Sarfraz Ahmed's Strike Rate in Test matches

[Mamoon]

The same style has won many games.

Yes it both wins games and loses games, depending on the context. I am happy with a match-winner/match-loser combo, as opposed to someone who cannot win any game in any context, for example Shafiq.

 

[Finisher]

 

[The_Odd_One]

The most funny thing is that he is not even a big hitter of the ball, yet his SR is next to Warner only.

This shows how good he is with strike rotation. He is being wasted at #6 in ODIs. Must bat at #4.

 

[Citizen4]

The most funny thing is that he is not even a big hitter of the ball, yet his SR is next to Warner only.

This shows how good he is with strike rotation. He is being wasted at #6 in ODIs. Must bat at #4.

our management are not that smart sadly

 

[zulfiqar]

our management are not that smart sadly

I think the other issue is that mgmt is trying to find a finisher. They figure a wicket-keep batsman has been finishing for India all these years, so we might find our own. Moin Khan also used to be our designated "finisher" for a while, so its a concept that PCB is familiar with. If we could find one designated finisher batsman though, surely Sarfaraz would move up the order. Shoaib Malik is the man tasked with rotating strike in the middle overs at the moment.

Sarfaraz moving up wouldn't solve our main problems though, which are:

1. Lack of quick run-getters at the top of the order
2. Lack of power hitters lower in the order
3. Fielding

 

[srh]

I think the other issue is that mgmt is trying to find a finisher. They figure a wicket-keep batsman has been finishing for India all these years, so we might find our own. Moin Khan also used to be our designated "finisher" for a while, so its a concept that PCB is familiar with. If we could find one designated finisher batsman though, surely Sarfaraz would move up the order. Shoaib Malik is the man tasked with rotating strike in the middle overs at the moment.

Sarfaraz moving up wouldn't solve our main problems though, which are:

1. Lack of quick run-getters at the top of the order
2. Lack of power hitters lower in the order
3. Fielding

What about Lack of power hitters as openers? aka lack of Sharjeel Khan?

 

[Citizen4]

I think the other issue is that mgmt is trying to find a finisher. They figure a wicket-keep batsman has been finishing for India all these years, so we might find our own. Moin Khan also used to be our designated "finisher" for a while, so its a concept that PCB is familiar with. If we could find one designated finisher batsman though, surely Sarfaraz would move up the order. Shoaib Malik is the man tasked with rotating strike in the middle overs at the moment.

Sarfaraz moving up wouldn't solve our main problems though, which are:

1. Lack of quick run-getters at the top of the order
2. Lack of power hitters lower in the order
3. Fielding

the previous management tried it and failed, Sarfraz will never be successful below 5 as a hitter, it is a proven fact that his best position is in the middle order as an accumulator.
Management moved him down just to accomodate Hafeez, that disturbed the team balance.
Yamin should have been selected for the CT team, he is in form, he can be the solution for the lower order. He can hit big and also find gaps to hit fours even in death overs, he can be used as the 4th seamer.
But seniority culture, politics and favoritism will never allow the best possible combination to be selected. The selection of Umar and Azhar again is the proof of that, to top it off they selected Zakir who had no form in List A cricket, but was the 2nd highest scorer of last QeA trophy, they selected him for Odi based on 4-day cricket form. Fahim Ashraf is also a mediocre bowler. We need guys like Yamin and Talat in the team right now, but it seems unlikely that they get selected. The current management dont trust the new guys, it is clear at this point. Fakhar didnt even get an Odi in the last series. He can give us a good start with good strike rate.But it seems unlikely that he'll open in CT now.

 

[Bilal7]

Needs a breakout series where he dominates with the bat consistently to become a world class batsman and Pakistan's best keeper-batsman ever. He adds a different dimension to our team, great character and great person, MashAllah.

 

[Bilal7]

Yes it both wins games and loses games, depending on the context. I am happy with a match-winner/match-loser combo, as opposed to someone who cannot win any game in any context, for example Shafiq.

Nearly won us a test match in Australia. Give him some respect, especially after you were campaigning for his reintroduction into the ODI team.

 

[ahmedwaqas92]

His haphazard approach to batting predictably cost Pakistan last year on our overseas tours. Played a key role in our defeats and less than a key role in our wins. However, in favorable conditions, he has been a genuine asset. A proper game-changer in Asia and on Asian style surfaces.

I think everyone, including his die hard fans will agree that Sarfraz will not end up as some ATG but that doesn't mean that he can't be an extremely important cog in the lineup in favorable conditions which is of great value in itself as most test matches we play are in Asia.

His technique and style of play will never yield us much success overseas however if all good players could excel in all conditions then there would be 20-30 more ATGs at the moment than what we currently have.

A solid player and a game changer in Asian conditions while the best keeping alternative we have for overseas games.

 

[msb314]

High SR or not - glad this guy finally got a half century.

Still not good enough for Test cricket as a batsman - needs to make bigger scores and perform under pressure.

 

[msb314]

Nearly won us a test match in Australia. Give him some respect, especially after you were campaigning for his reintroduction into the ODI team.

At this point - he is a far better ODI batsman than a Test batsman.

 

[Mamoon]

I think everyone, including his die hard fans will agree that Sarfraz will not end up as some ATG but that doesn't mean that he can't be an extremely important cog in the lineup in favorable conditions which is of great value in itself as most test matches we play are in Asia.

His technique and style of play will never yield us much success overseas however if all good players could excel in all conditions then there would be 20-30 more ATGs at the moment than what we currently have.

A solid player and a game changer in Asian conditions while the best keeping alternative we have for overseas games.

More than the lack of runs in England, NZ and Australia, it was the manner of his dismissals and the way he approached his batting that was disappointing. He made no concerned effort to adapt and grind it out, kept getting out in the same fashion after 20-25 runs.

 

[Mamoon]

At this point - he is a far better ODI batsman than a Test batsman.

He is talking about Shafiq.

 

[Mamoon]

Nearly won us a test match in Australia. Give him some respect, especially after you were campaigning for his reintroduction into the ODI team.

There is a limit to everything. It has been 7 years now and he is almost 33, yet he remains a one-innings-per-series merchant. The straw that broke the camels back was the way he failed at number 3 after getting promoted and then was quickly demoted back to number 6. At this stage of his career, he should have been at the same level as Azhar, and ready to lead the batting after Younis and Misbah. However, it seems like he will continue to be carried by his teammates, producing a random innings every now and then and failing more than 50% of the time.

 

[New Yorker]

I think the other issue is that mgmt is trying to find a finisher. They figure a wicket-keep batsman has been finishing for India all these years, so we might find our own. Moin Khan also used to be our designated "finisher" for a while, so its a concept that PCB is familiar with. If we could find one designated finisher batsman though, surely Sarfaraz would move up the order. Shoaib Malik is the man tasked with rotating strike in the middle overs at the moment.

Sarfaraz moving up wouldn't solve our main problems though, which are:

1. Lack of quick run-getters at the top of the order
2. Lack of power hitters lower in the order
3. Fielding

Our problem, plainly speaking, is that we don't get enough runs. If we have a faster accumulator in the middle like Sarfraz, we could go into the slog overs with 20 more runs from his bat alone. And being able to score fast in the middle over has all kinds of other benefits; it forces the opposition to use up the overs allocated to their death bowlers.

Has anyone has looked into how strike rotation affects the SR also of the batsman at the other end?

 

[New Yorker]

High SR or not - glad this guy finally got a half century.

Still not good enough for Test cricket as a batsman - needs to make bigger scores and perform under pressure.

Plenty good enough as a wicket keeper batsman captain; the best wicket keeper batsman Pakistan ever had
by many measures.

Coming in to score at Sr 80 when every other batsmen including your captain is sitting still is performance under pressure. The innings was going nowhere before Sarfraz walked in.

A tad overwrought to complain about his inability to perform outside of Asia. He averaged 56 SR 80 in Australia, with two not out scores, which again suggests that he comes in too late.

 

[msb314]

Plenty good enough as a wicket keeper batsman captain; the best wicket keeper batsman Pakistan ever had
by many measures.

Coming in to score at Sr 80 when every other batsmen including your captain is sitting still is performance under pressure. The innings was going nowhere before Sarfraz walked in.

A tad overwrought to complain about his inability to perform outside of Asia. He averaged 56 SR 80 in Australia, with two not out scores, which again suggests that he comes in too late.

It was a good innings but Sarfraz needs to be more consistent - it has been almost 2 years since he last scored a Test half century (vs SL in 2015).

I know he comes in at no. 7 but he had a fantastic 2014/15 when he averaged 50 with the bat. His standards have fallen a lot since.

 

[msb314]

He is talking about Shafiq.

Okay

 

[Faisalsq092]

It was a good innings but Sarfraz needs to be more consistent - it has been almost 2 years since he last scored a Test half century (vs SL in 2015).

I know he comes in at no. 7 but he had a fantastic 2014/15 when he averaged 50 with the bat. His standards have fallen a lot since.

Well he did score a couple of fifties in the West Indies Home series last year and two more in Australia. Add to that there were some very combative 40s as well. So it isn't that he has gone completely missing. I think he had done his share of work.

 

[New Yorker]

It was a good innings but Sarfraz needs to be more consistent - it has been almost 2 years since he last scored a Test half century (vs SL in 2015).

I know he comes in at no. 7 but he had a fantastic 2014/15 when he averaged 50 with the bat. His standards have fallen a lot since.

What are you talking about? He scored a 72* and 59* in Australia. Also racked up a 54 and a 43 on that tour. Maybe you are thinking about his ODI record, in which he has not passed 20 in 4 innings, but that includes three not-out scores in the 20s. Again, he comes in much too late.

 

[Arsalan Pro]

He is breath of fresh air in a team filled with tuk tuks.

 

[Arsalan Pro]

Brilliant player and a game changer.

 

[New Yorker]

More than the lack of runs in England, NZ and Australia, it was the manner of his dismissals and the way he approached his batting that was disappointing. He made no concerned effort to adapt and grind it out, kept getting out in the same fashion after 20-25 runs.

He didn't lack for runs in Australia. Ave 56, two 50+ not outs, including a 79*. '20-25 runs
and out' is a gross mis-portrayal. You can fault him for not grinding it out at one or two
junctures, but I don't know what more he could have done in the two innings when he
was left stranded. What we have seen over and over again is that he comes in and makes
batting look easy compared to whoever is grinding it out, then he may get out, but often
times he just runs out of partners. I don't know if he is an ATG but I do feel we have not had
better Pakistani wickies all things accounted for...I also think he will produce some memorable
innings overseas. Can score quickly and fluently against pace as we have seen recently, if
anything i think his technique against spin is a bit overrated, as [MENTION=79064]MMHS[/MENTION] so well laid out some
time ago...

 

[Mamoon]

He didn't lack for runs in Australia. Ave 56, two 50+ not outs, including a 79*. '20-25 runs
and out' is a gross mis-portrayal. You can fault him for not grinding it out at one or two
junctures, but I don't know what more he could have done in the two innings when he
was left stranded. What we have seen over and over again is that he comes in and makes
batting look easy compared to whoever is grinding it out, then he may get out, but often
times he just runs out of partners. I don't know if he is an ATG but I do feel we have not had
better Pakistani wickies all things accounted for...I also think he will produce some memorable
innings overseas. Can score quickly and fluently against pace as we have seen recently, if
anything i think his technique against spin is a bit overrated, as [MENTION=79064]MMHS[/MENTION] so well laid out some
time ago...

I don't give much value to dead rubber knocks. Yes he played well in Brisbane, and overall he was better than he was in England, but the main disappointment for me as I have stated already, was the fact in both England and Australia, he almost always looked good. Along with Azhar, he was one of the two batsmen who never looked troubled by the conditions. Sarfraz's temperament inhibited his run scoring last year, and he showed little urgency to grind it out. No doubt the best WK batsman we have and probably ever had; he has added tremendous value to the team since his resurgence.

 

[dildildalwalla]

A good SR but he really needs to work on more than cameo innings.

 

[New Yorker]

I don't give much value to dead rubber knocks. Yes he played well in Brisbane, and overall he was better than he was in England, but the main disappointment for me as I have stated already, was the fact in both England and Australia, he almost always looked good. Along with Azhar, he was one of the two batsmen who never looked troubled by the conditions. Sarfraz's temperament inhibited his run scoring last year, and he showed little urgency to grind it out. No doubt the best WK batsman we have and probably ever had; he has added tremendous value to the team since his resurgence.

Well give as much as value as you like but lets acknowledge that these knocks actually happened. Your posts suggested a string of Test matches, dead rubber or not, in which he never passed 25.

 

[boomboom6]

He's avg. 51 in last 3 years in 28 tests with a SR 2nd only to Warner. Man if only we can maximize his talent.

 

[Arsalan Pro]

He's avg. 51 in last 3 years in 28 tests with a SR 2nd only to Warner. Man if only we can maximize his talent.

We can, give him the No.4/5 spot after Misbah and Younis retire and he will score big hundreds.

 

[boomboom6]

Our problem, plainly speaking, is that we don't get enough runs. If we have a faster accumulator in the middle like Sarfraz, we could go into the slog overs with 20 more runs from his bat alone. And being able to score fast in the middle over has all kinds of other benefits; it forces the opposition to use up the overs allocated to their death bowlers.

Has anyone has looked into how strike rotation affects the SR also of the batsman at the other end?

Sarf should bat at 4 in ODIs & T20s.

 

[boomboom6]

We can, give him the No.4/5 spot after Misbah and Younis retire and he will score big hundreds.

Yeah may be batting higher in test line up will make him value his wicket more. He's a stud batsman for us in all 3 formats. Just feel though in tests the highest he can come at is 6 due to wicket keeping duties. At 5 we'd be asking him to bat for long and then keep. Lot to ask. 6 in tests will be great. If Amir & Yasir can improve with the bat, it'll give Sarf more security.

He should be the permanent #4 in ODIs & T20s. His middle overs strike rotation will immediately boost our stagnant batting. I hope he realizes this and stops wasting himself at 7.

 

[boomboom6]

I think everyone, including his die hard fans will agree that Sarfraz will not end up as some ATG but that doesn't mean that he can't be an extremely important cog in the lineup in favorable conditions which is of great value in itself as most test matches we play are in Asia.

His technique and style of play will never yield us much success overseas however if all good players could excel in all conditions then there would be 20-30 more ATGs at the moment than what we currently have.

A solid player and a game changer in Asian conditions while the best keeping alternative we have for overseas games.

He's on a trajectory to be a Pak great with the bat and if he plays some memorable innings in the middle order in big tourneys, he can end up as an ATG.

Infact he hasn't gotten the recognition that he deserves last 3 years since his real arrival to the team. He's been lowkey magnificent !!

 

[boomboom6]

Needs a breakout series where he dominates with the bat consistently to become a world class batsman and Pakistan's best keeper-batsman ever. He adds a different dimension to our team, great character and great person, MashAllah.

Sarf did just that in Eng in ODIs last summer. Highest scorer, avg. only 2nd to Root, with better SR. The problem of course is the others around him. Infact he had one of the most incredible individual series for a Pak/Asian batsman in England.

Then in Australia, avgd. 57 in 3 tests with a high SR. Again at the position he bats in tests, it will be very difficult to score big 100s especially given how subpar our tail is. But he's made the most of it so far.

He is most certainly a terrific bat for us right now.

 

[Mamoon]

Well give as much as value as you like but lets acknowledge that these knocks actually happened. Your posts suggested a string of Test matches, dead rubber or not, in which he never passed 25.

I was mostly referring to the England Test series where Sarfraz's lack of runs hurt us. To be honest, his first innings in Brisbane slipped my mind partly due to the fact that we were completely out of the game at that point and it appeared inconsequential, and he followed that up with a low score in the second innings where we pushed Australia to the limit. Overall, I'd say he could have done more considering the fact that he wasn't troubled by the conditions. Not as disappointing as England though.

 

[JibranAnsari]

He needs to score 100s , useful knocks but gets out when set.

 

[SaadAliG]

More than the lack of runs in England, NZ and Australia, it was the manner of his dismissals and the way he approached his batting that was disappointing. He made no concerned effort to adapt and grind it out, kept getting out in the same fashion after 20-25 runs.

Stupid and ignorant as always. He was the highest run scorer in ODI series against England. Averaged 57 in tests against Australia while rarely got a chance to bat. He's batting at number 7 in tests mind you. Does not need to be the highest run scorer at all at that number. He's contributing far more than he's expected to at that number.

 

[SaadAliG]

He needs to score 100s , useful knocks but gets out when set.

Batting at number 7, yeah. He must score atleast 3 hundreds a series like every other number 7 does.

 

[JibranAnsari]

Batting at number 7, yeah. He must score atleast 3 hundreds a series like every other number 7 does.

He had a chance to score hundred in the last innings he played and quite a few chances before too..his good sr means that he can actually score hundreds at number 7. He isnt usually the last man out.

 

[Saj]

Very unselfish batsman.

Always bats for the team rather than his own landmarks or average.

 

[Arsalan Pro]

Very unselfish batsman.

Always bats for the team rather than his own landmarks or average.

Totally agreed, also unlike our other batsmen, he sacrifices his own batting position to fit in other players.

 

[Arsalan Pro]

I think everyone, including his die hard fans will agree that Sarfraz will not end up as some ATG but that doesn't mean that he can't be an extremely important cog in the lineup in favorable conditions which is of great value in itself as most test matches we play are in Asia.

His technique and style of play will never yield us much success overseas however if all good players could excel in all conditions then there would be 20-30 more ATGs at the moment than what we currently have.

A solid player and a game changer in Asian conditions while the best keeping alternative we have for overseas games.

He has succeeded in overseas conditions in ODIs for sure and last year is a proof of that, where he was the top run getter against England in England among all batsmen.

In Tests his average against Australia was over 56, which is extremely good and was probably the second highest after Azhar among all Pakistani batsmen.

That said, his last 2-3 years in international cricket have been so good that one can claim he will be a future ATG.

 

[Mamoon]

Stupid and ignorant as always. He was the highest run scorer in ODI series against England. Averaged 57 in tests against Australia while rarely got a chance to bat. He's batting at number 7 in tests mind you. Does not need to be the highest run scorer at all at that number. He's contributing far more than he's expected to at that number.

I don't think I have the energy and time to spoon-feed you. However, I do feel sorry for your inability to comprehend basic English, and for the fact that you wasted 10 seconds of your life to remind me that 'He was the highest run scorer in ODI series against England'. Once again, I am not talking about his ODI form which has been very good since last year.

However, his Test form was not great last year, especially in England. He didn't cross 50 once, and he kept on throwing his wicket away, which cannot be excused because he bats at number 7. We have heard this rubbish about different players for years now. Throwing your wicket away and not capitalizing on your starts is not acceptable at any batting position. It has nothing to do with 'does not need to be the highest run scorer', but with the fact that it is the duty of every batsman to score runs. As I have stated earlier, the fact that he looked good at the crease but didn't get any big scores was all the more disappointing. He was clearly not struggling to adapt to the conditions like Younis for example. His batting did cost the team in the England Test series. period. As far as Australia is concerned, he started well but choked like the others at the MCG, and I don't give much value to dead rubber knocks.

Before firing posts and making jibes, it certainly wouldn't hurt to take two minutes to understand the context of the discussion.