Who should fulfill the finisher role for the Pakistan team in the shorter formats?

RyanRyan10

Local Club Star
Joined
Sep 19, 2018
Runs
2,119
There has been considerable discussion surrounding the top order. However, Pakistani fans seem to overlook the importance of the finisher role. In my opinion, Aamer Jamal would be a worthy choice.

The role of a finisher in the limited overs demands courage and temperament . Aamer Jamal showcased these attributes during his tour of Australia. He has career T20 strike rate of 154.68 which is phenomenal.

Some might highlight that he tends to leak runs; however, it is not necessary for him to bowl his full quota in every match. Hardik Pandya and Marcus Stoinis also do not bowl their full quotas in every match.

Pakistan could also play a spin bowling all-rounder, allowing him to share the quota of the 5th bowling option with Aamer Jamal. These two players can occupy the no.6 and no.7 spots. Both Naseem and Shaheen can bat, so Pakistan won't have to worry about their batting depth.
 
I don’t care. First remove your openers
This thread is not about an opener and if you do not care then why do you want openers to be removed. Leave it as it is.

I just want to hear few options about finisher role. That's it..nothing more.
 
This thread is not about an opener and if you do not care then why do you want openers to be removed. Leave it as it is.

I just want to hear few options about finisher role. That's it..nothing more.
My opinion doesn’t matter.

I can’t knowingly suggest a ‘finisher’ or a lower order batter for a side that is structurally incorrect. First get the structure sorted out, and then discuss the pieces that ensure the balance.
 
My opinion doesn’t matter.

I can’t knowingly suggest a ‘finisher’ or a lower order batter for a side that is structurally incorrect. First get the structure sorted out, and then discuss the pieces that ensure the balance.
Ok let me ask another simple question.

who should bat in last 5 overs. or who is the lower order batter??
 
First the middle order needs to be fixed. You cant have a specialist finisher because often the lower middle order is coming in to bat in the 13-15th over due to middle order collapse.

So the person is forced to save his wicket rather than actually go for the big hits.
 
This thread is not about an opener and if you do not care then why do you want openers to be removed. Leave it as it is.

I just want to hear few options about finisher role. That's it..nothing more.
Finishers are useless unless you have a lineup that sets a platform for them .

That said, I do think Pakistan should have picked Aamer Jamal ahead of one of the pacers.
 
Chacha and Imad were our only options for finishers. I struggle to think of any other names based on recent PSLs
 
No names I can think of. We have a lot of top order bats and no middle lower order finishers.
It means we are doomed. We cannot keep playing these tried and tested hacks again and again.

Aamer Jamal is a good option but he should be groomed for this role.
 
It means we are doomed. We cannot keep playing these tried and tested hacks again and again.

Aamer Jamal is a good option but he should be groomed for this role.
It is a good chance now for someone to step up and do the job but the PCB must give them a long rope because it is a tough role.
 
Let’s hear @Major ‘s thoughts? Who is the new hero/messiah for this role?
The concept of finisher is abit over rated. They simply dont exist, and even they do exist they fail more often than perform.

Better to fix the middle order and have proper batters at lower order.

Guys like miller, klassen, surya, or dhoni in the past played in the lower order not because of their finishing abilities but because they are proper batters that cant play the new ball but prefer to play against the old ball.

When the focus is to have a dedicated finisher, than the team starts moving up and down players for no reason. If 100 were required and 5 wickets were down, we would be seeing asif, ifti and khushdil being moved down and some bowler being shifted up.

Even bevan was known as a finisher not because of boundary hitting abilities but because of his fitness that allowed him to rotate strike and still 1s and 2s
 
It means we are doomed. We cannot keep playing these tried and tested hacks again and again.

Aamer Jamal is a good option but he should be groomed for this role.
Aamir jamals bowling is terrible. He bowls all around the wicket. The australian side was soo bad that they gave him wickets on rubbish bowling.

If aamir jamal is selected that means he will be bowling 10 overs that can be problematic.

We just need a guy who can rotate strike, shift gears at the lower order and have fitness for the strike rotation aswell.

Irfan niazi shows potential, but needs to top domestic tables before being considered
 
It means we are doomed. We cannot keep playing these tried and tested hacks again and again.

Aamer Jamal is a good option but he should be groomed for this role.

we are not doomed.

your not going to know what's at the end of the tunnel unless you walk through it. It's crucial to give opportunities to those performing in domestic cricket, even if it's just for a series. Without this chance, discovering new talent becomes impossible.

but in pakistan players like rizwan and babar need to play every single match even if its against nepal because those are the only matches where they can be hero's otherwise they get showed their place vs big teams

this is why some of us say rizwan and babar are destroying pakistan cricket.

take india as an example half of their main players are missing from the zimbabwe series this month, if pakistan were playing zimbabwe babar, rizwan, shadab, shaheen and chacha would be the first names on the list. im sure india will find 1 or 2 new players from this series
 
The concept of finisher is abit over rated. They simply dont exist, and even they do exist they fail more often than perform.

Better to fix the middle order and have proper batters at lower order.

Guys like miller, klassen, surya, or dhoni in the past played in the lower order not because of their finishing abilities but because they are proper batters that cant play the new ball but prefer to play against the old ball.

When the focus is to have a dedicated finisher, than the team starts moving up and down players for no reason. If 100 were required and 5 wickets were down, we would be seeing asif, ifti and khushdil being moved down and some bowler being shifted up.

Even bevan was known as a finisher not because of boundary hitting abilities but because of his fitness that allowed him to rotate strike and still 1s and 2s

brilliant idea, we could get rizwan and babar to play in the middle they definitely are useless up the top
 
brilliant idea, we could get rizwan and babar to play in the middle they definitely are useless up the top

Every department in cricket is important, and to fix your lower order you dont end up destroying your top order.

The top order will always have players that can bat the new ball, so dropping your openers is really a foolish idea. That creates a situation where you dont have a person to play the new ball and thus creating more problems
 
I see.

Top order is fine?
Bro no matter how much you complain, top order is not an issue.

Besides, we have tried saim, fakhar and harris and non of them have done wonders.

Too much time and resources been wasted in the top order.

The middle order has stayed broken since last 3 years and the reason for that is we play openers there due to a guilty concious and give them more leverage.
 
Every department in cricket is important, and to fix your lower order you dont end up destroying your top order.

The top order will always have players that can bat the new ball, so dropping your openers is really a foolish idea. That creates a situation where you dont have a person to play the new ball and thus creating more problems
You keep going about how middle order failed and how brilliant the top order is.

Can you post what did the top order do this worldcup That's even half decent
 
We tried Saim and Fakhar as openers with Babar and Rizwan following them?
They have been tried and results are there for everyone to see.

You can do nitpicking if you want, but that doesnt change the fact that they failed when given the opportunity.
 
You keep going about how middle order failed and how brilliant the top order is.

Can you post what did the top order do this worldcup That's even half decent
Where did i said the top order is brilliant?

This is why you need to come out of your agenda based posting.

Top orders issue is not that they cant bat, they can bat and need to pace the innings abit more.

For this, they tried different set of guys including usman khan, saim ayub, harris and fakhar and all of them failed.

They couldnt outperform rizwan and babar. Thus its better to get rizwan and babar to pace up more than removing them.

Middle orders issue is, they cant even bat or stay at the wicket.

Thus, the middle order is more of an issue than the top order.

If pakistan were to play saim and fakhar as openers, who would be failing, i know you wont have issues with the top order, because your issue is not with the performance but with your favourites not playing
 
They have been tried and results are there for everyone to see.
When was Fakhar ever tried as an opener? 5 years ago?

When have 2 openers been tried with Babar and Rizwan following them???

Tell me.
 
When was Fakhar ever tried as an opener? 5 years ago?

When have 2 openers been tried with Babar and Rizwan following them???

Tell me.


Wasnt saim tried as opener?

Fakhar failed as an opener in t20 because of which he was moved.

Now to say that oh saim ayub failed because his partner wasnt harris and was babar or rizwan and had saim had a new parter results would had been different.

That is just clutching straws and trying to find a new excuse when all others fail.

No matter who iw standing on the other end, it doesnt matter because its saim holding the bat and it has been saim failing along. Same story with harris and usman khan aswell.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Wasnt saim tried as opener?

Fakhar failed as an opener in t20 because of which he was moved.

Now to say that oh saim ayub failed because his partner wasnt harris and was babar or rizwan and had saim had a new parter results would had been different.

That is just clutching straws and trying to find a new excuse when all others fail.

No matter who iw standing on the other end, it doesnt matter because its saim holding the bat and it has been saim failing along. Same story with harris and usman khan aswell.


Did Pakistan ever try 2 different openers (that didn’t include one of Babar or Rizwan) with Babar and Rizwan following after those two new openers? Answer this question.

My stance on cricket is very straightforward and simple. Neither Babar or Rizwan should be opening in T20. Not one of the two nonsense, both should not be opening. Babar is fine for number 3. That’s it.

So remind me, when did Pakistan ever try Babar and Rizwan following two Dashing openers? Have they ever done it?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top