POTW: Mamoon

[MenInG]

An excellent, well-articulated, thought-provoking post on how we are (mis) judging modern-day batters from [MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION] is this week's choice for POTW.

Congratulations!


http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/s...e-undervalued-due-to-microanalysis&p=11804943

While modern batsmen are often considered to be lucky than their predecessors because scoring runs has become relatively easier in white ball cricket, the fact is that they are also subject to greater criticism due to the widespread availability of data. They are undervalued due to microanalysis and are exposed to greater criticism.

For example, Imam-ul-Haq is still not highly rated by many Pakistani fans in spite of possessing a fantastic ODI record: 50 average, 83 SR and 9 centuries in 58 innings. He is well on his way to scoring 25+ ODI hundreds by the time he retires.

The reason why he is not highly rated is because his numbers are not impressive against first-choice attacks.

Today, every cricket fan can access detailed statistics with just one click and jump to conclusions and pass verdicts regarding different players. This builds a perception and collective perception builds a narrative.

Once a narrative is established, it is usually very hard to change unless something dramatic happens. For example, Imam top scoring for Pakistan in a World Cup and leading Pakistan to glory etc.

On the other hand, Saeed Anwar is widely regarded as Pakistan's greatest opener. Any comparison between him and Fakhar and Imam would be deemed blasphemous.

However, Saeed Anwar averaged 22 in Australia after 26 ODIs, 23 in NZ after 11 ODIs and 25 in South Africa after 22 ODIs.

That is an emphatically embarrassing record for any ODI opener, let alone someone who is widely regarded as the greatest ODI opener produced by Pakistan to date.

When Saeed Anwar was playing, this data was not available or accessible to the fans. There was no Cricinfo, no PakPassion, no social media. The fans only consumed what was served to them, i.e. career record, highest score, number of centuries etc. which built the perception and the subsequent narrative around Saeed Anwar.

If Saeed Anwar played today and produced such numbers against the top sides in bilateral ODI series, he would be blasted left, right and center on social media. There would be numerous threads on PakPassion calling him a flat track bully, weak attack basher etc. This narrative did not exist back then because no one was aware of these numbers.

If you - like me - grew up in the 90's admiring Saeed Anwar's batting, these shocking numbers will not change your perception now. However, if you had knowledge of these numbers while growing up, you might have viewed him in a different light.

This thread is not about Imam or Saeed only and neither is it a pitch to consider them as equals (I myself don't - I will take Saeed over Imam any day). In addition, it also applies to bowlers but I emphasized on batsmen because they are subject to greater criticism because of the narrative that the rules and conditions are favorable for them especially in white ball cricket.

The gist of this discourse is to debate how the overflow of information and ease of access of data has hurt the image of players, especially batsman, and how they have absolutely no room for error.

Nothing is hidden from the public anymore - every single failure is highlighted and discussed. This is an overlooked aspect when it comes to modern players and they have to do a lot more than their predecessors to gain approval of the fans.

 

[Caved12]

All his recent posts deserve the POTW award.

Congratulations!

 

[Hitman]

The man is the best-est poster in PP's history.

By the way, congrats!

 

[imshally81]

Batting was difficult in Saeed Anwar's era... Barely we seen 280+ score... Now batting is easy because of 2 balls rule which minimise the reverse swing in the equation, Power play, 15 degree rule etc etc...

But you are right in that time... Fans don't had access or limited acess the detail data analysis & statistics...but right now everything is available.. So you can't hide... Difficult time for cricketers..

 

[Cric1234]

Good post but I had a look at Saeeds record when he failed in a few series in 8 matches not once was 300 plus scored by Pakistan and 4 times a score under 200 was posted by Pakistan on top of that all the matches were played against full strength teams.

That tells you everything you can’t compare players from different eras Saeed was in a tougher position playing tournaments and Bilaterals under different conditions which would regularly assist the fast bowlers maintaining his form was a lot tougher than today.

More credit should be given for bouncing back to form due to this I really don’t think a player like Imam would have a strike above 70 if he played all these matches against full strength bowling attacks in varied conditions where under 250 was being scored regularly by teams.

 

[shaz619]

Good post. Imam, Fakhar and Babar are all severely criticised, mind boggling to say the least

 

[sam_ahm]

Congrats, it's a good post. I agree due to easy availability of data and social media players are heavily criticized and at the same time praised excessively.

I've always stayed away from comparing players across eras, I don't think it's fair... We will always get into things like (in this case) Imam would have averaged less than 10 in those times and may not have even bounced back... So we get into could have, would have, should have, which is meaningless.

 

[Rajdeep]

Well done Mamoon, an absolute legend of PP. Many Congrats.

 

[Mamoon]

Thanks all.

I would once again like to reiterate that it was not a comparison between Imam and Saeed Anwar. It was an attempt to explain how the ease of access to information has influenced the perception of fans.

We have become far less forgiving, highly judgmental and have lost the capacity to appreciate performances without ifs and buts.

 

[gazza619]

Thanks all.

I would once again like to reiterate that it was not a comparison between Imam and Saeed Anwar. It was an attempt to explain how the ease of access to information has influenced the perception of fans.

We have become far less forgiving, highly judgmental and have lost the capacity to appreciate performances without ifs and buts.

Yeah i misunderstood your post first time i read it.

Players of today have to deal with a lot of online abuse as well

 

[moghul]

Very good post, very interesting topic and he raised some interesting points . Thoroughly deserved POTW recognition , even best in a month.

You can judge a batter , with stats or by the perception he creates about himself with the innings he played in a situation when a lot was at stake, whether it was a WC game, or game against India , a pressure situation and also the quality of opposition.

For me, just stats are not important, statistically speaking Babar is already ahead of Richards , Pontings and Kohli but no one in his right mind would pick Babar , ahead of those 3 in his team.

Also , when Saeed was playing , it was the golden era of ODIs, unlike today when not many people care much about it. In those days , due to absence of google and other social media as Mamoon mention , the followers of the game and the "experts" had played the game themselves in streets, mohalls, clubs , schools, colleges of even beyond while majority of today's "experts" haven't played any hard ball cricket at all , IMP but they became 'experts' thanks to google only. They are data experts , not the experts of the game .

Don;t want to go in a long discussion but when Imam or any Pakistanis batter, even Babar will ever play innings like Saeed's hundred in 2003 WC against India in SA and his his record breaking 194 in 1997 in Chennai ( and many others) , only then we could open this sort of discussion.

I can say that , as I watched all those innings live and still remember the pressure , intensity and what was at stake in those games where Saeed Anwar played many of his great knocks . I have also watched most of the Imam's recent innings , not many of them were worth watching, were boring and nothing much was at stake.

I don't care how many runs Imam or Babar pile up against some mediocre attack of highways of Pindi and against Zimbabwe and NZL C team , they have to play an innings of something like Fakhar;s 100 against India in 2017 CT to convince me they are world class ( Babar is world class from today's standard , not Imam, yet ) They will have a golden chance in coming WC in India to prove that point, till then lets not talk things like this, doesn't make any sense.

 

[greatest]

I grew up watching the sport in the late 80s and 90s. Back then we used to judge a batter mainly on how he scored against quality bowlers like the West Indian pace battery, Donald, McGrath, Ambrose, etc etc. And if he was a Pakistani then his runs and reputation carried extra value if he scored against India.
Although, Saeed was an exceptional batter whose career came to a premature end but he won our hearts and is still praised today because of his vital knocks against India. The 188 in Kolkata, the 194 inBangalore. And numerous other hundreds and 50s against them.

Same with Miandad who played a vital role in winning us the 1992 World Cup especially in that crucial semi-final Inzamam would not have played that match-winning knock without Miandad's constant advice from the other end. But over the years and still today Javed is remembered for his last ball six against India.

Btw, a brilliant post by Mamoon. Well deserved!

 

[Colorblind Genius]

This is my personal view and many may not agree but stats and numbers is not THE ONLY factor that a player should be judged on.

What data and numbers and statistics did Wasim Akram, Waqar and Inzi had in the domestic cricket to warrant a place and walk directly in Pak national squad?

Another piece of data that we should almost always consider is the ratio of winning “player of the match” record.

If your piles n piles of runs or taking loads of wickets does not lead to victories than the value of such numbers is not always impressive.

 

[JibranAnsari]

A very fine post. Congratulations.

Saeed anwar was a wonderful batsman but i still remember that when i was watching him bat against quick bowler i was always worried that he would edge one to keep or slips. Used to struggles against quicks of australia and south africa in particular.

 

[pakistani pride]

Stats dont tell the whole story. Example is Imam he has not played a single crucial, under pressure match winning knock. Yet he has a pretty average of 50 odd. He is not even half the player S Anwar. We dont need posts or data for that.

Its all about impact. FZ will always be remembered due to the 100 VS India.

 

[sam_ahm]

Thanks all.

I would once again like to reiterate that it was not a comparison between Imam and Saeed Anwar. It was an attempt to explain how the ease of access to information has influenced the perception of fans.

We have become far less forgiving, highly judgmental and have lost the capacity to appreciate performances without ifs and buts.

That's very true.

 

[moghul]

Thanks all.

I would once again like to reiterate that it was not a comparison between Imam and Saeed Anwar. It was an attempt to explain how the ease of access to information has influenced the perception of fans.

We have become far less forgiving, highly judgmental and have lost the capacity to appreciate performances without ifs and buts.

And, you didn't convince many, not me that the players of the past had better perception due to the lack of social media in those days , it was created by some of their landmark performance at highest stage of the game . Today's players have better stats due to the weak opposition they have played most of their matches.

 

[Mamoon]

And, you didn't convince many, not me that the players of the past had better perception due to the lack of social media in those days , it was created by some of their landmark performance at highest stage of the game . Today's players have better stats due to the weak opposition they have played most of their matches.

That’s fine, I’m not trying to convince anyone. It is my opinion and people can disagree with it.

The point is not about better or worse stats. The point is that a lot of shortcomings of the previous generations of players were hidden from the public because that information was not available.

No one knew and therefore no one cared what player X averaged in individual countries or when certain first choice players from XYZ countries were unavailable.

These days there is an asterisk to every performance because of over-analysis. These asterisk and ifs and buts can be applied to players of any generation but it didn’t happen because this data was not accessible.

 

[Mamoon]

Stats dont tell the whole story. Example is Imam he has not played a single crucial, under pressure match winning knock. Yet he has a pretty average of 50 odd. He is not even half the player S Anwar. We dont need posts or data for that.

It’s all about impact. FZ will always be remembered due to the 100 VS India.

Thanks for your comment and also thanks for completely missing the point as well.

 

[pakistani pride]

Thanks for your comment and also thanks for completely missing the point as well.

Well you keep defending Imam. The point here is that we all know Imam has 0 impact. We dont need stats for that. Anwar played so many matcg winning knocks.

Imam for me, so far I remember him for a selfish player with a pathetic SR against the better teams. Also him celebrating a tuk tuk 100 vs SA, only for SA to chase down that score.

 

[pakistani pride]

And, you didn't convince many, not me that the players of the past had better perception due to the lack of social media in those days , it was created by some of their landmark performance at highest stage of the game . Today's players have better stats due to the weak opposition they have played most of their matches.

This.
Imam is the biggest stats padder example.

 

[Mamoon]

Well you keep defending Imam. The point here is that we all know Imam has 0 impact. We dont need stats for that. Anwar played so many matcg winning knocks.

Imam for me, so far I remember him for a selfish player with a pathetic SR against the better teams. Also him celebrating a tuk tuk 100 vs SA, only for SA to chase down that score.

This.
Imam is the biggest stats padder example.

Terms like “stats padder” mean absolutely nothing. It is a new invention that has zero substance.

Every quality batsman is a “stats padder”. Every batsman who has maintained a high average could have sacrificed that average for a higher SR.

Saeed Anwar averaged 39 @80. In the same era, Jayasuriya averaged 32 @90.

Does that mean Saeed Anwar was a selfish stats padder who wanted to maintain a high average? Absolutely not.

He was a quality opener who had a different role than Jayasuriya and had different traits as a batsman.

Imam is averaging 50 @90 in the last two years. He has helped Pakistan post and chase 300+ totals which has not been the norm for Pakistan over the years.

Pakistan’s perception as a poor chasing team has changed over the last couple of years and Imam has played a significant role in altering that perception.

Pakistan’s top-order has been a mess for as long we can remember and losing both openers in the first 5 overs has always been the norm for Pakistan until Fakhar, Imam and Babar occupied the top three positions. This is Imam’s impact.

It is absolutely absurd to suggest an opener who is averaging 50 @90 in ODI cricket is somehow a hurdle for his team.

It seems like for today’s fans, the lower your average, the better the team player you are because a high average creates the perception that you are playing for yourself rather than the team.

Thankfully, Don Bradman played Test cricket before the age of social media, PakPassion and Cricinfo Statsguru. Otherwise, he would get criticized for being a stats padder and how he took X number of balls to get from 80 to 100 which shows he was playing for his milestone and not the team cause.

 

[Saj]

An interesting post.

Call me old fashioned, but I don't need data to see if a player has class or not.

Also one key factor is the standard of modern day bowling attacks - some of the bowling attacks of the 90s etc were a different level to some of the modern day ODI bowling attacks.

 

[Amjid Javed]

An interesting post.

Call me old fashioned, but I don't need data to see if a player has class or not.

Also one key factor is the standard of modern day bowling attacks - some of the bowling attacks of the 90s etc were a different level to some of the modern day ODI bowling attacks.

100% spot on, stats don't tell you a players impact in big games, clutch moments etc..

The good old eye test tells you all you need to know on a player.

 

[RexRex]

Other examples of this statsguru phenomenon I can think of -

> Sunil Gavaskar is lauded as having a great record of taming the fearsome WI pace attack of the 70s/80s but when you dig into the actual stats, his mountain of runs against WI came primarily against the weaker WI bowlers very early on in his career, not the legends like Marshall/Garner/Roberts.

> Dennis Lillee is lauded as one of the great bowlers from that era but he has a horrible subcontinent record.

 

[Amjid Javed]

An interesting post.

Call me old fashioned, but I don't need data to see if a player has class or not.

Also one key factor is the standard of modern day bowling attacks - some of the bowling attacks of the 90s etc were a different level to some of the modern day ODI bowling attacks.

Bowling attacks in 90s in particular South Africa, Pakistan, Australia and to an extent Sri Lanka (in Asian conditions) were all world class and bowlers bowled in order to take wickets to win games and keep runs down.

Modern day bowlers simply bowl to try and keep score down as the game to so batsmen friendly in regards to rules.

 

[sweep_shot]

An interesting post.

Call me old fashioned, but I don't need data to see if a player has class or not.

Also one key factor is the standard of modern day bowling attacks - some of the bowling attacks of the 90s etc were a different level to some of the modern day ODI bowling attacks.

I agree.

Data doesn't always give the full picture. Cricket is not that type of sport.

Netherlands's Ryan ten Doeschate has the highest ODI average of all time. But, he is clearly not a legend. Just one example.

 

[sweep_shot]

Good post from [MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION].

Modern day runs are heavily inflated. If legends like Saeed Anwar, Inzi etc. were playing in today's time, they probably would've scored centuries after centuries.

 

[Nado_]

Too many people rely on stats these days but stats don’t always paint a true picture. Back in the good old days you didn’t need stats to know who your star players were you just watched them win games and perform at crunch moments.

 

[Cric1234]

If Imam played McGrath Lee Warne Donald Pollock Murali etc type of bowlers regularly on wickets where under 250 is a common score more than 300 I’m sure he wouldn’t have a strike rate over 70.

Luckily for him he's played New Zealand B Australia B West Indies B Netherlands in his so called great period where he’s helped chase 300 plus scores.

The only series he played against New Zealand’s best team he failed in both matches also against Netherlands but that can happen.

Yes it’s a small sample but he failed to do so in the last World Cup and Asia Cup
had umpteen chances to show something aswell then that excuse he’s young etc was used but even then against B teams and minnows he was scoring runs.

 

[gazza619]

An interesting post.

Call me old fashioned, but I don't need data to see if a player has class or not.

Also one key factor is the standard of modern day bowling attacks - some of the bowling attacks of the 90s etc were a different level to some of the modern day ODI bowling attacks.

Do you genuinely think that the Wasims, the Waqars, the McGraths would have had the same success today?

Millions of cameras, no ball tampering, small boundaries, heavy bats, modern day inventive batters, these are all the facts we must consider.

 

[Saj]

Do you genuinely think that the Wasims, the Waqars, the McGraths would have had the same success today?

Millions of cameras, no ball tampering, small boundaries, heavy bats, modern day inventive batters, these are all the facts we must consider.

Yes, absolutely.

They were legends.

Legend status spans generations.

 

[Bilal7]

Terms like “stats padder” mean absolutely nothing. It is a new invention that has zero substance.

Every quality batsman is a “stats padder”. Every batsman who has maintained a high average could have sacrificed that average for a higher SR.

Saeed Anwar averaged 39 @80. In the same era, Jayasuriya averaged 32 @90.

Does that mean Saeed Anwar was a selfish stats padder who wanted to maintain a high average? Absolutely not.

He was a quality opener who had a different role than Jayasuriya and had different traits as a batsman.

Imam is averaging 50 @90 in the last two years. He has helped Pakistan post and chase 300+ totals which has not been the norm for Pakistan over the years.

Pakistan’s perception as a poor chasing team has changed over the last couple of years and Imam has played a significant role in altering that perception.

Pakistan’s top-order has been a mess for as long we can remember and losing both openers in the first 5 overs has always been the norm for Pakistan until Fakhar, Imam and Babar occupied the top three positions. This is Imam’s impact.

It is absolutely absurd to suggest an opener who is averaging 50 @90 in ODI cricket is somehow a hurdle for his team.

It seems like for today’s fans, the lower your average, the better the team player you are because a high average creates the perception that you are playing for yourself rather than the team.

Thankfully, Don Bradman played Test cricket before the age of social media, PakPassion and Cricinfo Statsguru. Otherwise, he would get criticized for being a stats padder and how he took X number of balls to get from 80 to 100 which shows he was playing for his milestone and not the team cause.

Ironically, it takes Imam-ul-Haq to make you appreciate the OG '50 average, 90 SR' opener, Hashim Amla.

Good post, well deserved POTW.

 

[ElRaja]

1. bilateral odi series in previous eras (pre 2015 pbly) invariably involved first-strength teams, and losses were tolerated far less than today. the odi bilateral format might as well be akin to reserve team games now.

2. saeed anwars odi exploits were the icing on the cake of his overall career, the foundation of his brilliance is predicated on his test record, if you were around in that era that u know his 188* against india, or his hundred in Brisbane were as much a part of his legacy. anwar would have no where near the respect he commands if he was mot the best opener of his era at test level.

3. yes, information is more easily available, but the fact is imam is somewhat under rated cos he was only excelled in the least important format in the game. if he rocks up and scores two hundreds at the world cup, no one will under rate him.

i remember growing up in 90s and i remember every single player getting hell, from match fixing, to being criticised for playing dumb, to cracking under pressure, but in hindsight no one is really gonna poo poo retired players like active players cos it doesnt make sense

some good points, but generally misses the mark on a few others.

 

[Mamoon]

1. bilateral odi series in previous eras (pre 2015 pbly) invariably involved first-strength teams, and losses were tolerated far less than today. the odi bilateral format might as well be akin to reserve team games now.

2. saeed anwars odi exploits were the icing on the cake of his overall career, the foundation of his brilliance is predicated on his test record, if you were around in that era that u know his 188* against india, or his hundred in Brisbane were as much a part of his legacy. anwar would have no where near the respect he commands if he was mot the best opener of his era at test level.

3. yes, information is more easily available, but the fact is imam is somewhat under rated cos he was only excelled in the least important format in the game. if he rocks up and scores two hundreds at the world cup, no one will under rate him.

i remember growing up in 90s and i remember every single player getting hell, from match fixing, to being criticised for playing dumb, to cracking under pressure, but in hindsight no one is really gonna poo poo retired players like active players cos it doesnt make sense

some good points, but generally misses the mark on a few others.

Disagree with Saeed’s legacy as a Test player as far as the common fan is concerned. ODI cricket reached its peak in Pakistan after the 1992 World Cup.

Your regular fan was massively invested in ODIs and the Sharjah Cups and ODI tri-series and other tournaments as opposed to Test matches.

People say Test cricket is dying now but for your average Pakistani supporter, Test cricket had already started to die out in the 90s and ODIs were by far the more popular format at the time. Obviously, winning the 1992 World Cup played a massive role.

Saeed was a great Test opener, but his performances against India in Sharjah Cups and the iconic 194 defined his career more so than his exploits in Test cricket.

90s Pakistani players were criticized more for match-fixing allegations but they got away with a lot of mediocre performances on the pitch.

For example, they kept losing almost every single home Test series from 1995 onwards but they didn’t receive anywhere near the level of criticism that is dished out today.

 

[ElRaja]

Disagree with Saeed’s legacy as a Test player as far as the common fan is concerned. ODI cricket reached its peak in Pakistan after the 1992 World Cup.

Your regular fan was massively invested in ODIs and the Sharjah Cups and ODI tri-series and other tournaments as opposed to Test matches.

People say Test cricket is dying now but for your average Pakistani supporter, Test cricket had already started to die out in the 90s and ODIs were by far the more popular format at the time. Obviously, winning the 1992 World Cup played a massive role.

Saeed was a great Test opener, but his performances against India in Sharjah Cups and the iconic 194 defined his career more so than his exploits in Test cricket.

90s Pakistani players were criticized more for match-fixing allegations but they got away with a lot of mediocre performances on the pitch.

For example, they kept losing almost every single home Test series from 1995 onwards but they didn’t receive anywhere near the level of criticism that is dished out today.

my experiences were different to yours then, i remember kids following every home test match and talking about it in school, i remember listening to it on the radio in the van that used to pick and drop me from school. sure its viewership was lower, but the most lauded players of that era were dual-format players.

its like Mohammad sami, who had an excellent odi record for a lot of his career, but rarely got the respect during his playing career despite odis having more importance in the era he played in.

the players of that era were criticised a lot too, however it was partially blanketed under match fixing assumptions, or its lost to history as fans didnt have a means of recording it like forums or social media comments.

babar as a modern player has far less criticism than a lot of players of that era because he is prolific and effective, the fundamental truth is that the era of late 80s and to mid 90s players may not have produced many wins but produced more multi-format world-class players than the last 25 odd years.

wasim, waqar, inzi, saeed, saqlain, yousuf, shoaib debuted between 87 and 97 i think. babar, rizwan, shaheen and arguably saeed ajmal in post 2000 debuts. that's 7 guys in 10 years, versus very roughly 4 in almost a quarter of a century.

so modern Pakistani players are not rated as highly as that era, yes, but because individually they are not as good as the crop that debuted when we started watching the game.

 

[Ab Fan]

Ironically, it takes Imam-ul-Haq to make you appreciate the OG '50 average, 90 SR' opener, Hashim Amla.

Good post, well deserved POTW.

Amla has maintained that combination by performing vs top teams mostly, albeit in bilaterals but nevertheless top 8 teams.

Imam's stats are highly skewed due to runs vs minnows and associates nation.

 

[shamaan]

Amla has maintained that combination by performing vs top teams mostly, albeit in bilaterals but nevertheless top 8 teams.

Imam's stats are highly skewed due to runs vs minnows and associates nation.

Imaam averages are pretty decent baring New Zealand and and England.

 

[Yk313]

An excellent, well-articulated, thought-provoking post on how we are (mis) judging modern-day batters from [MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION] is this week's choice for POTW.

Congratulations!


http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/s...e-undervalued-due-to-microanalysis&p=11804943

Thanks! Readily available nature of data and *benchmarking*.

Imam (or anyone else for that matter) being benchmarked against contemporaries and likewise for Saeed or anyone else from earlier times.

 

[pakistani pride]

Terms like “stats padder” mean absolutely nothing. It is a new invention that has zero substance.

Every quality batsman is a “stats padder”. Every batsman who has maintained a high average could have sacrificed that average for a higher SR.

Saeed Anwar averaged 39 @80. In the same era, Jayasuriya averaged 32 @90.

Does that mean Saeed Anwar was a selfish stats padder who wanted to maintain a high average? Absolutely not.

He was a quality opener who had a different role than Jayasuriya and had different traits as a batsman.

Imam is averaging 50 @90 in the last two years. He has helped Pakistan post and chase 300+ totals which has not been the norm for Pakistan over the years.

Pakistan’s perception as a poor chasing team has changed over the last couple of years and Imam has played a significant role in altering that perception.

Pakistan’s top-order has been a mess for as long we can remember and losing both openers in the first 5 overs has always been the norm for Pakistan until Fakhar, Imam and Babar occupied the top three positions. This is Imam’s impact.

It is absolutely absurd to suggest an opener who is averaging 50 @90 in ODI cricket is somehow a hurdle for his team.

It seems like for today’s fans, the lower your average, the better the team player you are because a high average creates the perception that you are playing for yourself rather than the team.

Thankfully, Don Bradman played Test cricket before the age of social media, PakPassion and Cricinfo Statsguru. Otherwise, he would get criticized for being a stats padder and how he took X number of balls to get from 80 to 100 which shows he was playing for his milestone and not the team cause.

Imam would have averaged 20 at a 50 SR had he played the bowlers Anwar faced in the 90s.

What is so special about Imam, name me one just one single match winning knock in a pressure cooker game?

Who cares if you average 100 when all those soft runs came vs weak teams in JAMODIS.