This is my detailed analysis on the PCB's dispersal of cricketers' contracts of 2013. I formed an analysis similar to this before but my efforts went in vain as the reports were unconfirmed/unofficial. Although I am forming it after the conclusion of the Champions Trophy, I will try to create it so it doesn't include any performances from the recent Champions Trophy and will attempt to construct it as if I am creating it when they were released.
Category A
The first name which appears, and rightfully appears, is Misbah-Ul-Haq. Although his name appears at the top of the list through pure luck, it epitomises how Misbah-Ul-Haq should be the first name written down in the Category A list.
Given that he is our captain in the two most important formats of the game (Tests and ODI's) and how he has become the most beneficial member of the team recently on the basis of being the backbone of our batting line-up recently (providing that minimum score that our brilliant and maverick bowlers need to allow Pakistan to be victorious and being the only batsman who has scored on a regular basis in our ODI team, even being the second highest scorer of the ODI leg of the South African tour behind AB De Villiers), I think it is only fitting that he received a Category A contract (despite calls for him to be removed from the team on account of his age, strike-rate and alleged defensive captaincy by a few).
He allowed our team to rise from the morale-depleting England tour of 2010 when he was surprisingly given the Test captaincy, and with his captaincy Pakistan has become a formidable team in international cricket once again. Therefore, I think he deserves to receive the highest accolade possible on the basis of his great performance in the last few years, both as a batsman and as a captain.
However, despite being a Misbah-Ul-Haq fan, I have to declare that Misbah could've potentially been moved down a tier on account of how he will most probably retire in the near future due to age (his body may not be able to cope with the strains of international cricket) and so he could have been slowly removed from the team to allow Pakistan to build for the future. Nevertheless, in saying this, I reiterate my previous points on why his acquisition of a Category A contract is befitting because if the captain of a team (the one who leads the side and is usually one of the best players in the team itself) can't receive the top accolade available, who can?
The second name which appears on the list of players awarded a Category A contract is Mohammed Hafeez. I completely disagree with his presence in the top tier of contracts because he is probably one of the most vulnerable of our batsmen against the moving ball, possibly the most vulnerable amongst them, and also because of the way in which he was failed in international cricket ever since his debut. In my opinion Tests are the ultimate format of cricket and so performance in Test cricket is necessary to hallmark a player as a great player and is also necessary to judge the worth of a player. As an opener in Test matches, Hafeez has failed comfortably, even having an average below 20 in foreign conditions excluding those against minnow cricketing nations! For someone who is relied upon to provide solid opening partnerships on a regular basis, this is completely unacceptable.
However, given the way in which the PCB seemingly places greater emphasis and interest on Limited Over Internationals, it is no wonder that a batsman who has many deficiencies in his technique which are regularly exploited in Test matches and someone who regularly falls early in Test matches but performs decently in ODIs is rewarded a Category A contract.
Now, some may read this and think to themselves, Hafeez's job is not just to be an opening batsman - he is an all-rounder. But, his bowling has no worth in Test matches and his main job is to be an opener and provide scores/see off the new ball - which he fails to do on a consistent basis. Therefore, I think (at the most) he should have been awarded a Category B contract because he has some worth in T20Is and ODIs, both as a batsman (because the majority of ODIs nowadays are contested on the flattest of tracks which offer no assistance to the bowlers) and as a bowler (as he is able to bowl tidy overs but the problem with this is he is unable to take wickets).
Also, a point to consider is that he may have been awarded a Category A contract on the primary basis that he is the T20I captain, and so if he was awarded less, he would argue about it as he currently has way too much power and influence in the team. Plus, by awarding him a Category A contract, the PCB might have thought this would decrease the likelihood of a rift occurring within the team which is symbolic of the Pakistan team.
Thirdly, we come to Saeed Ajmal. Rightfully he was awarded a Category A contract because he had been the bowler our team was reliant upon to provide performances. He has been our best performer in Tests, ODIs and T20Is for a number of years now and he has carried our attack in times when our premier bowls fell to the vermin that is match-fixing. Also, he allowed our team to thrive by being the premier bowler despite Pakistan cricket being synonymous with producing world-class fast bowlers. In addition, Ajmal helped us to defeat the #1 Test side - when not many expected Pakistan to do so - with his expert wizardry and guile.
After this we come to the name of Younus Khan. Given that he is our premier Test batsman (and the backbone of our Test batting line-up) and has been ever since Inzamam retired and Yousuf lost his form, and the fact that he is ranked #9 in the ICC Test Rankings for batsmen, it is only befitting that he is awarded a Category A contract. In addition, although he performed mediocrely in Limited Over Internationals throughout his career and is non-existent in the Limited Over International team nowadays, it is only rightful to award him a Category A contract because he a few years left in him and is one of our Test all-time greats. Besides, if a mediocre Test batsman like Mohammad Hafeez is able to acquire a Category A contract, how can it be possible that a legend such as Younus Khan isn't able to do so?
Finally, the last name that appears is that of Mr. Shahid Afridi. How disgusting to see his name appear in the top tier of accolades. For a player who has performed horribly for the last year or so, both in batting and bowling, and for someone who shown virtually no discipline in terms of applying himself (instead throwing his wicket away) or selecting what he declares to the media, it is extremely surprising, even repugnant, to see that performances aren't rewarded with an increase in pay or by awarding performing players with the comfort of being able to know that the PCB has recognised their performances and assured their place in the team.
Then again, the PCB has always been renowned to be the most incompetent of cricketing boards, reminding us time and time again of their stupidity and inept. This decision to include him in the Category A of contracts is symbolic of the PCB which rewards players sometimes not based upon merit but upon other mysterious/nepotistic reasons.
Afridi's inclusion in the Category A of contracts indicates that he is likely to be selected in the near future despite being lacklustre in the recent past (and he shown virtually no potential/suggestion that he is deemed to return to form) given the way the PCB selects players (the recent release of the T20I and ODI teams of the tour of the West Indies prove my gut instinct correct). And although I do believe Afridi will improve because of his 88 (48) against South Africa where he was striking the ball really cleanly and also because some of the drift and dip which he is renowned for I could see in his bowling in the South Africa ODIs, I still think he should never have been rewarded a Category A contract, because the contracts are primarily rewarded based upon performance and not potential.
If anything, Afridi should've been offered a Category C contract at the most because we should reward beneficial and salubrious performances and show players that they have to perform in order to be rewarded.
Category B
The first name which appears upon this tier of contracts is that of Umar Gul. For a bowler who performs only once in a while in the ODI and Test formats, I think it is suitable that he was awarded a Category B contract because he is our mainstay pace bowler of our T20 team. However, one could consider placing him in the Category C of contracts because ever since his magnificent performance of 5/31 against an Indian batting attack consisting of some of their all-time legends, he has regularly failed to live up to Pakistani expectations in Tests. However, I hope this offering of a Category B contract can encourage him to bowl better in Tests and ODIs.
The second name which appears is that of Umar Akmal. I believe that his positioning in the Category B of contracts is commendable because if I remember correctly, he was dropped from the ODI team only two matches after two consecutive half-centuries. Although it can be argued that he was rightfully dropped on accounts of batting indiscipline, he was dropped for far too long a duration which has resulted in his prolonged loss of form and confidence (his domestic form/scores portray this across clearly). However, offering him a Category B contract conveys across that he is still under the selectors' radar and they still have plans to include him in the playing XI (which has become true with the recent announcement of the Pakistan squad to tour the West Indies). I just hope he can take confidence from this and be motivated to perform.
After this appears the name of Azhar Ali. I slightly disagree with this because as an integral player of our Test team and someone who has performed excellently as an opener in our ODI side (even if at a lower than usual strike-rate), he should have received a Category A contract. Although a Category B contract can be considered acceptable for this youngster (in terms of matches played), I feel that he should've received a Category A contract because he has performed well in both formats of the game and performances should be rewarded.
However, I don't feel that Ali has been too hard done by because a Category B contract isn't something which can be laughed at. But then again, when people like Hafeez and Afridi are allowed to gain a Category A contract despite failing to perform on numerous vital occasions. Also, with Hafeez being being a virtually non-existent opener in foreign conditions and Afridi not even being part of the Test team anymore, why should either of them receive a Category A contract when they are either failing to perform in the most important format/not even player!? Ali may feel a little disappointed because he has performed better than either of these two lackadaisical and mediocre players (in the Test and ODI formats for Hafeez and for Afridi all three formats).
Furthermore, another name located in the Category B of contracts is that of Asad Shafiq. In my opinion, this should be considered completely acceptable because whilst reasonably failing in ODIs (despite being dropped numerous times after performing), he performed with a Test century on the tough tour to South Africa (where numerous other Pakistani batsmen failed miserably). Despite declaring this, he may feel a little aghast as to why others (i.e Hafeez and Afridi) have been awarded Category A contracts despite failing in Tests when he himself performed adequately well, having an average 33.16 with 1 century (but brilliantly when compared to the other batsmen, having the 3rd highest amount of runs) in the recent tour of SA.
Moreover, another name located in the Category B of contracts is that of Junaid Khan. Given that he is the best pace bowler of our Test and ODI team(despite being only young, both in terms of age and matches played), I salute this move by the PCB because he has been rewarded for his good performances in the most important formats. However, I still believe he should have been offered a Category A contract because of the way in which he has performed after the match-fixing debacle snatched away the leaders of our bowling attack and also because he seems to be the leader of our pace bowling attack (though this may be Mohammed Irfan who has similarly performed brilliantly).
Then we advance to the name of Abdur Rehman. For a guy who has not played any international matches since the England tour of the UAE in 2012, I don't see how he warrants a Category B contract. Although it may not be his fault that he hasn't played any international games (the situation for him to gain a place in the starting XI in Tests hasn't been there with a single Test tour, and that to fast-bowling havens of South Africa), I don't see how his recent form has justified his acquisition of a Category B contract.
After his highly successful Test series against England in the UAE where he bagged 19 wickets at 16.73 in the Test matches, he failed during the tour of Sri Lanka only taking 6 wickets at the high average of 41.33 from the 2 Test matches in which he played in. Besides, he wasn't even among the TOP 50 of the wicket-takers list in the concluded President's Trophy (arguably his best format), although I have to admit he performed decently in the recently concluded President's Cup One-Day Tournament being the sixth highest with 9 wickets at an average of 27. Despite having this accomplishment recently, I am puzzled as to why he didn't do better and take a greater amount of wickets especially on the turning tracks of Pakistan. Amongst notable spin bowlers, he did the best (but there are only two who fall into that particular category; him and Mohammed Hafeez, with the latter not renowned for his wicket-taking ability). Therefore, I don't think he deserves a Category B contract because he has neither performed in any of his recent international matches nor had remarkable statistics in recent domestic competitions.
After this appears the name of Shoaib Malik. His distinction of being able to attain a Category B contract epitomises the type of corruptness and nepotistic forces which are prevalent throughout the PCB. Much like Afridi's inclusion in the team, neither his recent form or his development in his career warrants him being able to receive a Category B contract. However, where Afridi has performed in his career as an ODI all-rounder and won numerous matches for Pakistan, Malik has failed abysmally apart from against Hong Kong, South Africa and India. Whether you think he performed well or not during his career is a different matter, but he has nothing to assert that he should even attain even a Category C contract, never mind a place in the team (based upon his current form). He is neither a proper batsman or a proper bowler but bewilderingly he still manages to attain a place in the side.
In addition, we then reach the name of Nasir Jamshed. Given that he has performed well since his comeback, scoring 781 runs at the average of 43.38 with 3 centuries (albeit against India), I think the argument can be made that he should've been rewarded a Category A contract on the basis that he is our only performing opening batsman in ODIs (with Hafeez at the other hand). In addition, even at this young age of both himself and his career, he has stabilised his position as an opener in ODIs (and I think also in Tests as well) and so should've been offered a Category A contract because he was won more vital matches for Pakistan recently than the lacklustre Hafeez (who is surprisingly situated in the Category A of contracts). However, he is only young and if he continually performs this well, I think he will be able to force the selectors to give him a Category A contract.
Category C
Finally, inevitably, we reach the name of Kamran Akmal. I salute the PCB for only rewarding him a Category C contract because he has been an absolutely atrocious wicket-keeper throughout his career (even after he seemed to be decent find at the beginning of his career, both with the gloves and with the willow in hand). Although his glovework has improved recently, his form with the bat has been horrendous and despite being one of our more experienced and senior batsmen, he has failed to show any restraint, entering the wicket and losing it at crucial times of the game. Of course, his performances have been abysmal even without mentioning the match-fixing allegations which mar his career (that performance in the Sydney Test of 2008 can’t have been the result of pure bad luck/coincidental/because of his horrible wicket-keeping ability as although the dropped catches may have been, that missed run-out chance of Shane Watson was way too dubious, given that it is instinctive for a wicket-keeper to hit the wickets as soon as the ball lands in his gloves). Therefore, to miss the run-out chance by forcefully moving his gloves away from the stumps – against the momentum of his gloves moving in a downward motion – was extremely mysterious and adding to this his melodramatic and overly animated disappointed expression and gestures after he missed the relatively straightforward run-out chance. Even if one manages to forget all that, and merely focuses on his recent form, it still can’t be justified how he received a Category C contract because even though his glovework has improved (though not faultless or remarkable as such), his batting ability has declined. Therefore, it seems as if both facets of the game work in parallel; when one increases, the other decreases and vice versa. I hope his recent dropping from the West Indies ODI squad heralds a change where he will never be present in Pakistan colours again.
After this arrives the name of Mohammed Irfan. I am utterly disgusted and/or disappointed with placing him in the Category C of contracts. For a bowler who has returned from a highly disappointing start to his international career and has performed greatly since, I would’ve thought he at least deserved a Category B contract, if not a Category A. After a highly successful Limited Over Internationals tour of India where he extracted great amounts of bounce from surfaces which are usually known to be slow and low, he completed a tour of South Africa where he was arguably our best bowler of the tour even though he must’ve been extremely disappointed at not being able to play in the first Test match, at the renowned live-wire and extremely bouncy pitch of Johannesburg. Adding to this, he has performed successfully with a very awkward body frame, being 7’ 1” tall, much to the disbelief of critics who thought his body would not hold up. Therefore, I think he should’ve been rewarded a Category B contract, at least, because he has a commendable work ethic and his fitness has improved, where others have a terrible work ethic and effort to improve their fitness (Nasir Jamshed and Imran Farhat are two examples of this). Because he has been striving to improve his fitness (even looking like one of our fittest pace bowlers during the South Africa Test matches), I think he should’ve been awarded a more rewarding contract because he has worked hard on his deficiency, showing that he is committed to the game (which is the types of players Pakistan cricket need instead of the casual, lackadaisical players which are prevalent throughout our team). People who know that they need to work hard in international cricket, that is the types of players we require.
Moreover, we approach the name of Imran Farhat. His selection is a tricky one to discuss even if many treat his selection in the XI with disdain. I understand that his selection is rife and reeking of nepotism but at least he has performed sometimes. Although I am absolutely disgusted with his inclusion in the team because it is on the basis of his father-in-law's (Mohammed Ilyas) displeasure at his exclusion from the team and also because of his contacts - rather than on the basis of merit/performing consistently in domestic cricket, I have to declare that since his comeback during the South Africa series, he has performed adequately. However, despite saying this, I disagree with even awarding him a Category C contract because he constantly makes his way into the team, despite not even performing brilliantly in domestic cricket, due to his contacts and the influence his relatives have over Pakistan cricket. Why should a player, who doesn't even perform in domestic cricket (to push for a place in international cricket), deserve a place in our international team, especially when his inclusion stinks of nepotism? Besides, even though he has regrettably performed adequately well since his comeback in international cricket (in terms of scores), he has done so in an extremely greedy manner by scoring at a very slow strike-rate and has batted inconsistently (especially failing in the most important of matches, like those in the ICC Champions Trophy).
Furthermore, we then reach the name of Taufeeq Umar. Since his comeback in Tests, he has performed modestly as an opener notching up 3 centuries (with a high score of 236) at the average of 37.93 from the 18 Tests (since his comeback in November 2010). I agree with him being rewarded a Category C contract because his record isn't too bad (although it could be improved). I believe he shouldn't have been offered more because it seems as if he may be phased out of the Test team (Nasir Jamshed looks the player to take the opening slot from him in Tests) and also because he hasn't performed brilliantly (although he has performed sufficiently).
After this appears the name of Azaiz Cheema. His inclusion in the PCB Contracting list is slightly bewildering as he hasn't played any international cricket since the Australia tour of the UAE where he played in the first ODI at Sharjah, taking 0 wickets in his 7.2 overs whilst conceding 38 runs. In addition, in his last three Test outings, he has taken only 1 wicket at the stupendous bowling average of 167 in a combined 53.2 overs (from the 3 Test matches). Therefore, I don't understand how he deserved a Category C contract. However, despite declaring this, I believe he may have received a Category C contract on the basis of his domestic performances. In the last President's Trophy he bagged 46 wickets at 18.82 from 18 innings (fifth best takings) whilst also taking 43 wickets at 17.48 in 16 innings in the Quaid-e-Azam Trophy (second best takings amongst the bowlers). He also took 5 wickets at the less impressive average of 32.60 in the President's Cup One-Day Tournament (this is understandable as he seems to be more of a Test bowler capable of applying pressure by bowling long spells rather than producing magical deliveries). With all of this information, I believe he deserved maybe a Category C contract but probably was more entitled to just a stipend contract if others such as Zulfiqar Babar (who has been performing consistently in domestic cricket for a number of years now) didn't also receive a Category C contract.
The next name which is transcribed is that of Adnan Akmal. I believe he deserved a Category C contract after performing competently, both as a wicket-keeper and as a batsman. However, I adamantly think he couldn't have received a higher contract at all because in 16 Tests he has only scored 440 runs at an average of 27.50, with 2 50s and a high score of 61. During the 3rd Test between Pakistan and Sri Lanka at Pallekele, he produced a gritty knock of 35* whilst suffering from a hairline fracture on his left ring finger. These types of fighting, staunch, strong-willed characters are exactly the types of players Pakistan should be striving to locate instead of those who go missing whenever needed/whenever tense situations arise. Despite stating this, I still believe only a Category C contract/a stipend contract is the highest accolade he should receive because he has only performed adequately and not brilliantly or to the point where his performances amaze people. His chicken dance though is supreme!
After this we approach the name of Faisal Iqbal. His inclusion in the Category C of contracts is completely marred with nepotism, with his uncle Javed Miandad being the director-general of the PCB. As a result, it is no surprise to me that he was awarded a Category C contract even though he thoroughly didn't deserve one, having batted in 44 Test innings and only managing to obtain an average of 26.76 with 1 century against India in 2006 at Karachi. Even if his recent domestic scores are looked at, I have no doubts that the only reason for him receiving a Category C contract is because of his helpful contacts. In this year's President's Trophy, he managed to score 426 runs in 11 First-class innings at the average of 42.60. The only remarkable occurrence regarding these performances is that they came at the impressive strike-rate of 80.68. Rather confoundedly though, in the President's Cup One-Day Tournament he only managed to obtain a strike-rate of 67.03 whilst scoring 120 runs in 3 innings at the average of 60. This indicates that his recent domestic performances do not warrant a Category C contract because there have been several others, who have performed better than him, who have received virtually no recognition of their performances in terms of wages and game fees. Consequently, I have no doubt that it was most likely that he was awarded a Category C contract on the basis of his contacts rather than consistent performances.
In addition, the final name which is present in the Category C of contracts list is that of Ahmed Shehzad. I strictly believe he deserved a Category C contract because although his ODI average doesn't portray the fact that he has performed sufficiently in international cricket, reaping an average of 25.36 from the 20 ODIs in which he has played in, I believe he has performed decently well because he has scored 2 centuries, conveying across that he has the ability to be present at the crease for long durations and is salubrious to the team in terms of providing runs for the team. Given that he is only young at 21 years of age, I believe he has scope for potential to improve his average.
Stipend Category
The first name which appears in this category is that of Sarfraz Ahmed. I actually salute this move of the PCB because it shows that he has not been forgotten, despite the intense scrutiny he has faced from both Pakistani cricket fans and the media because of his apparent "failures" and has regularly been attributed with having a coward-like mindset. This has arose after he displayed no aggression when Philander wrongly threw the ball towards the South African wicket-keeper, seemingly directed in the path of Sarfraz Ahmed - most probably to indimidate or even attempt to injure him - and did not even say a few words in anger. However, what people seem to ignore is the fact that he was inserted in the line-up unexpectedly, without being given a consistent run in the side, on a tough tour of SA where most of our specialist batsmen didn't even perform too well themselves.
He scored 83 runs at the shocking average of 13.83 (with a high score of 40 in Pakistan's 2nd innings of the 3rd Test) but I will re-iterate my point that he still deserves a consistent run in the side on the basis of his domestic performances and the supreme perfection of his wicket-keeping ability during the tour fo South Africa. In an era in which Pakistan fans have been blessed with the rubbish wicket-keeping standards of the Akmal trio, he represents something of a saviour in terms of being able to catch properly behind the stumps. With a First-Class batting average of 40.75 from the 92 games in which he has participated, I think he deserves greater recognition of his services and ultimately deserves a stable, assured run in the Test side before he is discarded/is disregarded for international outings. For some reason it seems, Sarfraz Ahmed received no assurance from the selectors that he would be given a consistent run in the side and his place in the side would not disappear after a few failures. This is interpretable through the way in which he batted; with no confidence, batting in a shell and always seeming to be under too much pressure to play in his natural ways.
He may prove not to be a wicket-keeper of international standards but to prove this, he must first be given a consistent run in the team (because of his commendable domestic performances).
The second name which appears in the stipend category list is Wahab Riaz. I think this was quite a good move by the PCB because in recent times he has bowled with some fire and aggression, clocking up 90+ mph on a regular basis. Although he may have failed during the ODI tour of South Africa, where he proved expensive (as usual!), I think he has shown enough promise to be a regular wicket-taker to warrant a stipend category contract.
In addition, he seems to have worked considerably upon his batting and fitness, which conveys across that he is willing and aware to help the team (not only with his bowling) and knows that to keep his place in the side and to help Pakistan to become competitive amongst the other top teams, then it is required that he contributes not only with the ball (other teams have tailenders who are beneficial to the team by providing runs) but also with the bat. In addition, he needs to be as professional and adaptable as possible because high fitness levels and ability to bat (applying to bowlers mostly) are something which international cricket require nowadays. Therefore, I believe the PCB's idea to approach him with a stipend category was justifiable because although he is a little on the expensive side in international matches, he remains a wicket-taking option (even though he is often not given the new ball) and has shown that he is not insouciant about his place in the side being assured - which is the types of players Pakistan require, ones who acknowledge that their places aren't confirmed unless they perform and those who know that to be successful other necessary assets need to be added to their game, both to allow them to be succesful and to take their place in the side and also to allow Pakistan to have a higher success rate and be competitive in world cricket.
Furthermore, we reach the name of Rahat Ali. I admire this move by the PCB because although many have written Ali off and declare that he should be disregarded for selection, I believe he has potential to improve and seems to be the missing link in the Pakistan pace bowling attack. With two pacemen who should be used to bowl in short bursts because of their wicket-taking ability and tendency to conjure up magical deliveries rather than bowl consistently and apply pressure, I believe Pakistan requires a pace bowler who is willing to bowl in the middle overs for long periods of time. Therefore, I think this pace bowler needs to be someone who is not flustered of not being able to bowl with a relatively new ball, has stamina and is someone who is not afflicted by knowing that most of his bowling efforts will probably be in vain and that he will be bowling simply to make the overs pass (whilst picking up a wicket or two) till the second new ball arrives.
However, despite saying this, I don't believe Rahat Ali fulfills this category as during the Test matches in South Africa he seemed rather lacklustre in being able to implement pressure by bowling in the correct areas (because he seemed to bowl way too many loose, inefficient deliveries, which released the pressure) and also seemed rather short on stamina. But, I still don't think he can be disregarded for selection immediately because he took 6-127 against South Africa (the #1 Test team in the world) in the 1st innings of the 3rd Test (albeit at a very expensive economy rate) and also has an impressive bowling average of 21.01 from 41 First-Class matches (also taking 27 wickets from 15 innings in the President's Trophy of 2013 and acquiring 18 wickets at an average of 19.55 from 6 First-Class innings in the Quaid-E-Azam Trophy). Therefore, I think he needs to be given a consistent run or at least a few more games before one can deem him unsuitable for international cricket.
Moreover, the next name which appears is that of Ehsan Adil. I totally agree with awarding him a contract on the basis of his remarkable performances in domestic cricket in which he acquired 54 wickets at a bowling average of 17.88 from 19 First-Class innings in the President's trophy (only behind Zulfiqar Babar in the top wicket-takers list), took home 9 wickets at the average of 27.11 from 5 List A in the President's Cup One-Day Tournament and also having an overall average of 19.21 (whilst also taking 61 wickets!) in the 22 First-Class matches in which he has participated in in his short career so far. This youngster has performed excellently and seems a good prospect for Pakistan to invest in, not only based upon his domestic statistics, but also based upon the agression which he has shown (a fast bowler should be fiery and agressive) and the thoughtful bowler he seems to be (the way in which he outwitted Graeme Smith in his first over in Test cricket was brilliant to watch). It's a good move by the PCB to reward wholesome domestic performances, not only with a Test outing, but also with a contract to give the youngster confidence and show his efforts haven't gone unnoticed.
Then we reach the name of Umar Amin. This youngster has adequate domestic figures with a First-Class batting average of 38.07 from 120 innings and a List A average of 32.79 but somehow he has managed to acquire a considerable fan following, who have suggested he is the most appropriate batsman for the vital #3 role, especially in the Limited Over International formats of the game (as he also possesses an average of 26.54 from 36 T20 innings). Although at the current stage in his career I can't possibly suggest whether it is indeed true that he should be given a chance at #3 (he has not been given a consistent run in the side, which I believe is obligatory when discussing a player's vale/ability), I can declare that he seems a little limited in his stroke-play, which shouldn't prove too detrimental unless Pakistan continue playing him as a batsman to be employed in the closing stages of an innings, because in my opinion he doesn't possess the ability to slog and besides, that isn't his natural playing style. In addition, I can also state that until he is given a fair chance in the team and the Pakistan cricket team decides to insert spontaneously as a middle-order batsman (he has played 5 Tests, all on what was a difficult tour to England in 2010, where he was thrown into unfamiliar batting conditions and was expected to perform, but understandably failed only being able to acquire 99 runs - with a highest score of 33 - from 8 available Test innings), judgement must be reserved on his capabilities.
At this current moment, however, I believe the PCB opted for the current decision to award him with a stipend contract because of his performance in the President's Trophy in 2013, where he was able to salvage 767 runs from 17 innings at the gleaming average of 45.11. However, it must be noted that 281 runs of these were made in a singular innings, and although I don't believe in removing random performances, consider that when one excludes this innings his figures become significantly less impressive, with him managing to obtain only 486 runs at the facile, measly average of 28.58. Therefore, this suggests he is heavily inconsistent, along with the fact that this monstrous score actually remained the only century included in his amassed total of 767 runs. Despite declaring this, the innings was produced against an attack boasting the likes of Ehsan Adil and Umar Gul, although I suspect it was an extremely innocuous flat pitch, conveyed across with the fact that a total of 873 runs were produced from two uncompleted innings, with only 8 wickets falling in the whole game. But, I must say that rewarding him with a stipend contract certainly isn't a lamentable decision because I believe he is one player to invest in for the future and I hope this will provide him with some confidence. Also, because of his performances in the President's Cup One-Day Tournament (218 runs at a strike-rate of 84.82 in 4 games, at the wholesome average of 54.50) I believe it would be more salubrious to the advancement of the Pakistan cricket team in world cricket if he was given Limited Over International caps before more Test appearances. Another point to consider is that even during this tournament, he exhibits a record with a solitary century and no half-centuries, more indications that he is heavily inconsistent (which Pakistan definitely does not require at this stage in international cricket). So please, bear that in mind when discussing his future potential.
Moreover, we then approach the name of Zulfiqar Babar, a slow left-armer who has been attaining bucket-loads of wickets in domestic cricket over the past number of years. A spin bowler who is certainly not afraid to flight the ball (evident with his eagerness of flighting the ball during the T20Is against the West Indies - certainly an antithesis to the way in which Saeed Ajmal operates), he proved the leading wicket-taker in the President's Trophy, acquiring 62 wickets at a bowling average of 15.03 from 17 bowling innings. Therefore, along with the fact that he has been performing well over a number of years in domestic cricket now and also because of Rehman's failures which I've mentioned above, I believe he should consistently be given chances to perform - no matter what his age - if Abdul Rehman is given opportunities. Of course, if a younger spinner is provided with international opportunities, he should remain far back in the pecking order (remaining only a replacement spin bowler) but if Abdul Rehman is allowed to retain his place, I don't see why Zulfiqar Babar's record doesn't warrant him to be first choice among the two.
As you can most probably infer, I agree with the fact that the PCB have offered a stipend contract to Babar, but one can't help but feel - too little too late (he should really have been given international call-ups by now, let's be honest)?
After this, we embark on a task to discuss Asad Ali and the merits of offering him a stipend contract. I hold the opinion that it justifiable offering him a stipend contract because of his exploits in domestic First-Class cricket (11th on the wicket-takers list in the President's Trophy, with 36 wickets at an average of 22.11 from 16 bowling innings) and List A cricket (managing to acquire the primary podium position in the wicket-taking list, obtaining 14 wickets at an average of 17.07 from 6 List A games). These statistics deem him applicable for a stipend category and maybe even indicate that he warrants chances at the international level. However, as the West Indies ODIs highlighted, although he is proficient in the art of swing bowling, his lack of pace (especially dangerous considering at this stage in his career he will primarily be playing ODIs, which are played on some of the flattest tracks in the whole world, and also because his home arena is the UAE, never a fast-bowling paradise - unless bowlers have genuine pace such as Waqar Younis and Wasim Akram) is a blotch on his record, and I believe until he notches up a few more clicks or (as its effectiveness was shown in the 'Speedgun quick Vs Perceived to be quick) becomes more aggressive - which can be potent - his ability to prove an attritional and authoritative presence over the opposition will be severely limited.
The second to last name to appear is that of Haris Sohail. Providing a record with a First-Class average of 52.75, Sohail was the 4th highest run-producer in the President's Trophy of 2013, managing to obtain 673 runs from 9 games at the incredibly portly average of 134.60. Already being hyped as the great Pakistan batting star of the future, perhaps understandably so, he was given his first international cap during the Pakistan tour of the West Indies earlier this year and although I wasn't able to see him play (for reasons already mentioned previously), the thought was that he struggled somewhat. That being said, however, I staunchly believe he deserves to be given international opportunities, especially because of the fact that he boasts such an impressive record as he does. To further add to his First-Class exploits, earlier this year he amassed 169 runs from 4 List A innings at the batting average of 84.50, which - although not verified - suggests that he experience in recovering a faulting innings, portrayed across with the fact that he boasts 2 Not-Outs in the 4 innings, implying that his team struggles to put up respectable totals (merely speculation, mind). Amongst these 169 runs, he scored 2 half-centuries, which suggests that he is much more consistent than Umar Amin (he also scored 4 centuries and 2 half-centuries, in stark contrast to Amin's solitary century and 4 half-centuries - which also conveys across that he is much more experienced and has much more apprehension over producing long and meaningful innings and doesn't throw his wicket away cheaply). Therefore, I believe it was just that he was given a stipend category; hopefully, he is given more international chances as well.
Finally, last but not least, Anwar Ali. Although boasting an adequate domestic record, with averages under 30 in all three domestic formats of the game, the main achievement throughout Anwar Ali's career was the domineering presence he was in the final of 2006 Under-19 World Cup, producing booming in-swingers and ending up with the impressive figures of 5/35 to take the game home for Pakistan when many thought it would be a relatively easy Indian victory (Pakistan only managed to post a meagre total of 109 runs). Not much has happened since then for Anwar Ali, despite his performance in the final. However, I myself support his inclusion in the team (at least primarily, in order to see what talent he poses) but I must state: no-one can fully know the reason of his performance in the 2006 Under-19 World Cup final and therefore fully declare that the mercurial performance was not simply the result of excellent, appreciable conditions or simply luck etc (because of his rather unsparkling performances in domestic cricket). Although one may believe I am harshly maligning Anwar Ali and his performance, please note: I genuinely believe his action was wrongfully altered by Aaqib Javed, and although I don't believe Javed intended to do any harm with what he was doing (simply because of his own tendency to bowl out-swingers rather than the customary Anwar Ali in-swinger), I declare that what he did was ruinous. I hope Anwar Ali will provide some spectacles for us cricketing fans again but in the meantime I believe his offer of a stipend contract rests on a hinge - he boasts neither excessively brilliant domestic performances nor has he produced such deplorably impressive performances (after the 5/35 against the Indian Under-19 team) in the recent past. What a sad story of a lost player he is...
now, nice post btw, however I think only cricket section posts count.
onting
