Shahid Afridi versus Abdul Razzaq

[waqas.farooq]

Shahid Afridi and Abdul Razzaq are one of the best LOIs all-rounders Pakistan ever had. When on song both can win match single handedly either with Bat or Ball. What if you have to choose one? Who it will be?

Abdul Razaaq

A versatile all-rounder who can bat and bowl at every position in the team. When he started he was a genuine quick but lost his pace due to fitness problems. He can be defensive when needed and can switch gears at any moment. Once he decides to go after bowlers he can be one of the most destructive batsmen with cleanest hitting ability. He is bang bang for some reason. His services has been grossly underutilized by the Pakistan team especially during twilight of his career. He has not been used to the full potential and continues to be sidelined.

Shahid Afridi

Fans Favourite for thrill and energy he causes his surroundings. He was picked as bowler but announced himself with boom boom "the quickest 100". His 36 ball hundred was such that it will have everlasting impact on his career. Everybody including himself forgot that he was primarily a leg spin. Though over the years his more failures than success with the bat enforced him to revive his prime trade that is bowling still his fans fancy his destructive innings with bat which are few and far between.


Their Overall stat comparison shows

.... Mat Runs HS Bat Av 100 Wkts BBI Bowl Av 5s

A.R 265 5080 112 29.70 3 269 6/35 31.83 3
S.A 359 7303 124 23.48 6 358 7/12 33.72 9


Performance against top 7

. . . Mat Runs Hs Bat av 100 Wkts BBI Bowl Av 5s

A.R 227 4429 112 28.57 2 220 5/31 34.10 2

S.H 298 5946 109 22.52 5 263 7/12 38.57 4



Their performance in won matches

. . . Mat Runs Hs Bat av 100 Wkts BBI Bowl Av 5s

A.R 145 2726 112 40.08 3 176 6/35 24.92 2

S.H 200 4699 124 29.74 5 260 7/12 24.60 9


Interesting Facts

• Afridi has won 30 MoM awards, however 12 of those came against teams other than top 7. He has 04 Man of tournment awards.
• Afridi has total 9 five wicket hauls of which 5 are against minnows so no surprice that his bowling average is 38.57 against top 7 teams.
• Three times he took 05 wkts and made 50+ in same match.

• Abdul has won 18 MoM awards in total only 3 are against minnows (other than top 7). He has also won 04 Man of tournment awards
• His batting avg in won matches is 40.
• He has played 37 innings while pakistan won chasing. In those 37 innings he has scored 1033 @ Avg of 68.86 with one 100 and five 50s.

 

[hadi123]

Lala in bowling and fielding, Razzaq in baatting

 

[hur rizvi]

Razzaq was much more consistent, only thing afridi has an edge over him is his feilding...

Razzaq had the ability to finish games which afridi lacks and razzaq was more responsible

 

[waqas.farooq]

Lala in bowling and fielding, Razzaq in baatting

But if u look at their bowling performances Razzaq has done slightly better. Afridi is good only on spin friendly wickets.

 

[hur rizvi]

Razzaq is probably the best All-rounder in ODIS we have produced


Razzaq as an ODI all-rounder is comparable to Imran Khan

 

[hur rizvi]

But if u look at their bowling performances Razzaq has done slightly better. Afridi is good only on spin friendly wickets.

Looks like he has just seen razzaq recently...

Razzaq was a monster ODI bowler at his peak

 

[Sidilicious]

Personally, I feel Razzaq is a better performer.

Afiridi will perform once in 10 matches. But when he performs, he will win you the game. As it can be seen from the stats that bowling wise Afridi and Razzaq have similar averages, wickets/matches and runs/matches but Afiridi has more 5 wicket hauls and 100s. So, when Afiridi performs Pakistan wins. Unfortunately, that (afiridi performing) does not happen very often.

Razzaq on the other hand, is a more consistent performer. He will not win you a lot of games single-handedly, but is also less likely to have hopeless performances (he does have them, but way fewer than Afridi).

If Pak were playing in the subcontinent, I would play Afridi, otherwise, I would play Razzaq.

Having said that, I would not play Hafeez and Afridi in the same team. I would go for Hafeez over Afridi.

 

[Down2Earth]

Razzaq was always the superior player. A genuine match winner

 

[W63L35]

But if u look at their bowling performances Razzaq has done slightly better. Afridi is good only on spin friendly wickets.

Is their a reason you did not list batting Strike Rates and Bowling E/R in the OP?

Let me explain why both are extremely important in LOIs....... may be more important than batting and bowling Average/SR.

In LOIs team scoring more runs in given number of overs (50 or 20) wins.... it does not matter how many wickets each team lost.

Team A batting first scores 301 runs for the loss of NO wickets.... in 50 overs.
Team B batting 2nd scores 302 runs for the loss of 9 wickets..... in 49.5 overs.

Guess which team wins?

Now you'll have two openers from the team batting first (A) whose batting average will be phenomenal but you'll have 11 batsmen from team B whose S/R will be better. Similarly bowling E/R is reverse of batting S/R. Less the E/R, the less oppsite team is able to score ... in allotted # of overs!

So redoing your stats in OP......see the charts below..


Let's take Afridi's overall batting SR (114.64) vs Razzaq's overall batting S/R (81.25) and let's say 11 Afridis are playing vs 11 Razzaqs.
Afridis batsmen will score 344 runs in their 50 overs.
Razzaqs batsmen will score only 244 runs in their 50 overs.
Afridis will by 100 runs...... (if you ignore batting average).

Then let's take Afridi's overall bowling Econ (4.61) vs Razzaq's bowling E/R (4.69) and let's say 11 Afridis are playing vs 11 Razzaqs.
Afridis bowlers will give away 230 runs in their 50 overs.
Razzaqs bowlers will give away 235 runs in their 50 overs.
Afridis will by 5 runs...... (if you ignore bowling S/R).


So you see how important batting S/R and bowling E/R are?

.

 

[hur rizvi]

Is their a reason you did not list batting Strike Rates and Bowling E/R in the OP?

Let me explain why both are extremely important in LOIs....... may be more important than batting and bowling Average/SR.

In LOIs team scoring more runs in given number of overs (50 or 20) wins.... it does not matter how many wickets each team lost.

Team A batting first scores 301 runs for the loss of NO wickets.... in 50 overs.
Team B batting 2nd scores 302 runs for the loss of 9 wickets..... in 49.5 overs.

Guess which team wins?

Now you'll have two openers from the team batting first (A) whose batting average will be phenomenal but you'll have 11 batsmen from team B whose S/R will be better. Similarly bowling E/R is reverse of batting S/R. Less the E/R, the less oppsite team is able to score ... in allotted # of overs!

So redoing your stats in OP......see the charts below..


Let's take Afridi's overall batting SR (114.64) vs Razzaq's overall batting S/R (81.25) and let's say 11 Afridis are playing vs 11 Razzaqs.
Afridis batsmen will score 344 runs in their 50 overs.
Razzaqs batsmen will score only 244 runs in their 50 overs.
Afridis will by 100 runs...... (if you ignore batting average).

Then let's take Afridi's overall bowling Econ (4.61) vs Razzaq's bowling E/R (4.69) and let's say 11 Afridis are playing vs 11 Razzaqs.
Afridis bowlers will give away 230 runs in their 50 overs.
Razzaqs bowlers will give away 235 runs in their 50 overs.
Afridis will by 5 runs...... (if you ignore bowling S/R).


So you see how important batting S/R and bowling E/R are?

.

How can you ignore bowling and batting averages?? Razzaq better on both fronts

What's the possibility of 11 Afridi's batting 50 overs??

S/R are important but Razzaq himself has a very decent S/R of 82, it would have counted if Razzaq had a bad S/R

 

[Sidilicious]

How can you ignore bowling and batting averages?? Razzaq better on both fronts

What's the possibility of 11 Afridi's batting 50 overs??

S/R are important but Razzaq himself has a very decent S/R of 82, it would have counted if Razzaq had a bad S/R

Good point.

An Afiridi innings lasts approx 19 balls, and scores about 21.7 runs. So, 11 Afridis in 50 overs will last about 35 overs, and score about 240.

A Razzaq innigs lasts about 27 balls, and also scores about 22.2 runs. So 11 Razzaqs will last just about the whole 50 overs and score about 250.

I would go for Razzaq.

Make your own opinion.

 

[MR__KHAN__JI]

Razzaq by a distance.

 

[W63L35]

Good point.

An Afiridi innings lasts approx 19 balls, and scores about 21.7 runs. So, 11 Afridis in 50 overs will last about 35 overs, and score about 240.

A Razzaq innigs lasts about 27 balls, and also scores about 22.2 runs. So 11 Razzaqs will last just about the whole 50 overs and score about 250.

I would go for Razzaq.

Make your own opinion.

Good calculation...... but you can not deny the fact that over the career....
Afridi scores 5946 runs in 5373 balls.
Razzaq scores 5080 runs in 6252 balls.....
and ODI cricket is all about S/R where these two batted (late order # 7-9).



Now... do that same calculation for their bowling!

 

[W63L35]

Razzaq by a distance.

How many miles?

 

[Mamoon]

Afridi fan boys feeling insecure.

 

[hur rizvi]

Good point.

An Afiridi innings lasts approx 19 balls, and scores about 21.7 runs. So, 11 Afridis in 50 overs will last about 35 overs, and score about 240.

A Razzaq innigs lasts about 27 balls, and also scores about 22.2 runs. So 11 Razzaqs will last just about the whole 50 overs and score about 250.

I would go for Razzaq.

Make your own opinion.

And at E/R off 4.61 Afridi would concede 231 runs

At E/R of 4.69 Razzaq would concede 235 runs

5 Razzaq's would easily defend what 11 Razzaqs would score and because of a better S/R and Average he's more likely to get more wickets...

 

[hur rizvi]

Good calculation...... but you can not deny the fact that over the career....
Afridi scores 5946 runs in 5373 balls.
Razzaq scores 5080 runs in 6252 balls.....
and ODI cricket is all about S/R where these two batted (late order # 7-9).



Now... do that same calculation for their bowling!

In bowling Razzaq is ahead on 2/3 fronts i-e S/R and Average.

Difference in E/R=0.08 where as difference in S/R= 3.2 balls Difference in Averages=~2 runs

 

[pakistanigoneaussie]

AR easily he rescued Pakistan many times with bat and ball. People like to forget he got 3 top order wickets in the t20 final too


I know I have a bit of a bias because AR is my favorite player but I'm sure most would agree

 

[Sidilicious]

Good calculation...... but you can not deny the fact that over the career....
Afridi scores 5946 runs in 5373 balls.
Razzaq scores 5080 runs in 6252 balls.....
and ODI cricket is all about S/R where these two batted (late order # 7-9).



Now... do that same calculation for their bowling!

No, you are not entirely correct.

If they were a part of a strong batting line-up, then I think your point could be defended. Unfortunately, Pakistan's batting line up is not that strong, and it the duty of the all-rounders to do what is needed, and not just hit out.

In the 2011 WC, even India (which was without a shadow of doubt the strongest batting line up) decided to go with Raina rather than Yusuf Pathan, just because Raina could last longer.

 

[Mamoon]

Regardless of the stats, Razzaq never gave that feeling which Afridi does - the feeling that he is going to get out any time.

Afridi has never looked secure while batting and even when is hitting them big, everyone knows his wicket is around the corner.

Razzaq's hitting was much more clean and he was a lot more sensible in approach.

In terms of bowling, Razzaq was an excellent bowler early in his career but regressed badly. He is now an ordinary trundler.

Afridi is much more threatening with the ball.

 

[hur rizvi]

Regardless of the stats, Razzaq never gave that feeling which Afridi does - the feeling that he is going to get out any time.

Afridi has never looked secure while batting and even when is hitting them big, everyone knows his wicket is around the corner.

Razzaq's hitting was much more clean and he was a lot more sensible in approach.

In terms of bowling, Razzaq was an excellent bowler early in his career but regressed badly. He is now an ordinary trundler.

Afridi is much more threatening with the ball.

Afridi is much more threatening with the ball now, but over the course of their whole careers Razzaq is a much better bowler

 

[pakistanigoneaussie]

Afridi fan boys feeling insecure.

I remember you confessing to be one

 

[Mamoon]

I remember you confessing to be one

I am not a fan boy. But I love to jump on his bandwagon and irk his haters whenever he does well

 

[tahir_dj]

Razzaq was always sent at no 7 or 8 when either he had only few overs left or 2 or 3 wickets left where he had just slog .. and no one appreciated his efforts

as bowling wise he is a genuine medium pacers who the captains failed to utilize properly by not giving him the bowl
you can take his performance against australia in t20 last year where he bowled the last over to prevent australia from winning. and that was the only match he was played
i feel sorry for the guy he is a match winner who should be batting at no 5 minimum.

 

[Canistani Hero]

Razzaq is more consistent, Afridi is a bigger match winner when he comes off

 

[saiyan0312]

razzaq... more consistent and he can have middle performances. he is not just bang or bust and he can finish matches.

 

[IndianWillow]

Afridi would have been a terrific asset had he been part of a stronger batting line up, his S/R are good enough to chase some tall scores. But at an average of 23 in a weak side, he was more often a failure. Afridi at average 30 at S/R 100 would have been a bigger match winner.

 

[leatherface58]

Both are mediocre but Razzaq is more consistent. Razzaq also was pretty good with the ball in his early days. He opened the bowling too IIRC.

 

[akamaka]

Afridi would have been a terrific asset had he been part of a stronger batting line up, his S/R are good enough to chase some tall scores. But at an average of 23 in a weak side, he was more often a failure. Afridi at average 30 at S/R 100 would have been a bigger match winner.

Not even that, Afridi's biggest problem is coming out to bat, side is in trouble and he goes for a six first ball. He did it again last game , in the 16 years he has played he has just never taken responsibility.

Razzaq wins by a big margin. Too bad we made him bat so low down the order.

 

[hur rizvi]

Both are mediocre but Razzaq is more consistent. Razzaq also was pretty good with the ball in his early days. He opened the bowling too IIRC.

Razzaq mediocre???

He was a genuine ODI all-rounder, who could win matches with both Bat and ball

 

[zaid65]

How many miles?

Very smart answer, you are genius.

Never give up, despite being humiliated by everybody.

 

[zaid65]

I remember you confessing to be one

Mamoon, seems to be confused fanboy, keep switching his sides, poor kid

 

[zaid65]

When Afridi fan could not defend his peathetic average in batting and bowling ( especially against top teams), they bring the SR comparison to win the argument.

How low somebody could go? If this could be Sachin vs Afridi argument and Afridi would have better average ( in dreams) and Sachin would have better SR, I was wondering, how they would reacted with Indian fans?

 

[MR__KHAN__JI]

How many miles?

Plenty enough.

Afridi is a poor mans Razzaq. Shame we chose Afridi over Razzaq.....

 

[zaid65]

How low somebody can go, one hand he is giving statement that seniors should be rested for the junior players in Zimbabwe tour and than use his connections in the media to publish this lame news that he is practicing and training for the upcoming Zimbabwe trip.

How many times, you have seen x, y, z player has been in the news regarding practicing for the useless tour?

I have said, he must be drooling to play against Zimbabwe to secure his birth for next 12 months by boosting his average against minnows, surprise surprise!!

Practice shooroh kardi, jym bhee jaatay hain

What a looser!!

 

[zaid65]

Plenty enough.

Afridi is a poor mans Razzaq. Shame we chose Afridi over Razzaq.....

By W35 standard of discussion, he need exact numbers, length of the miles, otherwise he would considered himself victorious in this discussion.

 

[Zaz]

Razzaq easily, he has both a better bowling avge and batting and was more consistent overall

 

[MR__KHAN__JI]

By W35 standard of discussion, he need exact numbers, length of the miles, otherwise he would considered himself victorious in this discussion.

But remember Afridi is not as bad as u make out though. ... He has provided a good service over the years.

 

[zaid65]

Razzaq easily, he has both a better bowling avge and batting and was more consistent overall

One thing Razaq is lacking, his skills to pampers insecure journalists, to feed them , give photo sessions , some even are happy to get pictures and interview of the family members.

If Razaq would have been manipulated, play games and dirty politics, obviously have better looks, he would have been the captain of the Pakistani team.

 

[pakistanigoneaussie]

Is anyone else seeing similarity to BZ's tactics in glorifying Malik and W63's tactics in glorfying Afridi ?

 

[zaid65]

But remember Afridi is not as bad as u make out though. ... He has provided a good service over the years.

If you would have given that many chances to any average player, he would done he same.

You analyze players based on stats not by blanket statements. I could make the same argument about Shaoib Malik, Imran Nazir, Farhat, Younis Khan, ...but when I try to defend them with stats, I would look stupid and ignorant.

 

[zaid65]

Is anyone else seeing similarity to BZ's tactics in glorifying Malik and W63's tactics in glorfying Afridi ?

Exactly!!

I have said several times, both posters use the same tactics to glorify their heros, their useless stats and they both are delusional ( fixed false believes).

 

[cricketfanfirst]

It is a close contest but I prefer Abdur Razzaq. I found his bowling to be very good in his initial years, I still remember some of his spells in Australia against India, Sachin was taming other Pakistani bowlers in that match and he came and bowled a beauty to get rid of him. I remember he has done that to many top batsmen. Also, his hitting is more refined and looks clean. He just appeared to be more consistent than Afridi.

 

[MR__KHAN__JI]

Shahid Afridi and Abdul Razzaq are one of the best LOIs all-rounders Pakistan ever had. When on song both can win match single handedly either with Bat or Ball. What if you have to choose one? Who it will be?

Abdul Razaaq

A versatile all-rounder who can bat and bowl at every position in the team. When he started he was a genuine quick but lost his pace due to fitness problems. He can be defensive when needed and can switch gears at any moment. Once he decides to go after bowlers he can be one of the most destructive batsmen with cleanest hitting ability. He is bang bang for some reason. His services has been grossly underutilized by the Pakistan team especially during twilight of his career. He has not been used to the full potential and continues to be sidelined.

Shahid Afridi

Fans Favourite for thrill and energy he causes his surroundings. He was picked as bowler but announced himself with boom boom "the quickest 100". His 36 ball hundred was such that it will have everlasting impact on his career. Everybody including himself forgot that he was primarily a leg spin. Though over the years his more failures than success with the bat enforced him to revive his prime trade that is bowling still his fans fancy his destructive innings with bat which are few and far between.


Their Overall stat comparison shows

.... Mat Runs HS Bat Av 100 Wkts BBI Bowl Av 5s

A.R 265 5080 112 29.70 3 269 6/35 31.83 3
S.A 359 7303 124 23.48 6 358 7/12 33.72 9


Performance against top 7

. . . Mat Runs Hs Bat av 100 Wkts BBI Bowl Av 5s

A.R 227 4429 112 28.57 2 220 5/31 34.10 2

S.H 298 5946 109 22.52 5 263 7/12 38.57 4



Their performance in won matches

. . . Mat Runs Hs Bat av 100 Wkts BBI Bowl Av 5s

A.R 145 2726 112 40.08 3 176 6/35 24.92 2

S.H 200 4699 124 29.74 5 260 7/12 24.60 9


Interesting Facts

• Afridi has won 30 MoM awards, however 12 of those came against teams other than top 7. He has 04 Man of tournment awards.
• Afridi has total 9 five wicket hauls of which 5 are against minnows so no surprice that his bowling average is 38.57 against top 7 teams.
• Three times he took 05 wkts and made 50+ in same match.

• Abdul has won 18 MoM awards in total only 3 are against minnows (other than top 7). He has also won 04 Man of tournment awards
• His batting avg in won matches is 40.
• He has played 37 innings while pakistan won chasing. In those 37 innings he has scored 1033 @ Avg of 68.86 with one 100 and five 50s.

Can we see the equivalent stats for Hafeez also?

 

[MR__KHAN__JI]

If you would have given that many chances to any average player, he would done he same.

You analyze players based on stats not by blanket statements. I could make the same argument about Shaoib Malik, Imran Nazir, Farhat, Younis Khan, ...but when I try to defend them with stats, I would look stupid and ignorant.

Maybe maybe not.

Afridi HAS performed to the level he has... A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.


With the others you would look stupid... as their stats would suggest so

 

[umerz]

Razzaq was more naturally gifted and consistent however he lacked the hunger that Afridi still has which clearly shows when we look at the fitness levels and attitude on the field of both players

 

[IndianWillow]

Afridi was better on his day, those days were far and few between. Razzaq was better on a typical day of the game.

 

[pakistanigoneaussie]

Razzaq was more naturally gifted and consistent however he lacked the hunger that Afridi still has which clearly shows when we look at the fitness levels and attitude on the field of both players

Disagree, afridi was the more gifted batsman at the very least

 

[jeetu]

Razzaq easily

 

[waqas.farooq]

One thing Razaq is lacking, his skills to pampers insecure journalists, to feed them , give photo sessions , some even are happy to get pictures and interview of the family members.

If Razaq would have been manipulated, play games and dirty politics, obviously have better looks, he would have been the captain of the Pakistani team.

agreed

 

[Navdeep Srivastava]

According to stats , Razzaq easily but Afridi do bring X factor

 

[Mamoon]

Mamoon, seems to be confused fanboy, keep switching his sides, poor kid

I am not a fan boy of any player past or present. I just find your non stop rants against Afridi funny

 

[zaid65]

I am not a fan boy of any player past or present. I just find your non stop rants against Afridi funny

If you consider my valid criticism with logic and reasons as rants, you are closet fan boy

 

[LegendsXI]

Good calculation...... but you can not deny the fact that over the career....
Afridi scores 5946 runs in 5373 balls.
Razzaq scores 5080 runs in 6252 balls.....
and ODI cricket is all about S/R where these two batted (late order # 7-9).



Now... do that same calculation for their bowling!

Irrelevant point again, as Afirid would play more games to play lesser number of balls. Hence in a individual game situation the performances would count for Jack. as they normally do.

Albeit someone with a gold fish IQ can use this biased argument to prove his/her love for a useless player.

 

[Mamoon]

If you consider my valid criticism with logic and reasons as rants, you are closet fan boy

I don't disagree with you. I find your style funny and amusing.

I like you as a poster and you make a lot of sense. But people who make sense here are considered as keyboard warriors and attention seekers.

To earn respect on this forum, just follow others like sheep and over hype mediocre players

 

[Mamoon]

Strike rate without a good average is useless.

In most scenarios, scoring 20 of 10 balls is useless compared to 50 of 50 balls.

 

[Sidilicious]

Black Zero. Biggest Malik fan boy in the world.

ah. checked black zero on wiki. makes sense.

not much aware of superman terminology.

 

[zaid65]

I don't disagree with you. I find your style funny and amusing.

I like you as a poster and you make a lot of sense. But people who make sense here are considered as keyboard warriors and attention seekers.

To earn respect on this forum, just follow others like sheep and over hype mediocre players

Honestly, I care less about others and hate to be those sheep. I have my own style and I come to post what I feel, I care less about anybody.

PS: Apologize about misunderstanding.

 

[zaid65]

W63L35 has lost credibility completely. He was once the most respected poster on this forum.

He has been found numerous times tampering or manipulating the stats and add colours to make it look good. So you can imagine his following.

It only takes a small amount of criticism of Afridi to bring out the BZ level fan boy inside him

Quote of the week, brilliant.

He is biggest closet fan.

 

[Justcrazy]

Razzak is far better than .

is just an average slogger. His bowling not good against good batsmen.

Razzak can win games on his own batting. He looks more composed and secured. If Pakistan had a coach like Bob Woolmer or John Wright in his career early , he would have been a leading all rounder in Test matches also.

 

[Madplayer]

Razzak by miles. He is a more consistant hitter of the ball and can play fast bowling better while managing spin bowling too. For people crying about strike rates, If afridi can score a 20 ball 50 , razzak can do it too but he is not mad enough to try it every single match. Bowling wise, quite similar.

 

[Mamoon]

Honestly, I care less about others and hate to be those sheep. I have my own style and I come to post what I feel, I care less about anybody.

PS: Apologize about misunderstanding.

Agreed and hey no problem

 

[Mamoon]

He has been found numerous times tampering or manipulating the stats and add colours to make it look good. So you can imagine his following.



Quote of the week, brilliant.

He is biggest closet fan.

Yup and closet fans are much worse. At least BZ openly acknowledges his admiration for Malik but this guy hides behind his neutral and no bias gimmick all the time.

 

[Mobashir]

Both are extremely good all rounders and our team was at his best in the last decade when they were both in the team.

But watching them play, you confortably know that Afridi is the better batsman between them. The biggest quality of a batsman is rotating the strike, and no one take those singles more confortably than Afridi. Razaaq was mediocre against spin, and even against fast bowlers he had problems against the short ball.

Bowling wise, I will say they are both equal, with Razaaq being largely better in the first part of their careers and Afridi being largely better in the second part of his career.

In a team like Pakistan, fielding should never be forgoten and well Afridi was better by a distance.

Overall, Afridi wins, because of better matchwinning abilities and better fielding.

On a more important note, Pakistan is already missing Razaaq and will miss Afridi to when he will not be there (like in the champions trophy). It's not with useless all rounders like Hafeez that the team is going to progress.

 

[Mamoon]

The fact that when Afridi bats, your heart is always in your mouth because you just know that he is going to get out any time is enough to judge what a mediocre and fluke batsman he is.

Razzaq is a better batsman and hence he has a better average.

Secondly, he was a bigger match winner with the bat.

Afridi can't win a match with the bat the way Razzaq did against SA in 2010. Not even in a million years. He doesn't have enough brains to score 60 odd runs on his own with the number 11 batsman. He would have buckled under pressure in such a situation like he always does.

 

[umerz]

Disagree, afridi was the more gifted batsman at the very least

You have every right ti disagree but I think Razzq is more gifted player however he didnt't put much effort and had sort of laid back attitude which is quite evident from his downfall in bowling and fielding

 

[Mobashir]

The fact that when Afridi bats, your heart is always in your mouth because you just know that he is going to get out any time is enough to judge what a mediocre and fluke batsman he is.

Razzaq is a better batsman and hence he has a better average.

Secondly, he was a bigger match winner with the bat.

Afridi can't win a match with the bat the way Razzaq did against SA in 2010. Not even in a million years. He doesn't have enough brains to score 60 odd runs on his own with the number 11 batsman. He would have buckled under pressure in such a situation like he always does.

So Mamoon_Ghaffar, who do you rate the best batsman in Test cricket between both of them?

 

[pakistanigoneaussie]

You have every right ti disagree but I think Razzq is more gifted player however he didnt't put much effort and had sort of laid back attitude which is quite evident from his downfall in bowling and fielding

If you include bowling as well then yes AR was more gifted, in terms of pure batting though afridi was gifted with brilliant hand eye coordination. If he worked hard he could have been a KP or Viru type player.

 

[zaid65]

Yup and closet fans are much worse. At least BZ openly acknowledges his admiration for Malik but this guy hides behind his neutral and no bias gimmick all the time.

Couldn't agree more and excellent observation one more time.

The issue with BZ, there are only few Malik fans as opposed to Afridi, so poor BZ has to take all the heat, while W35 hides behind those fan boys and have gotten free ride for long. At least BZ is not hypocrite and take heat from front as opposed to play games ( like his hero) and give an impression of being neutral ( my foot).

They both are same coin with different face ( BZ is head and W35 is tail)

 

[zaid65]

If you include bowling as well then yes AR was more gifted, in terms of pure batting though afridi was gifted with brilliant hand eye coordination. If he worked hard he could have been a KP or Viru type player.

This is a common argument here on PP that if Afridi would have worked hard, he would have been x,y, z player. I believe in sports, you are born with certain talent. Afridi was always a bits and pieces player ( gully cricketer) . Originally he was a leg spinner, who accidentally discoverd that he can bat during match against SL and scored a fastest one day century.

Once he ran out of batting fluke, he switched his gear back to bowling to stay in the team and since than he is changing his gears to holding the spot in the team.

On the other hand, KP or Viru are natural, gifted and tailor made world class batsmen. They are born with these skills, yes they work hard but they work hard to maintain their skills, they do not work hard to develop these skills. You cannot make anybody Waseem, Waqar or Aamir with work hard, these players are born with these skills.

 

[Mamoon]

Couldn't agree more and excellent observation one more time.

The issue with BZ, there are only few Malik fans as opposed to Afridi, so poor BZ has to take all the heat, while W35 hides behind those fan boys and have gotten free ride for long. At least BZ is not hypocrite and take heat from front as opposed to play games ( like his hero) and give an impression of being neutral ( my foot).

They both are same coin with different face ( BZ is head and W35 is tail)

Well put. Couldn't agree more and secondly BZ isn't a master manipulator of stats so he doesn't get away with it all the time. He's very good but W63 is on another level.

 

[Mamoon]

This is a common argument here on PP that if Afridi would have worked hard, he would have been x,y, z player. I believe in sports, you are born with certain talent. Afridi was always a bits and pieces player ( gully cricketer) . Originally he was a leg spinner, who accidentally discoverd that he can bat during match against SL and scored a fastest one day century.

Once he ran out of batting fluke, he switched his gear back to bowling to stay in the team and since than he is changing his gears to holding the spot in the team.

On the other hand, KP or Viru are natural, gifted and tailor made world class batsmen. They are born with these skills, yes they work hard but they work hard to maintain their skills, they do not work hard to develop these skills. You cannot make anybody Waseem, Waqar or Aamir with work hard, these players are born with these skills.

Excellent point regarding Afridi's role and when his batting approach is criticized, his fan boys come up with the excuse that he's a bowler so we shouldn't expect anything from him with the bat.

I guarantee you that there's not a single Afridi fan boy who became his fan because of his bowling. They all still get goosebumps over his 37 ball hundred 17 years ago but as that turned out to be a fluke and his batting continues to flop after so many years averaging a pathetic 23, they have come up with this bowling excuse.

 

[Raz]

This is a common argument here on PP that if Afridi would have worked hard, he would have been x,y, z player. I believe in sports, you are born with certain talent. Afridi was always a bits and pieces player ( gully cricketer) . Originally he was a leg spinner, who accidentally discoverd that he can bat during match against SL and scored a fastest one day century.

Once he ran out of batting fluke, he switched his gear back to bowling to stay in the team and since than he is changing his gears to holding the spot in the team.

On the other hand, KP or Viru are natural, gifted and tailor made world class batsmen. They are born with these skills, yes they work hard but they work hard to maintain their skills, they do not work hard to develop these skills. You cannot make anybody Waseem, Waqar or Aamir with work hard, these players are born with these skills.

It's not just a common argument on PP, it's the opinion of many others including the late Bob Woolmer, whom if I recall once said "Shahid Afridi is one of the most talented cricketers I have seen".

You and others talk as if Afridi has only scored that 37 ball century and done jack diddly squat in the other matches he has played. Or are you going to call his many other noteworthy innings flukes as well? Afridi has played shots that others can only dream of playing. He has taken apart great bowlers during his career. Now many other cricketers have come and gone during Afridi's career. Yet they haven't achieved even half as much as what Afridi has.

 

[Mamoon]

It's not just a common argument on PP, it's the opinion of many others including the late Bob Woolmer, whom if I recall once said "Shahid Afridi is one of the most talented cricketers I have seen".

You and others talk as if Afridi has only scored that 37 ball century and done jack diddly squat in the other matches he has played. Or are you going to call his many other noteworthy innings flukes as well? Afridi has played shots that others can only dream of playing. He has taken apart great bowlers during his career. Now many other cricketers have come and gone during Afridi's career. Yet they haven't achieved even half as much as what Afridi has.

Afridi is a decent bits n pieces cricketer and that is it.

Only in Pakistan and in minnows like Bangladesh, Zimbabwe, Kenya, Ireland etc would he have played 360 ODIs and when you play so many games, you are bound to win some of them on your own.

Bottom-line is that Afridi has a pathetic average of 23 and that too playing in the lower order most of the times and hence having a chance to boost his average by remaining not out but Afridi has shown that he's incapable of that.

Even as an opener, he averages 24 with 3 hundreds in 145 games. That is a pathetic record.

With the ball his record against quality teams is very mediocre.

Afridi is a decent utility cricketer who has done well at times in the past and will continue do well occasionally and can be an absolute match winner on his day BUT it is people like you because of which he is the most overrated cricketer in history.

Stop living under the delusion that he is a great/world class player or a legend. He is not and neither is he big talent. I don't consider him an underachiever and let me explain why.

Just because you can hit a couple of random sixes per innings before top edging eventually doesn't make you a talented batsman. A talented batsman is the one who can play long, sensible innings and according to the situation of the team.

If your brand of cricket is that of an aggressive batsman, than man up and play like Viv Richards, Gilchrist and Sehwag etc.

Having 24 hundreds at an average of 50 and SR of 83 with triple hundreds (one of them in a single day) is what you call hitting and power batting. Not cheap slogs of Afridi at an average of 23.

Having the best strike rate in history when you have an average of 23 is not a big deal and in most cases, it doesn't help the team at all.

Even after 17 years and 350+ ODI matches, he has failed to learn the art of playing according to the situation.

I have followed Afridi's career throughout and apart from the two knocks in the T20 2009 and the one against WI in the second T20 recently, I don't remember a single sensible innings from Afridi or which he has played according to the situation by curbing his attacking instincts.

Making his immature fans dance and entertain them with 6 ball cameos is what he lives for.

I enjoy Afridi and I miss him when he isn't in the team because he has the presence about him and x factor if you like and it is understandable the people worship him (flashy hair getting shampooed before the match for money from head and shoulders, trademark celebrations, sixes and all that) BUT DON'T MAKE OF HIM WHAT HE IS NOT. He is no legend, he is not a great player and neither is he a big talent.

He is a club level slogger with zero application and a decent leg spinner.

The difference between him and other mediocre players is that he can potentially be a total match winner on his day and that is understandable with the way he plays. If you blindfold yourself and throw darts, Eventually after 20 misses, you'll hit the bulls eye for once.

But if you act sensibly and not blind fold yourself for show off purpose, you may not look awesome while hitting the bulls eye but you will not miss the target completely with your other shots.

Afridi could have kept that strike rate to around 100 instead of the sexy 114 and boosted his average to 35 if he had any thing between his skull.

But who says having a good cricketing brain is not part of talent? Learn what talent means to start with.

 

[RagingJ]

Razzaq comes out better in stats, Afridi can lift the team up.

Razzaq is lackadaiscal, Afridi is energitic.

The bottom line is, both could have been much better than what they became if they applied themselves.

 

[Mamoon]

Razzaq comes out better in stats, Afridi can lift the team up.

Razzaq is lackadaiscal, Afridi is energitic.

The bottom line is, both could have been much better than what they became if they applied themselves.

This is a flawed assumption.

Why didn't he apply himself? Because he didn't have the mental strength.

Why didn't he have the mental strength? because some people have it and some don't. You cannot teach that to someone and that is part of the package which is labeled as 'talent'.

I keep hearing this nonsense that Dravid was not a talented player but he had a lot of determination and guts.

His concentration and unflappable temperament was part of his ability. That is massive talent which you cannot teach.

 

[Mamoon]

Technically, no player punches above his weight or under performs. They lack something but excel in others and vice versa.

Younis Khan for instance doesn't have half the shots and class that Yousaf or Inzamam had but still he is a world class test batsman with an average of 50. Why? because he may have lacked the shots but he had much more power of concentration and focus than Yousaf and Inzamam.

That is talent as well.

 

[mastermind_quad]

In all fairness Razzaq is always a better batsman and bowler then Afridi but he is a very bad fielder and should not be compare to Afridi in terms of fielding .

I'll pick Razzaq here as he is a very good pressure player too..

 

[zaid65]

It's not just a common argument on PP, it's the opinion of many others including the late Bob Woolmer, whom if I recall once said "Shahid Afridi is one of the most talented cricketers I have seen".

You and others talk as if Afridi has only scored that 37 ball century and done jack diddly squat in the other matches he has played. Or are you going to call his many other noteworthy innings flukes as well? Afridi has played shots that others can only dream of playing. He has taken apart great bowlers during his career. Now many other cricketers have come and gone during Afridi's career. Yet they haven't achieved even half as much as what Afridi has.

First of all X, Y, Z players or coaches did give statements about certain players, those are not the words of Bible, Geeta or any Holly book. Imran Khan rated Sami as Marshal and Mansoor Akhtar as Viv Richard, turned out to be busts, same Imran rated Waseem and Inzi as extremely talented at the start of their career, turned out to be true.


A player who could not figure out in 17 year about his talent, is he a batsman, is he a bowler,.. in batting, is an opener, middle order or lower order, ..explain the class and talent of the player.

KP or Veru, from the day one showed their class and whole world recognized their talent, they do not need a third world country's coach one statement ( which could be politically motivated statement) to prove their class.

Afridi's fan need to come out of the horse of word " talent". The only talent he has, manipulation, playing dirty politics, buying cheap journalists to stay in news ( I have started practicing for Zimbabwe series), how to make money from the game of cricket,...

 

[zaid65]

Technically, no player punches above his weight or under performs. They lack something but excel in others and vice versa.

Younis Khan for instance doesn't have half the shots and class that Yousaf or Inzamam had but still he is a world class test batsman with an average of 50. Why? because he may have lacked the shots but he had much more power of concentration and focus than Yousaf and Inzamam.

That is talent as well.

For Pakistani fans, Imran Nazir is very talented, Afridi is the most talented player world of cricket ever produced, Sami is talented fast bowler, Wahab is rare talent, Fawad Alam is talented, ....anybody who can hit boundaries with blind eyes and have speed is talented.

If you happened to decent looking, better looks, style, ...the talent is beyond the limit ( almost kind of fetish to them).