But Amir sat out of the semi final and Pak beat a similar (arguably stronger) English team that day. Actually Pak turned the tables on both England and India in CT17. Junaid was the holding glue of that bowling attack. He would bowl defensively when someone on the other end was attacking. In the semi with Rumman looking slippery, he took on the lead bowler role and attacked earlier on. I remember he gave away 23 in first 3 overs but came back to finish with less than 6rpo whilst grabbing a few wickets. It was a charged up unit that worked like a unit in the later stages of that tournament. I won't say it was a fluke. But I don't think Pak wouldn't have won if Amir wasn't there. Fakhar had put us in a very strong position and it's never easy chasing a big total in final unless you're Australia.
What you claimed is entirely hypothetical.
We don't know the what's and ifs of anything so we can't claim of if X player was missing, i don't think we would have won or I think we would have.
The fact, I REPEAT FACT, is that in a final Amir was their, plain and simple.
Cricket is a team game, ans the main players of ct 2017 that deserve credit are Fakhar, Amir and hafeez.
Everyone else played a support role which includes hasan Ali, Shadab and even babar, Malik and Imad for their run contribution.
But the main factors were Fakhar and amir.
Fakhar, Amir have been Pakistan's Match winners for the past decade. Babar has not, Their is nothing wrong with claiming that.
Just like theirs nothing wrong with claiming that although Bobby is a good player HE IS NOT WORLD CLASS, since everyone compares him to international standards, every top team has 3 to 4 batsmen superior to babar.
Similarly theirs nothing with claiming that FAKHAR AT HIS ABSOLUTE BEST is 500x the batsmen that BABAR is at his ABDOLUTE BEST.
babar at his absolute worst is better then fakhar at his absolute worse though, that much I'll agree on, and he's more consistent then Fakhar.