Should PCB implement a policy that makes it mandatory to debut in ODIs before the age of 21?

[msb314]

Whilst I am very pleased that Haris and now Usman are finally getting a chance at the international level - they have both only played a handful of games are now 29 and 27 years of age respectively

Lets face it - Haris and Usman should have both debuted in the ODi and Test team right after the 2011 WC had our "seniors" retired then but it was not to be.

What I am suggesting is for PCB to enforce a 21 year age limit before the Chief selector and head coach must debut a player in LOI in order to further his career at the international level. At a young age - the player can learn and adapt far more quicker at the international level than he would in domestic. he would rapidly gain match awareness and experience that would be great for his career. I think the best "career management" we have done in recent times is that of Babar who debuted at the age of 21 in 2015.

For Tests - I think it can be a bit flexible. Maybe the age limit should be 24 or 25 years of age.

Thoughts?

 

[CricketingMinds]

Terrible idea but I have seen worse ideas on PP such as "Bring Asif Back" Lol

 

[big_gamer007]

Rubbish idea. Age limit is non sense however PCB and selectors should give chances to talented youngsters on time but imposing age limit will kill Pakistani cricket.

 

[msb314]

Rubbish idea. Age limit is non sense however PCB and selectors should give chances to talented youngsters on time but imposing age limit will kill Pakistani cricket.

You are quick to reject and criticize the idea but you mention giving chances to "talented youngsters" - by definition a youngster should be in the early stages of his career anyway

 

[Rayyman]

Grest idea

For fast bowlers: 24
For opening batsman: 26
For spinners and middle-order batsman: 28

 

[big_gamer007]

You are quick to reject and criticize the idea but you mention giving chances to "talented youngsters" - by definition a youngster should be in the early stages of his career anyway

If you impose an age limit chances of killing a youngsters career will increase 1000 times more..

 

[Dagestani_Eagle]

Why not limit it to foetus?

That would be real youngsta beauty

 

[Baigel]

Yes...Let's play with the likes of Shehzad and get rid of Fakhar and Sharjeel

 

[pakistanigoneaussie]

We wouldn’t have Fahkar zaman then, or Faheem

 

[Big Mac]

Some Pakistan players who were 22 or older when they made their ODI debut:

Mohammed Yousuf
Shoaib Akthar
Mohammad Asif
Misbah-ul-Haq
Saeed Ajmal

25 or older on test debut:

Aamer Sohail
Misbah-ul-Haq
Saeed Ajmal
Azhar Ali
Yasir Shah
Mohammed Abbas

 

[Junaids]

More to the point, I really would give the Chief Selector the following Test selection guidelines:

1. Maximum 3 players aged over 30 allowed to be selected. AND

2. Maximum 2 players aged over 32 allowed to be selected. AND

3. Maximum 1 player allowed to be selected in age band 33-34.

4. No player allowed to be selected after 35th birthday under any circumstances.

 

[Shaddy86]

Ridiculous idea. How do you even think of such stuff

 

[Arham_PakFan]

No.Frankly,that’s a stupid idea.

 

[hadi123]

No. Just no. Makes no sense.

 

[UN talkz]

No

 

[CricketAnalyst]

More to the point, I really would give the Chief Selector the following Test selection guidelines:

1. Maximum 3 players aged over 30 allowed to be selected. AND

2. Maximum 2 players aged over 32 allowed to be selected. AND

3. Maximum 1 player allowed to be selected in age band 33-34.

4. No player allowed to be selected after 35th birthday under any circumstances.

That is discriminatory, stupid and mindless.

It's one of the most truly stupid things I've heard on this forum.

What people need to be told is to pick the best side every single time without thinking about development, or experience or sentiment.

If someone is good enough it doesn't help you whatsoever to know what their age is. It won't stop them from playing well, and nor will someone underage magically become good by playing them.

 

[MMHS]

Won't work - only those "buffer" between biological & certificate age will increase - "Kids" will be picked at 21, and posters here will justify their age through gin technology. Everyone in PCB or selection team and PAK squad management know exact biological age of most players, if not every playing in FC circuits (& they celebrate birthday within pals on actual date) - spirit should be to reduce the average age of the squad, proper phasing out of aged players and fair treatment to younger players. After that, still someone like YK will be there, and that's acceptable.

 

[sshakir411]

should be 13 years old since that’s when a kid turns in to an adult

 

[Bilal7]

And this is why fans have no say in the selection process.

 

[kuskash]

But who will decide the real age of Pak players to begin with?

 

[Savak]

Don't agree with this. It's all about the quality of the players. A player can be destructive and world class in his 30's compared to a young ineffective unimpressive 19-21 year old. Don't care how old a guy is, if he can win games for Pakistan then select him.

 

[sadida97]

Don't agree with this. It's all about the quality of the players. A player can be destructive and world class in his 30's compared to a young ineffective unimpressive 19-21 year old. Don't care how old a guy is, if he can win games for Pakistan then select him.

lets select kamran akmal then, and bring back younis

 

[Rahul1]

I'm surprised at op's ability to come up with such 'unique' ideas.

 

[Rahul1]

More to the point, I really would give the Chief Selector the following Test selection guidelines:

1. Maximum 3 players aged over 30 allowed to be selected. AND

2. Maximum 2 players aged over 32 allowed to be selected. AND

3. Maximum 1 player allowed to be selected in age band 33-34.

4. No player allowed to be selected after 35th birthday under any circumstances.

And this idea is even worse than in the op.

 

[Hasan123]

Something like this should be implemented in domestic cricket not at international level.

 

[CricketAnalyst]

Won't work - only those "buffer" between biological & certificate age will increase - "Kids" will be picked at 21, and posters here will justify their age through gin technology. Everyone in PCB or selection team and PAK squad management know exact biological age of most players, if not every playing in FC circuits (& they celebrate birthday within pals on actual date) - spirit should be to reduce the average age of the squad, proper phasing out of aged players and fair treatment to younger players. After that, still someone like YK will be there, and that's acceptable.

The goal shouldn't be to lower age or increase age.

If age is relevant to performance, just selecting the best players will account for it.

If not, its a stupid criterion.

 

[QuickCrick]

I do get your point tabout players coming through late but your solution is terrible.

The only solution for this is if the seniors retire when they are past it and not carry on. If your young and trying to break through then make some noise in the domestic circuit and put pressure on the seniors.

 

[msb314]

Grest idea

For fast bowlers: 24
For opening batsman: 26
For spinners and middle-order batsman: 28

Thanks!

I would probably make the cutoff for middle order batsman a bit younger.

 

[msb314]

Something like this should be implemented in domestic cricket not at international level.

May I ask why not?

 

[msb314]

I'm surprised at op's ability to come up with such 'unique' ideas.

To give you perspective - Virat Kohli debuted in the ODI team back in 2008. He was only 19 years of age and hence started gaining international experience at that age! i.e. not a decade later when he would be 28!

Kohli also made his Test debut in 2011 when he was 21. BCCI clearly saw his potential at that age before making him a permanent member of the Test squad by 2012.

That is the way to go.

 

[msb314]

And this is why fans have no say in the selection process.

Why don't you suggest a better idea then??

I would rather see 21 year old kids given a chance to become ATG and gain experience rather than see the same 40 year old "seniors" who are only playing on past reputation.

Yes both you and I agree that YK is a test ATG but he lingered on his career 3 years too much.

 

[msb314]

Don't agree with this. It's all about the quality of the players. A player can be destructive and world class in his 30's compared to a young ineffective unimpressive 19-21 year old. Don't care how old a guy is, if he can win games for Pakistan then select him.

Here is the issue.

A 19-21 year old may seem "ineffective and unimpressive" but he will not be able to showcase his talent and temperament until he gains vital international experience.

Some of our 30 year old "seniors" that are now good players could have become even better had they started off earlier and learnt the ropes via international cricket rather than domestic.

 

[msb314]

No.Frankly,that’s a stupid idea.

No. Just no. Makes no sense.

No

Why not?

Try to be specific and articulate rather than just generic.

 

[msb314]

We wouldn’t have Fahkar zaman then, or Faheem

We made a mistake.

Fakhar should have debuted much earlier yet Nasir Jamshed, Hafeez etc. were still opening for us in ODI's until 2015.

Fahim should have debuted earlier too but the likes of Anwar Ali and Bhatti got unwarranted chances ahead of him.

Cannot correct the past but moving forward - a player must debut earlier on in his career and be forced to learn the ropes via international cricket. If he succeeds than great. If not - then he may need to spend more time in domestic cricket and/or PSL before being given another chance later.

 

[msb314]

Some Pakistan players who were 22 or older when they made their ODI debut:

Mohammed Yousuf
Shoaib Akthar
Mohammad Asif
Misbah-ul-Haq
Saeed Ajmal

25 or older on test debut:

Aamer Sohail
Misbah-ul-Haq
Saeed Ajmal
Azhar Ali
Yasir Shah
Mohammed Abbas

As a mentioned to [MENTION=57355]pakistanigoneaussie[/MENTION] we made plenty of mistakes in the past but can now rectify that by doing the right thing.

MoYo, Akhtar, Asif could have been even better players had they been given chances earlier on in their career.

It is well known the Ajmal was rotting away in domestic whilst the likes of Kaneria and mediocre spinners like Arshad Khan were playing international cricket. Ajmal finally got a lucky break but we wasted many years of his career. if he had gotten a chance when he was 21 - PCB could have realized his talent and persisted with him in the early to mid 2000's.

 

[The_Odd_One]

I don't like this idea but I will not have more than 2 players above 30 in ODIs and none above 30 in T20s.

 

[Arham_PakFan]

Why not?

Try to be specific and articulate rather than just generic.

1)Because it’s discriminatory and ageist.

2)Because it reduces competition(an international hopeful might as well pack his bags when he turns 21.

3)21 is very young in cricketing terms.Players often improve until 30

 

[iniqbal223]

Having separate team would work with WC next year in mind:

Tests XI

Azhar (c)
Imam
Haris
Usman Salauddin
Saad Ali
Asad Shafiq
Md. Rizwan
Yasir
Wahab
Abbas
Juaid/Rahat/etc

ODI XI

Fakhar
Haris Sohail
Babar
Sarfaraz
Hussain Talat
Malik
Faheem
Shadab
Junaid
Hasan
Amir


T2O XI

Fakhar
Babar
Sarfaraz
Husain Talat
Asif Ali
Shadab
Imad
Malik
Faheem
Hasan
Amir


Problem about Sarafarz is ever since he became captain, he has not given himself enough gametime in batting. Almost always came at 6/7 or when 5-10 overs were left, or nothing was left. No good batsman grow in this way.
If he really needs his batting to shine and become better, he needs to come up the order at least in ODI's and T20's

 

[msb314]

1)Because it’s discriminatory and ageist.

2)Because it reduces competition(an international hopeful might as well pack his bags when he turns 21.

3)21 is very young in cricketing terms.Players often improve until 30

Combining points 1 and 2 - it is NOT discriminatory nor does it reduce competition because the management has to debut the player before he turns 21. Whether the player had a career after his debut is entirely upto the player if he performs or not.

In fact - it would encourage more competition because a good player now knows he is likely to get a chance to debut when his young and make a favorably impression on his coach the selectors if he does well on his debut. He knows he will not have to waste precious years of his career rotting away in domestic cricket before getting a chance. It will also put pressure on our "seniors" as they will know in the back of their minds that a debuting youngster could displace them in the team if he performs well.

The idea is that if the PCB forces this age limit on the chief selector and the head coach - we will see a wave of fresh new players being given chances at the international level to prove themselves. If a player is over the age limit - i.e. 22 or 23 or 24 etc. a case by case exception could be made but his should be the exception nor the norm.

Regarding your point 3 - I still believe the best way for a player to get better is via experience at international level - in terms of stroke play, temperament and also dealing with pressure There is no better alternative...

 

[Arham_PakFan]

Combining points 1 and 2 - it is NOT discriminatory nor does it reduce competition because the management has to debut the player before he turns 21. Whether the player had a career after his debut is entirely upto the player if he performs or not.

In fact - it would encourage more competition because a good player now knows he is likely to get a chance to debut when his young and make a favorably impression on his coach the selectors if he does well on his debut. He knows he will not have to waste precious years of his career rotting away in domestic cricket before getting a chance. It will also put pressure on our "seniors" as they will know in the back of their minds that a debuting youngster could displace them in the team if he performs well.

The idea is that if the PCB forces this age limit on the chief selector and the head coach - we will see a wave of fresh new players being given chances at the international level to prove themselves. If a player is over the age limit - i.e. 22 or 23 or 24 etc. a case by case exception could be made but his should be the exception nor the norm.

Regarding your point 3 - I still believe the best way for a player to get better is via experience at international level - in terms of stroke play, temperament and also dealing with pressure There is no better alternative...

It IS discriminatory.How can you not see that.You are basically saying a 21 year old has a higher chance of debuting than a 25 year old.A lot of people start their domestic careers late e.g Fakhar Zaman.And it’s not guaranteed that a 20 year old will always succeed.For every Babar Azam you will get 5 Umar Akmals.

Mohammad Abbas started his domestic career late.If there was a policy like the one you propose,he would nver have gotten a change.Another example is Yasir Shah,who is our biggest matchwinner.

 

[Hasan123]

May I ask why not?

Internationals is about picking the best avaliable 11.

 

[Big Mac]

As a mentioned to [MENTION=57355]pakistanigoneaussie[/MENTION] we made plenty of mistakes in the past but can now rectify that by doing the right thing.

MoYo, Akhtar, Asif could have been even better players had they been given chances earlier on in their career.

It is well known the Ajmal was rotting away in domestic whilst the likes of Kaneria and mediocre spinners like Arshad Khan were playing international cricket. Ajmal finally got a lucky break but we wasted many years of his career. if he had gotten a chance when he was 21 - PCB could have realized his talent and persisted with him in the early to mid 2000's.

You don't know that.

Kaneria was a very good spinner for a start and spinners mature much later in their careers. Graeme Swann was great for England because he got dropped early in his career and went back to first class cricket to get experience and confidence in his own game.

Herath made his debut aged 21 or so, but he got dropped after a couple more games and didn't become a regular for another 8 or 9 years.

Asif was a genius because he had that experience of working out batsmen in first class cricket and knowing his strengths and weaknesses. Nobody would have ever given him his debut at 21 because he would have been another trundler in a land obsessed with pace. He'd have played one test and been thrown away.

Who knows, if Junior Akmal had played 2-3 years more of first class cricket before playing for Pakistan maybe he wouldn't have wasted his career?

 

[hadi123]

1)Because it’s discriminatory and ageist.

2)Because it reduces competition(an international hopeful might as well pack his bags when he turns 21.

3)21 is very young in cricketing terms.Players often improve until 30

Agreed. Many players are late bloomers. Saeed Ajmal for example. International cricket at the end of the day is about picking your best 11.

 

[MMHS]

The goal shouldn't be to lower age or increase age.

If age is relevant to performance, just selecting the best players will account for it.

If not, its a stupid criterion.

You misread my post - reducing average age doesn’t mean drop performing seniors (that’s why YK’s name came), rather not backing underperforming seniors, for their experience. In simple words, if there are 2 players with similar out put - one is 35 & another 23; the younger one should be promoted, because he comes with a potential for a decade.

Phasing out a generation needs bigger heart and some ruthlessness- but still there will be spaces for few outstanding performers beyond age.

For this particular case (PAK team), let me be specific - I am a fan of Malik, but absolutely no reason why he should not retire for ODI after CT win or Hafeez won’t be dropped after 3rd call. These are too ordinary players to be carried like this.

What OP is saying isn’t suggested, neither supported - you can’t bind your selection criteria with a formula. But, one has to find a way to promote younger players, which eventually should keep average age at a static point somewhere around 27-29. For PAK’s case it’s already too high even considering official age, hence that point came.

 

[FreePalestine]

seriously bad idea. I think would probably make it into my top five worst ideas seen on PP so far and that is saying something

 

[Itachi]

One of the worst ideas I have seen in PP since 2011.

 

[giri26]

That's not a good way of selecting players as players mature at different ages. Every one is not ready for international cricket by 21.

 

[CricketAnalyst]

I don't like this idea but I will not have more than 2 players above 30 in ODIs and none above 30 in T20s.

Pretty much EVERYBODY in the IPL Champion Chennai Super Kings core group was over 35, let alone 30.

Performance matters not age.

Winning NOW matters. Not the assumption that only game time will magically improve inferior players in the future, therefore sacrificing present out-put.

Too many cricket fans disrespect every possible format and series; almost any game seems to be mainly an opportunity to 'blood' (what on earth does this mean?) some youngster for the future, where he too will be discarded to 'blood' some other incompetent fellow.

If players can't get in on merit they don't deserve to be in. All top-level pro cricket is worthwhile. This isn't NBA where you deliberately create rubbish sides so that you finish bottom of league and get good draft picks.