T20Is: Imad Wasim - Are we happy with Shahid Afridi's replacement?

[W63L35]

Looks like Imad Wasim has fully replaced Shahid Afridi in T20 as an spinning all-rounder..... and he has done a decent job to the role he is given in the team.

So as much as we wanted Afridi to leave and it was time for him to leave..... are we happy and satisfied with Afridi's replacement?


Since Imad has played 34 T20s, I am comparing his stats with Afridi's stats in first 34 ODI.

 

[Ronaldo7]

Afridi isn't some ATG player that we should be happy if we replace him. Just hope Imad doesn't turn into another afridi.

 

[PakSarZameen]

Bowling wise they are more or less the same

Afridi was the bigger batting force, of course.

 

[ads101]

Imad's a better version of Afridi in ODIs and a worse one in T20s but still perfectly good (Afridi was one of the best T20 players of all time IMO). He doesn't score as quick, and probably a bit worse bowler, but overall his contribution at 7 is more taking into account how consistently he scores down the order.

I'm very happy with Imad. In t20s he's doing great, but bowling in ODIs could be a little better, but you can't always have everything and I'm sure Imad will improve in that regard, he's still perfectly able bowling the full 10 over quota for not much fuss even if he doesn't pick up as many wickets.

 

[Hasan123]

Imad is a excellent T20 player.

 

[Saj]

Interesting numbers.

I think Imad has more to offer with the bat than what he has shown so far. However there are signs that he's now showing progress with the bat.

 

[JattMaula]

I respect the OP a lot but this is madness.

 

[W63L35]

Imad's a better version of Afridi in ODIs and a worse one in T20s but still perfectly good (Afridi was one of the best T20 players of all time IMO). He doesn't score as quick, and probably a bit worse bowler, but overall his contribution at 7 is more taking into account how consistently he scores down the order.

I'm very happy with Imad. In t20s he's doing great, but bowling in ODIs could be a little better, but you can't always have everything and I'm sure Imad will improve in that regard, he's still perfectly able bowling the full 10 over quota for not much fuss even if he doesn't pick up as many wickets.

All decent points....

But statistically, Afridi's last 41 ODIs are very very similar to Imad's first 41 ODIs.

Keep in mind, every upset Afridi-later wanted Afridi to leave ODI team because he had stopped performing. Now.... same people/fans are perfectly happy with Imad's ODI performances which are almost identical to Afridi's last 41 ODIs performances? I don't know what it could be the reason! Strange!

 

[JattMaula]

Nobody can replace Lala. Even at his absolute worst, he was better than all his 'replacements'.

 

[Angrez Pakistani]

You are comparing original LALA with fake Ronaldo. That ain't it chief.

 

[Prince of Pakistan]

I see Shadab more as Lala's replacement. A bowler who can hold a bat.

Imad is a genuine allrounder and maybe even more a batsman for this team.

 

[Mueez]

There is and will be only one Lala.

Nobody can replace him.

 

[BunnyRabbit]

Numbers are interesting, but we all know what their roles are/were in T20is.
Imad opens the bowling and finishes his quota mostly in the first 10 while Afridi would bowl from 6-15th over. Afridi was a better wicket taking bowler while Imad contains the runs and any wicket he gets is sort of an added bonus atm.
Battingwise, Afridi has been the biggest hit or miss batter in history IMO due to his reckless batting, Imad is more of a proper middle order batter who has adapted his batting well as per his batting number(no.7 seldom gets to bat before 10th over)

In ODI's comparing their bowling is a bit easier, because Imad doesn't usually open the bowling unless it's in Asia. Here again, Imad does a containing job, AND HE DOESNT get any wickets, which is a big big problem if he's your main spinner. Afridi on the other hand, would take wickets while going for around 40-48 runs per match but would take 1 or 2 wickets and in his peak he would take a lot of 4fers and 5 fers.
Imad certainly needs to develop his leftward spinner (left armer's offbreak) if he's to become a wicket taking bowler.
Battingwise here, Afridi apart from a brief period in 2005 and 2010, was never ever a consistent batter to be taken seriously as a batter. And Imad is starting to get better in that discipline (or he looks to be doing that), but we shall see how it goes.

In short, Afridi is one of the ATG T20i players who are extremely hard to replace but Imad is doing a commendable job in whatever role he is asked to do.
In ODI's, even at his worst, Afridi was arguably a better bowler than Imad, but then Imad is a better batter(atleast skills and temperament wise apart from brief spells of consistency from Afridi) and should look to translate that into his performances.

 

[gazza619]

Excellent comparison and very relevant.

Still early days but Imad has a long way to go.

 

[W63L35]

There is and will be only one Lala.

Nobody can replace him.

Nobody can replace Lala. Even at his absolute worst, he was better than all his 'replacements'.

I am not talking about replacing Afridi's legacy. Somebody took Don Bradman's spot right after he retired.

I am talking about Imad taking Afridi's place in the team - T20 and ODIs. Please understand the difference!

 

[W63L35]

Numbers are interesting, but we all know what their roles are/were in T20is.
Imad opens the bowling and finishes his quota mostly in the first 10 while Afridi would bowl from 6-15th over. Afridi was a better wicket taking bowler while Imad contains the runs and any wicket he gets is sort of an added bonus atm.
Battingwise, Afridi has been the biggest hit or miss batter in history IMO due to his reckless batting, Imad is more of a proper middle order batter who has adapted his batting well as per his batting number(no.7 seldom gets to bat before 10th over)

In ODI's comparing their bowling is a bit easier, because Imad doesn't usually open the bowling unless it's in Asia. Here again, Imad does a containing job, AND HE DOESNT get any wickets, which is a big big problem if he's your main spinner. Afridi on the other hand, would take wickets while going for around 40-48 runs per match but would take 1 or 2 wickets and in his peak he would take a lot of 4fers and 5 fers.
Imad certainly needs to develop his leftward spinner (left armer's offbreak) if he's to become a wicket taking bowler.
Battingwise here, Afridi apart from a brief period in 2005 and 2010, was never ever a consistent batter to be taken seriously as a batter. And Imad is starting to get better in that discipline (or he looks to be doing that), but we shall see how it goes.

In short, Afridi is one of the ATG T20i players who are extremely hard to replace but Imad is doing a commendable job in whatever role he is asked to do.
In ODI's, even at his worst, Afridi was arguably a better bowler than Imad, but then Imad is a better batter(atleast skills and temperament wise apart from brief spells of consistency from Afridi) and should look to translate that into his performances.

good post.

 

[ads101]

All decent points....

But statistically, Afridi's last 41 ODIs are very very similar to Imad's first 41 ODIs.

Keep in mind, every upset Afridi-later wanted Afridi to leave ODI team because he had stopped performing. Now.... same people/fans are perfectly happy with Imad's ODI performances which are almost identical to Afridi's last 41 ODIs performances? I don't know what it could be the reason! Strange!

View attachment 90848

Because an average of 47 at SR 105 is far better than 24.4 at SR 146. At least for our team who don't have a super strong 6. Bowling wise both have been pretty mediocre in this period and would not get in purely on bowling based on that.

I'd go so far to say currently Imad would get in just on batting, which Afridi wouldn't.

 

[W63L35]

Because an average of 47 at SR 105 is far better than 24.4 at SR 146. At least for our team who don't have a super strong 6. Bowling wise both have been pretty mediocre in this period and would not get in purely on bowling based on that.

I'd go so far to say currently Imad would get in just on batting, which Afridi wouldn't.

You do realize that in 14 innings Imad stayed Not out and that it inflating his average?

 

[Justcrazy]

Imad is much more consistent with the bat as well as ball. Afridi on his day could win games on his own , but Imad gives more reliability

 

[MenInG]

Impressive and canny Imad - hope he can continue doing this.

 

[Saj]

Tidy bowling effort today too from Imad.

Waqar was saying post-match that Sarfaraz didn't utilise him well and should have made him bowl more earlier in the innings.

 

[W63L35]

Good outing today for Imad. Hope Shadab is fit .... and both (with an effective Hafeez) can weave the same magic in the World CUp .....that Ajmal, Afridi and Hafeez did under Misbah and Afridi.

 

[Mueez]

Good outing today for Imad. Hope Shadab is fit .... and both (with an effective Hafeez) can weave the same magic in the World CUp .....that Ajmal, Afridi and Hafeez did under Misbah and Afridi.

Lets hope so!

But Ajmal pre-ban was from another planet...

And he was under guidance of Misbah.

 

[The_Odd_One]

Afridi had a different role in the team. He was an attacking batsman and spinner.

Imad has been more playing a role of pre-ban Hafeez.

 

[Pete Rose]

Looks like Imad Wasim has fully replaced Shahid Afridi in T20 as an spinning all-rounder..... and he has done a decent job to the role he is given in the team.

So as much as we wanted Afridi to leave and it was time for him to leave..... are we happy and satisfied with Afridi's replacement?


Since Imad has played 34 T20s, I am comparing his stats with Afridi's stats in first 34 ODI.


View attachment 90847

Afridi had been playing cricket for ten years by the time the first t20 was played. In those 10 years he has invented himself
as a batsman when he was failing as bowler
as a bowler when he failing as a batsman
as an allrounder when he was failing at both.

Either way, I am not sure its an apples to apples comparison when you have one guy starting his international career and the other guy having being exposed to ten years of international cricket prior.

 

[W63L35]

Afridi had been playing cricket for ten years by the time the first t20 was played. In those 10 years he has invented himself
as a batsman when he was failing as bowler
as a bowler when he failing as a batsman
as an allrounder when he was failing at both.

Either way, I am not sure its an apples to apples comparison when you have one guy starting his international career and the other guy having being exposed to ten years of international cricket prior.

I was not trying to prove one is better than the other.

I was asking fan's perspective .....See there two type of Pakistani fans;

1. The fans who were very extremely critical of Afridi's performance on the field in his last 2-3 years.
These fans wanted Afridi to leave long time before he actually left.

Now the question to them is: Are satisfied with Afridi's replacement from the performance stand point?

For example the fans who hated Afridi's 1st ball ducks, must be happy that Imad has only 4 1st ball ducks and 2 2nd ball ducks.


2. The fan who were happy to have him in the team at the time of his retirement.



So my question was to both types of the fans .... (regardless of the experience that Afridi had), is Imad help the team with his runs, wickets and fielding more that Afridi or less.

 

[Pete Rose]

I was not trying to prove one is better than the other.

I was asking fan's perspective .....See there two type of Pakistani fans;

1. The fans who were very extremely critical of Afridi's performance on the field in his last 2-3 years.
These fans wanted Afridi to leave long time before he actually left.

Now the question to them is: Are satisfied with Afridi's replacement from the performance stand point?

For example the fans who hated Afridi's 1st ball ducks, must be happy that Imad has only 4 1st ball ducks and 2 2nd ball ducks.


2. The fan who were happy to have him in the team at the time of his retirement.



So my question was to both types of the fans .... (regardless of the experience that Afridi had), is Imad help the team with his runs, wickets and fielding more that Afridi or less.

what are you talking about? the point is you should compare imad to his contemporaries in other teams. fwiw - i think Imad's bowling is ok, but his batting looks ok so far whenever he is batting 10 deliveries or so. i dont know if that makes him an all-rounder though. He needs to bat higher for that.

 

[Savak]

Imad Wasim is not the match winner that Afridi is. He has a long way to go. His bowling is very predictable now and he has yet to deliver a match winning knock or effort with the bat

 

[MenInG]

Become a crucial member of the side - batting has improved a lot.

 

[haris93]

Yup, Much better