Why the double standards when it comes to Babar Azam and Umar Akmal?

[Smudger]

The main question here is how do you define pressure? Umar Akmal failed miserably in the 2 pressure innings I saw him play in wt20. He wasnt able to score any boundary vs nz and looked like a fish out of water vs australia.
Whereas if you look at Babar he looked fluent from the word go but got out to a more easier bowler. He never looked out of sorts. I also saw him vs India in the final. There he struggled in the initial part of his innings but sort of made up in the end before getting out instead of throwing his wicket away in pressure. Also scored a lovely 63 vs Eng the other day.
Facts dont lie Babar is a more capable batsman then Akmal. I dont buy the logic that Akmal underperformed. He simply wasnt good enough . His record vs top teams show that. If he had been an underperformer he would have failed vs low ranked teams also

 

[Abdullah719]

Came across this earlier

 

[mastersaan10]

the fact that umar just failed a 5 match series in the position that Pakistan team needed him most for proves beyond doubt that Umar is not what pakistan needs. I admit that early on, Umar was denied his chances. We had freaking younis khan in odis at number 3 when this 20 year old hit a match winning century against sri lanka, who were decent at the time. if umar was given the treatment that babar is getting now, I have no doubt that Umar would have been a good enough batsman for pakistan today at number 4 . even then the dude is still averaging 34, which is better than malik and hafeez, though hafeez is a gun player for us these days.

even after admitting all this, umar fails more often than not to that hoick to leg side. Umar had a greater ceiling but unfortunately not everyone is blessed with Kohli like brain.

the fact that people here are comparing the two shows me that most pakistanis are like Akmal, not able to comprehend situations and make decisions.

 

[Captain caveman]

This is ridiculous.

Because of these kind of ‘fans’, Babar isn’t scoring centuries just like he used to because of he ‘plays too slow’.

Just

We deserve Imran Farhats.

WHAT?
This is a thread about being a choker and has nothing to do with strike rates!

 

[coy0607]

Apples to oranges comparison. Babar is a top 3 batsman while UA batted at 5-6.

You cannot compare the no. of centuries scored at these 2 different positions.

By this logic Babar is even better than Dhoni because the latter only has 10 centuries in 350+ matches.

then why are Umar Akaml and Babar being compared in the first place?

Akmal bats at 5/6, is a closer, so he should absolutely bat faster. Babar bats at 3, his role is to accumulate- totally different role

 

[Mueez]

WHAT?
This is a thread about being a choker and has nothing to do with strike rates!

We are damaging his confidence.

We should support him and not criticize the sh*t out of him.

 

[Captain caveman]

The main question here is how do you define pressure? Umar Akmal failed miserably in the 2 pressure innings I saw him play in wt20. He wasnt able to score any boundary vs nz and looked like a fish out of water vs australia.
Whereas if you look at Babar he looked fluent from the word go but got out to a more easier bowler. He never looked out of sorts. I also saw him vs India in the final. There he struggled in the initial part of his innings but sort of made up in the end before getting out instead of throwing his wicket away in pressure. Also scored a lovely 63 vs Eng the other day.
Facts dont lie Babar is a more capable batsman then Akmal. I dont buy the logic that Akmal underperformed. He simply wasnt good enough . His record vs top teams show that. If he had been an underperformer he would have failed vs low ranked teams also

This thread is about being a choker and both akmal and azam are chokers in pressure situations!
But i will respond to what you wrote.
Firstly, you comparison is not a fair one.
Umar has been in decline since 2015 wc. So not fair to compare performance of umar's after 2015 to babars current performances.
Compare umar in his first 4 years to babars first 4 years. Babar has batted at 3 at his own pace, with a strike rate under 100. Umar has batted at 6 with a limited number of overs available to him and expected to bat at near 150 strike rate.
No comparrison of thes

 

[Captain caveman]

This thread is about being a choker and both akmal and azam are chokers in pressure situations!
But i will respond to what you wrote.
Firstly, you comparison is not a fair one.
Umar has been in decline since 2015 wc. So not fair to compare performance of umar's after 2015 to babars current performances.
Compare umar in his first 4 years to babars first 4 years. Babar has batted at 3 at his own pace, with a strike rate under 100. Umar has batted at 6 with a limited number of overs available to him and expected to bat at near 150 strike rate.
No comparrison of thes

these two different types of batsman would be fair.
Thats why this not about statals but about handling pressure!

 

[Captain caveman]

these two different types of batsman would be fair.
Thats why this not about statals but about handling pressure!

*stats

 

[Green Patriot]

View attachment 92430

Came across this earlier

Shots fired

 

[Captain caveman]

then why are Umar Akaml and Babar being compared in the first place?

Akmal bats at 5/6, is a closer, so he should absolutely bat faster. Babar bats at 3, his role is to accumulate- totally different role

True!
Though umar never wanted the role of finisher, he always said that he wanted to bat at 3, which he was never allowed to do.

Anyway, the comparrison is about their handling of big match pressure. Both play some pretty shots and then get out to dreadful shots. The question is umar used to get crucified for this by people on this site, but no one says anything about babar doing the same. So why the double standards?

 

[ak619]

then why are Umar Akaml and Babar being compared in the first place?

Akmal bats at 5/6, is a closer, so he should absolutely bat faster. Babar bats at 3, his role is to accumulate- totally different role

If you see my post, I have compared Babar with pre-2012 Rohit Sharma.

Go through that post and you might understand where OP and I are coming from.

I know UA and Babar were handling totally different batting roles. But managing pressure and knowing when to play percentage cricket and when to take chances - these basics remain the same for everybody.

 

[Mkumar825]

Pakistan selectors,coch ,experts,fans all have one comman thing to look a players - personal like & dislike .

 

[Sean143]

The ability to play the ball on its merit is quite a rarity in batsmen, only a few have done it in the past. Babar is someone who is technically very correct and comparing him to a slogger like Umar Akmal is a disrespect to him.

 

[Captain caveman]

The ability to play the ball on its merit is quite a rarity in batsmen, only a few have done it in the past. Babar is someone who is technically very correct and comparing him to a slogger like Umar Akmal is a disrespect to him.

Again, i am not comparing their batting skills but their mentality!!!
But i will indulge you.
Umar is a shadow of the batsman he once was and it would be unfair to compare todays umar to todays babar.
Lets instead compare umars first 3 years as a pak player to babars 3 years as a pak player.
Babar plays beautiful drives and cuts the ball and THATS IT!
babar cannot pull or hook(he got out to a 82mph bouncer by kane in the aussie game).
Babar cannot sweep the ball against spin
And babar has no power game, struggles to hit a single 6.
Babar plays in a time of flat pitches and useless kookaburra ball.
Babar is allowed by management to score with a strike rate of less than 90 and anchor the innings!.
Now umar in his first 3 years-
Had all the shots in the book, certainly NOT a slogger, though he was weak against spin and didnt play sweep shots much.
Umar is known as one of the best pakistani bats against pace bowling, not just on flat pitches but on green mambas.
Umar destroyed shane bond & mitchell johnson, away from home.
Umar can play big shots and this was his downfall. As, pak management made him bat at 6 instead of his prefered position of 3. He was forced to bat at a strike rate of over 120+ and still scored runs.he was not given the luxury of batting at a sr 80 odd and taking his own sweet time as babar is.
All in all, both babar and past umar are/were very talented batsman but both are mentally weak, when under pressure.
Umar was the naturally more gifted batsman with all the shots in the book. Whereas, babar is an elegant batsman who relies mainly on drives and will be easily out if you bowl bouncers at him. Umar of the past would of hit those bouncers for 6!

 

[Sean143]

Again, i am not comparing their batting skills but their mentality!!!
But i will indulge you.
Umar is a shadow of the batsman he once was and it would be unfair to compare todays umar to todays babar.
Lets instead compare umars first 3 years as a pak player to babars 3 years as a pak player.
Babar plays beautiful drives and cuts the ball and THATS IT!
babar cannot pull or hook(he got out to a 82mph bouncer by kane in the aussie game).
Babar cannot sweep the ball against spin
And babar has no power game, struggles to hit a single 6.
Babar plays in a time of flat pitches and useless kookaburra ball.
Babar is allowed by management to score with a strike rate of less than 90 and anchor the innings!.
Now umar in his first 3 years-
Had all the shots in the book, certainly NOT a slogger, though he was weak against spin and didnt play sweep shots much.
Umar is known as one of the best pakistani bats against pace bowling, not just on flat pitches but on green mambas.
Umar destroyed shane bond & mitchell johnson, away from home.
Umar can play big shots and this was his downfall. As, pak management made him bat at 6 instead of his prefered position of 3. He was forced to bat at a strike rate of over 120+ and still scored runs.he was not given the luxury of batting at a sr 80 odd and taking his own sweet time as babar is.
All in all, both babar and past umar are/were very talented batsman but both are mentally weak, when under pressure.
Umar was the naturally more gifted batsman with all the shots in the book. Whereas, babar is an elegant batsman who relies mainly on drives and will be easily out if you bowl bouncers at him. Umar of the past would of hit those bouncers for 6!

Playing the ball in the air is easy, Umar Akmal thought he was perfect and that was his undoing, he has himself to blame for whatever happened to the talent he had. Secondly, if you compare the technique of the two batsman even from the start, you would notice that Umar had a lot of technical flaws, and all the flamboyance was of no use International cricket cuz bowlers were gonna ball to him according to his weak zone.

Longevity comes with control, and Umar Akmal never realized that, he always went for short-cuts, to be an ATG your defence has to be strong. he went hard at the ball, and it was pretty natural to him, he just couldn't have rectified those flaws. In Babar's case there was room for a lot of improvement, but the basic stance was pretty decent, and so he was able to develop his shots. Even though UA couldn't have been as good as Babar, he would have served Pakistan very well, had he at least not regressed from where he was. I think the unnecessary blame game by the coaches and seniors on him played a huge part, the guy was averaging 38+ with a sr of 80+ in that era, which was good enough. I think 5 should have been an ideal number for him.

 

[Sean143]

Playing the ball in the air is easy, Umar Akmal thought he was perfect and that was his undoing, he has himself to blame for whatever happened to the talent he had. Secondly, if you compare the technique of the two batsman even from the start, you would notice that Umar had a lot of technical flaws, and all the flamboyance was of no use International cricket cuz bowlers were gonna ball to him according to his weak zone.

Longevity comes with control, and Umar Akmal never realized that, he always went for short-cuts, to be an ATG your defence has to be strong. he went hard at the ball, and it was pretty natural to him, he just couldn't have rectified those flaws. In Babar's case there was room for a lot of improvement, but the basic stance was pretty decent, and so he was able to develop his shots. Even though UA couldn't have been as good as Babar, he would have served Pakistan very well, had he at least not regressed from where he was. I think the unnecessary blame game by the coaches and seniors on him played a huge part, the guy was averaging 38+ with a sr of 80+ in that era, which was good enough. I think 5 should have been an ideal number for him.

Secondly Babar is a good player of the short pitched stuff, did you see him in the two U-19 WC's he played in AUS and NZ?

 

[Captain caveman]

Secondly Babar is a good player of the short pitched stuff, did you see him in the two U-19 WC's he played in AUS and NZ?

Dont get me wrong, i think babar and umar are/were both talented young batsman. One has been supported by management to develop and the other was not.
I disagree that umar's batting stance was flawed. He had a good base and technique. Babar's stance is different where he plays the ball very late , this does mean that he can get squared up by pace bowlers which happens frequently with him.
Both have shown talent and both have shown brainfades.
Umar cant control hitting to midwicket and got out alot there.
Babar has a tendancy to waff out of nowhere at a wide ball with absolute no foot movement and gets out alot like this.
I havent seen babar's u19 innings, but what i do know is that he is very vulnerable to bouncers from what i have seen of him in the last few years.
I think babar plays morefor his stats(not necessarily a bad thing) whereas umar used to play up to the crowd(by trying to hit too many big shots).
Umar also seems less mature than babar and needed backing(mentoring& support) more than babar does
At the end of the day, in a country lacking in quality batsman, both should have been playing for pak in my opinion, but only one is and the other is now on a steep decline.