Should the PCB be outsourced?

[shortbread]

It's only a matter of time before the ones in power realizes that managing the PCB requires actual brains instead of a lineup of tried and tested failures like former overrated players with inflated egos or low IQ political appointees. There's a potential here for global consultancies who make a living by bidding for ad-hoc advisory jobs, in managing Pakistan cricket.

I mean, why not let a consulting firm step in? Imagine McKinsey putting their heads together to strategize our batting order as if it’s a corporate merger—because plotting a way to victory is clearly in their interests if they're delegated with the task. They'd be answerable instead of the likes of Naqvi currently, who sits in a stadium watching cricket trying to strategize on state security and internal affairs, while staring at decent stands being knocked down?!

Right now I'm convinced even a room full of drunk tourists could craft a more coherent game plan for Pakistan cricket. This could be a harbinger for other things in the country where by now its blooming evident that while Pakistani elites are power hungry, they really lack intelligence and are therefore incapable of delivering any results in a global context.

Anyone with an iota of common sense and some interest in cricket can do a better job than the current lot of buffoons. McKinsey, Deloitte, Boston, PwC... anyone interested? Cmon, take a swing at managing the PCB—it could be the first consulting gig where the only KPI is “not losing to Afghanistan.”

 

[Varun]

Consultants who excel only in faaltu-kaam are the last people who should be involved in sport. Even Chat GPT agrees with me:

If consultants were to assemble the Pakistani cricket team, their selection would likely focus too much on data and trends, with little regard for team balance, form, or intangibles like temperament. Here’s a possible XI they might come up with:

1. Sharjeel Khan (Opener)​

• Reason: High strike rate in T20 cricket makes him look like a dynamic option for all formats. Never mind his inconsistency in longer forms.

2. Kamran Akmal (Wicketkeeper-Opener)​

• Reason: Historical statistics as a wicketkeeper-batsman. Consultants might overlook the fact that his wicketkeeping has been inconsistent, and he hasn’t been a regular part of the team for years.

3. Fawad Alam (No. 3)​

• Reason: Impressive first-class average and career revival later on. They could pick him on stats alone without thinking of how he fits the current team setup.

4. Shoaib Malik (No. 4)​

• Reason: Longevity in international cricket with solid experience in T20 leagues. His declining form in international cricket could be ignored in favor of “experience.”

5. Azhar Ali (No. 5)​

• Reason: Test stalwart, but consultants may place him in an unfamiliar middle-order ODI or T20 position due to his experience, without considering his best fit is in Tests.

6. Shahid Afridi (Captain/All-Rounder)​

• Reason: Iconic status and high-profile media presence. The consultants would overlook his age, limited recent cricket experience, and volatility, assuming his leadership charisma alone can carry the team.

7. Mohammad Rizwan (Wicketkeeper-Batsman)​

• Reason: His exceptional stats in recent years across formats. However, placing two wicketkeeper-batsmen in the XI (with Kamran Akmal) could create a confusing dynamic.

8. Sohail Tanvir (All-Rounder)​

• Reason: His unique bowling action and brief success in T20 leagues globally. The consultants may see him as a double-utility player, ignoring his inconsistent international career.

9. Mohammad Amir (Fast Bowler)​

• Reason: High name recognition and previous success, despite his retirement and inconsistent performances since his return. Consultants could focus on his reputation rather than recent form.

10. Shadab Khan (Leg-Spinner/All-Rounder)​

• Reason: His handy lower-order batting and solid bowling economy. They may pick him based on stats without considering the team’s need for balance between spinners and pacers.

11. Umar Gul (Fast Bowler)​

• Reason: A historic death bowler with great numbers in the past, but long retired. The consultants might dig into legacy stats, ignoring the fact that Gul hasn’t played international cricket for years.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

The administrational side such as the board set up, revenue management, revenue streams and growth could be outsourced.

Will be difficult to outsource direct cricketing matters.

 

[Cricket Warrior]

And what will it help if we outsource? because we will still be picking players from this useless system... problem isn't at the management level... real issue is at the grassroots level which needs to be addressed.

 

[Kianig89]

May be a world class franchise should take over PCB with profit sharing formula. Future could be like Pakistan Knight Riders or Pakistan Royals

 

[ghalib kichlu]

roger binny seems to be doing good for India

Pakistan has shehryar khan afridi who was never appreciated
Also sikandar hayat khan in the early days of pakistani cricket

Maybe imran khan could drop the boat race and start advising wahab riaz instead

 

[FearlessRoar]

Bro i know you are frustrated with the PCT's performance, but outsourcing PCB? That's not the solution, trust me...First, the PCB is a governing body, not some service we can just outsource to someone else. It's a complex organization with a lot of stakeholders and responsibilities.

And think about it, who would we even outsource it to? Another country's cricket board? A private company? It's not like there's some magic solution out there that can fix all our problems.

Even if we outsource some smaller tasks, the big decisions and control need to stay with the PCB. We can't just hand over our cricketing future to someone else.

 

[Savak]

Bro i know you are frustrated with the PCT's performance, but outsourcing PCB? That's not the solution, trust me...First, the PCB is a governing body, not some service we can just outsource to someone else. It's a complex organization with a lot of stakeholders and responsibilities.

And think about it, who would we even outsource it to? Another country's cricket board? A private company? It's not like there's some magic solution out there that can fix all our problems.

Even if we outsource some smaller tasks, the big decisions and control need to stay with the PCB. We can't just hand over our cricketing future to someone else.

ECB, Cricket Australia are run like a private enterprise. Why can't the PCB be run along the same lines devoid of government control and influence? It will go a long way towards fixing our cricket