Naseem being English and Archer being Pakistani, our fans would be in fits at this ridiculous comparison between a player who basically took the game by storm in his first year and a complete nobody.

Only Pakistani fans have the gall to compare their mediocre nobodies with top players from other teams.

Naseem Shah is Pakistan's Nicolas Pepe. Overrated flops in my view.

 

[Rana]

So sad. Archer and Naseem being discussed like Akhtar and Lee in the 21st century.

 

[sindhiboy]

8 wickets in 3 and a half tests does not look good for Archer

 

[sindhiboy]

Naseem lacks variation at a young age. But he will pick up variation along the years

 

[ManFan]

Please read Saj’s posts on Naseem’s age in this thread.

http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/s...first-class-international-or-just-let-them-be

I am not letting age get in the way of my judgement. I have seen enough of Naseem yo conclude that he is an average bowler who is laughably overrated.

Now why is he laughably overrated? Well there are two majors:

(1) Pakistani fans have a hard time accepting the bitter fact that Pakistan has become a small, weak and mediocre cricket nation.

In 2020, we are closer in stature and quality to the likes of West Indies, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh than we are to India, England, Australia, South Africa and New Zealand.

As a result, we overhype every young or new player out of desperation because we try to find a savior in them - someone who would change the fortunes of Pakistan.

We overhype mediocre players and when they fail to live up to the expectations that we created in our heads, we initially try to make excuses and look for scapegoats (e.g. Naseem is inexperienced, he had a personal tragedy, he hasn’t been coached properly by Waqar, we ran him into the ground because of a lack of 5th bowler etc.)

Furthermore, once we make peace with the reality, we latch onto another batch of mediocre young players and try to find a savior in them and the cycle repeats.

If Pakistan was a top side, would regularly find itself in the top 2-3 rankings, would have several established top quality pacers, no one would bat an eyelid over someone average like Naseem and he wouldn’t be anywhere near the squad at this point.

(2) The second reason for why he is laughably overrated has to do with his age. PCB marketed him as some bowling version of Tendulkar who was Test class at 16, and that fake age - with everyone commentator calling him “16 year old Naseem Shah” which has now become “17 year old Naseem Shah” - has become a selling point.

If PCB called him for what he is, a 19/20 year old, he wouldn’t have made the headlines because then there would be no selling point.

His bowling itself is not a selling point at all. You look back to Amir in 2010 and he took the game by storm because of his bowling and not because PCB decided to advertise him for something that wasn’t true.

But since our fans have allowed themselves to be fooled by PCB’s lie, they are now excited and think that if this 16-17 year old could get an international call up at this age, he must turn into something special over the next 3-4 years.

But this stunt is not new for PCB. They sold Afridi and Hassan Raza as a 16 and 14 year old in 1996.

Excellent; I was wrong.

I agree with your analysis of why he is overrated but my point is this, name me another under-20 year-old with his pace.

Pakistan has been starved of pacers who can maintain control and with this young bowler, there is a chance. He may end up being nothing but he’s only had one years worth of international cricket. I still feel it’s too early to write him off. Even Warne was a passenger in his first year.

 

[Mamoon]

Excellent; I was wrong.

I agree with your analysis of why he is overrated but my point is this, name me another under-20 year-old with his pace.

Pakistan has been starved of pacers who can maintain control and with this young bowler, there is a chance. He may end up being nothing but he’s only had one years worth of international cricket. I still feel it’s too early to write him off. Even Warne was a passenger in his first year.

Didn’t Indian U-19 pacers clock 150 in the U-19 World Cup?

West Indies also have 19-20-21 year old bowlers who hit 90+ regularly.

Rabada was absolutely rapid at the same age.

Besides, even if assume that he is the quick loser bowler at his age and there is no 19-20 focusing solely on pace reflects the wrong mindset of our fans. Instead of hyping up his pace at the age of 19-20, they should be more worried about the complete lack of skill and intelligence that he has shown with the ball.

He has been a poorly calibrated bowling machine all summer and has been gun barrel straight apart from getting one delivery to move off the seam every two spells.

So instead of flexing about his pace, his fans should actually be worried about why the so-called fasted bowler at his age has returned from Australia and England with bowling averages of 68 and 69 with 4 wickets in 4 Tests.

 

[ManFan]

Didn’t Indian U-19 pacers clock 150 in the U-19 World Cup?

West Indies also have 19-20-21 year old bowlers who hit 90+ regularly.

Rabada was absolutely rapid at the same age.

Besides, even if assume that he is the quick loser bowler at his age and there is no 19-20 focusing solely on pace reflects the wrong mindset of our fans. Instead of hyping up his pace at the age of 19-20, they should be more worried about the complete lack of skill and intelligence that he has shown with the ball.

He has been a poorly calibrated bowling machine all summer and has been gun barrel straight apart from getting one delivery to move off the seam every two spells.

So instead of flexing about his pace, his fans should actually be worried about why the so-called fasted bowler at his age has returned from Australia and England with bowling averages of 68 and 69 with 4 wickets in 4 Tests.

Those U-19 bowlers have not yet bowled in international cricket as of yet.

Pace is what separated Archer from other English seamers of past; he is more mature than Naseem and therefore has more control.

The main quality of a bowler is pace, in order to generate fear and what separates him from other bowlers. Its the same thing with spinners; control comes with experience but they have to be able to spin the damn ball in the first place to be a quality spin bowler.

Naseem has two things on his side; age and speed. This could work against him as his body might not be able to handle the rigors of international cricket but he could also develop.

Broad, who debuted at 20, averaged 95 in his first year. He was at least 10kph slower than Naseem, almost gun-barrel straight, and going by record, two years older. But look where he is now. 500 wickets and counting. What accounted for this change?

Bowling over after over in Test cricket. So please, have some patience. Don't get me started with Anderson and Steyn. Yes, they swung the ball but only at times with little control and high economy rates.

 

[Xoib]

Naseem will be the best pacer in the world inshallah by 2024.He is a nobody Now had a poor tour but there is a lot of potential and if he works hard he will get there.

 

[Shazzam]

Not a fair comparison. One is a international quality bowler while the other is a fast tracked inexperienced bowler that needs to spend years in domestic before he gets called up again.

 

[Mamoon]

To conclude this thread for now before it is inevitably bumped in the future and with tears (for Naseem fans).

Archer: a top bowler who had an ordinary series.

Naseem: an ordinary bowler who had an ordinary series.

 

[Ab Fan]

Archer should take the new bowl going forward. That was the reason he was great in Ashes last year. Jimmy was injured.

 

[shamaan]

To conclude this thread for now before it is inevitably bumped in the future and with tears (for Naseem fans).

Archer: a top bowler who had an ordinary series.

Naseem: an ordinary bowler who had an ordinary series.

Archer has had more than a few ordinary series

 

[Firebat]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-partner="tweetdeck"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Azhar Ali "Naseem Shah showed glimpses of his talent with the way he bowled to Root & Buttler. He’s inexperienced & he’ll learn. Unfortunately, he couldn’t get the wickets we were expecting but sometimes that happens. I’m positive that this talent will perform in future" <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Cricket?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Cricket</a></p>— Saj Sadiq (@Saj_PakPassion) <a href="https://twitter.com/Saj_PakPassion/status/1298358163490639878?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 25, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[Forum363]

To conclude this thread for now before it is inevitably bumped in the future and with tears (for Naseem fans).

Archer: a top bowler who had an ordinary series.

Naseem: an ordinary bowler who had an ordinary series.

Haha a top bowler who has had 4 ordinary series in a row &#55357;&#56834; out of 5 series played. ‘But he won the World cup’. We’re taking about tests here mate where you claim him to be better than Rabada, Anderson, Shami, Boult, Broad etc

‘But England changed their rules to accommodate him so he’s the best regardless of performance..’ can’t argue with your ‘logic’ there

 

[MenInG]

[MENTION=152972]Pacy with wisdom[/MENTION]

Wonder if you see any change in Naseem since that time in summer?

 

[Mamoon]

Ah yes, another comparison thread that has gone south and will go down further south in the future.

Not feel like taking credit for calling it because anyone with any cricketing sense could have seen it coming.

Now the last clutch at a straw will be to remind us of Archer’s performance in NZ last year, but my response would be to wait for 3-4 years and then check how dumb this comparison thread looks.

I can assure you, this thread will look a lot worse in 2024-2025 than it does today.

There is still time to kill this snake...

 

[MenInG]

Ah yes, another comparison thread that has gone south and will go down further south in the future.

Not feel like taking credit for calling it because anyone with any cricketing sense could have seen it coming.

Now the last clutch at a straw will be to remind us of Archer’s performance in NZ last year, but my response would be to wait for 3-4 years and then check how dumb this comparison thread looks.

I can assure you, this thread will look a lot worse in 2024-2025 than it does today.

There is still time to kill this snake...

You weren't able to understand the issue then - if anything that's gone south, its your basic reasoning ability.

 

[Mamoon]

You weren't able to understand the issue then - if anything that's gone south, its your basic reasoning ability.

I understand the following really well - Naseem is an average bowler. By the time both Archer and Naseem are done with international cricket, even Naseem’s family will not dare to mention his name in the same sentence as Archer.

Now since Naseem is not the bowler they think he was and is not going to have the career they were fantasizing about, they fans have to choices. Either accept that he is not good enough, or blame everyone in the firing line, be it Waqar, Misbah or whoever else.

As far as OP is concerned, he is renowned for his pseudo technical analysis that fool naive and gullible posters.

Few months back, he tried to impress me and convince me that Wahab is a “much improved” bowler now. He also used some big words like “saucer release”. Safe to say, that backfired and he doesn’t play that trick on me anymore.

The “much improved” Wahab is now getting thrashed by Kiwi kids (and genuine kids, not Naseem Shah type kids) after getting thrashed by the first team.

Looks like the saucer, bowl, teacup or coffee mug release or whatever is clearly not working.

 

[MenInG]

I understand the following really well - Naseem is an average bowler. By the time both Archer and Naseem are done with international cricket, even Naseem’s family will not dare to mention his name in the same sentence as Archer.

Now since Naseem is not the bowler they think he was and is not going to have the career they were fantasizing about, they fans have to choices. Either accept that he is not good enough, or blame everyone in the firing line, be it Waqar, Misbah or whoever else.

As far as OP is concerned, he is renowned for his pseudo technical analysis that fool naive and gullible posters.

Few months back, he tried to impress me and convince me that Wahab is a “much improved” bowler now. He also used some big words like “saucer release”. Safe to say, that backfired and he doesn’t play that trick on me anymore.

The “much improved” Wahab is now getting thrashed by Kiwi kids (and genuine kids, not Naseem Shah type kids) after getting thrashed by the first team.

Looks like the saucer, bowl, teacup or coffee mug release or whatever is clearly not working.

No you have added nothing in this debate apart from simplistic jibes which makes your views worthless.

Read the Op, understand the technical side - then put in your views and you will find a receptive audience.

 

[Slog]

There is little technical analysis in the OP.

Also Archer at 20-21 when I first saw him was significantly superior to Naseem right now. But archer was toiling in domestics and honing his skills but somehow Naseem is ready

 

[MenInG]

There is little technical analysis in the OP.

Also Archer at 20-21 when I first saw him was significantly superior to Naseem right now. But archer was toiling in domestics and honing his skills but somehow Naseem is ready

Can you have the courtesy to point out which bits are non technical so that he can answer your criticism?

 

[CricketZ]

Well well well...

 

[Bigboii]

Bump
[MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION] floor is yours

 

[Mamoon]

Bump
[MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION] floor is yours

I think the floor is OP’s.

He expected Naseem to develop under Waqar but since Waqar is not up to the task, perhaps he should show this thread to Wasim Khan and apply for the bowling coach role.

If the OP knows what he is talking about then perhaps he can help Naseem become the superstar that he believes he can become.

 

[Revolution]

Really sad that people create these type of threads.

 

[Rayyman]

Archer is a good bowler who is overrated.

Naseem has more potential than him.

 

[Marooned]

Archer averaged 104.5 when he toured

 

[Shoaib88]

Archer is a good bowler who is overrated.

Naseem has more potential than him.

Yes Naseem has the potential to above 7 runs per over with average of above 80 in test cricket

 

[Ab Fan]

No surprises. Whatever [MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION] says is always right.

The hype behind Naseem Shah was witnessed by fans here during lockdown but it didn't took too long before the bubble got burst

 

[Indiafan]

 

[Hasan123]

OP deserves the humiliation. [MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION].

 

[BreadPakoda]

Long but entertaining read. Summarizing the comparison made by the OP (in one line, both are blockbuster bowlers, but Naseem has superior skills):

• Naseem can sustain his pace much better than Archer
• Naseem has better action as he uses his left arm as a catapult while Archer's left arm just aimlessly rests on the side
• Naseem has better attacking skills with the new ball
• Naseem has deadly bouncer despite short height
• Naseem has extreme accuracy for his pace. However, Archer should bowl a bit more fuller.
• Naseem has far superior old ball skills

For the technical part, one has to read the orig post.

 

[Slog]

Long but entertaining read. Summarizing the comparison made by the OP (in one line, both are blockbuster bowlers, but Naseem has superior skills):

• Naseem can sustain his pace much better than Archer
• Naseem has better action as he uses his left arm as a catapult while Archer's left arm just aimlessly rests on the side
• Naseem has better attacking skills with the new ball
• Naseem has deadly bouncer despite short height
• Naseem has extreme accuracy for his pace. However, Archer should bowl a bit more fuller.
• Naseem has far superior old ball skills

For the technical part, one has to read the orig post.

If your summary is accurate then there’s so much wrong.

Naseem can definitely NOT sustain his pace longer. There is literally no evidence of that. Over his FC career before his debut he had bowled an average of 11-12 overs per innings. So there was literally nothing to claim thy he could bowl long spells let alone bowl long spells while sustaining pace.

New ball and old ball skills: I hope england and New Zealand tours answer that question

 

[BreadPakoda]

If your summary is accurate then there’s so much wrong.

Naseem can definitely NOT sustain his pace longer. There is literally no evidence of that. Over his FC career before his debut he had bowled an average of 11-12 overs per innings. So there was literally nothing to claim thy he could bowl long spells let alone bowl long spells while sustaining pace.

New ball and old ball skills: I hope england and New Zealand tours answer that question

Quoting from the OP

While Archer does look effortless in his action it has to be noted that bowlers with a predominantly front-on action, with no pivid, put a lot of stress on the lower back.
And in Archer's case, he barely uses his left side much and totally relies on his lower core strength to maintain his extension.
That explains why his pace declines so much over the course of a test series.
On the other hand, a guy like naseem can sustain his pace much better because his side on action allows his oblique muscles as well as his hips to share in the burden with his back.

 

[Ab Fan]

Marvellous POTW piece.

One minor point though. I don’t think that Naseem is Pakistan’s Archer - I think Haris Rauf is much more similar to Archer.

Yeah, please demonstrate a bit more