Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Because he throws away good starts and gets out in soft ways
He negotiates some good spells and then gets out on easy deliveries which is a crime
You saying that we should be happy with his fifties and 70s makes it seem that we should be happy with mediocrity
So, scoring 300 against the minnow windies attack in UAE where our alternative options have superior averages: Shehzad @ 57.15 in UAE (something close to that figure) against superior opposition which includes NZ and Australia, Salman Butt (better average than any of our openers in Australia) and you think people are unjustly criticizing him?
I do agree that the talks of him dropping immediately are wrong, however, but i don't think he is the best test opener we have therefore should be lowered to the middle order.
He plays too slow.
Damn if you do damn if you dont
West indies arnt a minnow.
Plus scoring a 300 is very tough job. You could never take away credit from someone for a 300
/the beauty of test cricket
Test Cricket is played like One day cricket now. We need players who can go big or go home.
?
Please come up with a better reason to hate him
Test cricket is not played like one day cricket, i dont know whatatvhes you have been watching lately.
Because he throws away good starts and gets out in soft ways
He negotiates some good spells and then gets out on easy deliveries which is a crime
You saying that we should be happy with his fifties and 70s makes it seem that we should be happy with mediocrity
No one criticizes him in test cricket. He's a quality opener. The few that do are a clueless fickle lot who change their opinion every 10 minutes.
Who cares about strike rate in Test cricket lmao.
Test Cricket is played like One day cricket now. We need players who can go big or go home.
They are not doing that in ODI's what makes you think that they will do in test cricket?![]()
Because he throws away good starts and gets out in soft ways
He negotiates some good spells and then gets out on easy deliveries which is a crime
You saying that we should be happy with his fifties and 70s makes it seem that we should be happy with mediocrity
Because he throws away good starts and gets out in soft ways
He negotiates some good spells and then gets out on easy deliveries which is a crime
You saying that we should be happy with his fifties and 70s makes it seem that we should be happy with mediocrity
So, scoring 300 against the minnow windies attack in UAE where our alternative options have superior averages: Shehzad @ 57.15 in UAE (something close to that figure) against superior opposition which includes NZ and Australia, Salman Butt (better average than any of our openers in Australia) and you think people are unjustly criticizing him?
I do agree that the talks of him dropping immediately are wrong, however, but i don't think he is the best test opener we have therefore should be lowered to the middle order.
Bro... Shehzad wouoldn't have lasted 2 overs on the NZ wickets. I didn't like his slow approach either but you still have to applaud the fact that he made runs while the rest failed.
I am explaining that why Azhar is receiving criticism. The OP mentioned his 300 and i told him that his alternate has a superior average than him in the same country. Also, then i mentioned how Salman Butt who is the other alternative has a superior average in Australia.
Of course Salman is going to have a superior average in Australia than Azhar when Azhar has only played one game in Australia![]()
. Talk some sense at least.
Who cares about strike rate in Test cricket lmao.
Brilliant test match batsmen. Should have a century today in Odis he deserves criticism but in tests only idiots will critizce him.
Shafiq scored a century with a SR of 70, while batting in a much more pressure situation and a lot more difficult conditions
Azhar's atrocious SR is the only reason he gets some flack, otherwise he is a vital cog in our test side
Actually it does matter, which is why you will find that the majority of the top batsmen of the last 10-15 years maintained a 50+ SR in Tests because they were able to exert themselves on the opposition. In this day and age, it is not possible to become a top class Test batsman if you are consistently striking at 40-45. An exception can be made if you are very consistent, Kallis for example.
His SR is only a problem on those days where he gets stuck in a rut and it's in the 25-35 range.
He is a very good Test batsman, not in the same class as the potential greats of this generation.
Some of the best openers nowadays have similar strike-rates including Cook, Vijay, Elgar, Latham, etc.
Do you really think Azhar would average 40+ in Australia by the end of this series. hasan?
Shafiq scored a century with a SR of 70, while batting in a much more pressure situation and a lot more difficult conditions
Azhar's atrocious SR is the only reason he gets some flack, otherwise he is a vital cog in our test side