X factor players versus the accumulators

[mominsaigol]

This thread is focused on X factors vs consistent accumulators and why I am against consistent accumulators.

Their is a myth that consistent accumulators like bavuma, Babar, Root, Misbah, Imam are blessings to their sides and are oxygen for their respective teams. While players like fakhar, Haris, Sharjeel, saim ayub are all hacks and shouldn't be given the rope over consistent accumulators because atleast they are consistent and are ranked no 1- 10 in icc rankings.

I wish to debunk those myths and set all arguments aside.

No 1: Stats argument

A common argument presented is stats. Consistent accumulators have superior stats then impact players for example babar azam and imam average 50+ scores and on paper look good. Whereas X factors average lower stats in general.

The issue is on paper alot of atg's look bad.

Sanath Jaysuria averages only 32 with a Sr of 91. On paper it would seem that having someone like Misbah or Imam bodes better. After all both avg 44 and 50+ respectively and despite a lower sr, one would take misbah and imam over sanath any day.

However anyone who has actually watched the game would know the match winning impacts jaysuria has created, the impact that the man had on winning games, an impact that misbah or imam can't ever achieve and won't ever achieve.

This is the benefit of X factors. Players who have the capability of single handidely winning you games.

The 2nd factor is the X factors will obviously have lower stats then consistent accumulators, and that's because they take more risks and usually play for the crest on their chest and not personal milestones. Hence on paper they will look inferior.

Note: Certain all format players like rohit sharma, Virat kohli, ab de villers aka players who have both stats + Sr + impact aren't being counted cause their Atg's in the class of the top 10 best ever, So yes their are certain outliers to what I've claimed, but a kohli or rohit doesn't fall from the sky 24/7.

No 2: Consistent accumulators often lead to losing more games then winning.

A key issue with consistent accumulators is that more often then not, they will lose you more games due to rr increase, then actually win you games.

Yes again their are certain cases where these accumulators will win you games.

Let's take rizwan amd babar for an example: Rizwan scored a brilliant 131 against Sri Lanka, it was a great innings and without him taking the game deep we would have never defeated Sri lanka.

Similarly in 2019 babar scored an impressive 100 to steer the team home against NZ, despite having a sr of 78, he played on a difficult pitch steering the team home.

However

These 2 players have lost games more often then not. Rizwan played a match losing innings in the asia cup final when the match was in grasp and in our reach. Babar did the same in the semi final against aus in 2021 scoring a 39 of 34. Yes our bowlers failed, yes hasan Ali dropped a catch, however a 39 of 34 in a semi final against Australia for a t20 opener is nor acceptable, irrespective of the team sport drama.

Misbah, root and bavuma are in the same boat, their have been countless times where these guys have played molasses innings which have caused teams to lose.

Take Steven Smith for an example. Australia was looking good against India, and whether they would have beaten India or not is a different matter, but Steven Smith played a 46 of 74 which was the primary reason Australia lost to India this WC due to Smith crippling the rr, so irrespective of his past prime performances, in current form as an accumulator he's costly in a team composed of Warner, Maxwell, Marsh etc

No 3: X factors play innings that consistent accumulators can't ever play

Stats wise, on paper Steve Smith looks a million times better then maxwell as a batsmen, But can Smith ever hit a 100 of 44? Or single handiedly hit a 200 and win from an impossible situation? Smith isn't ever doing that even if the opposition is Nepal.

Fakhar zaman in this WC alone has been responsible for exceeding the RR against NZ scoring a massive 100 of 63 getting us over the drs line. One can only imagine what would have happened if imam who on paper has superior avg stats to fakhar would have done in such a situation.

No 4: The myth of dropping X factors cause they've been poor in a format.

Fakhar at opening In t20 may have been poor, however the solution was to either

A) Give him a longer rope at opening.

B) Replace him with a More Consistent X factor

However that did not happen, instead rizwan was given opening and despite being more consistent with a 50+ average, he's cost us more games at t20 opening, the t20 world cup and t20 Asia cup results are their to see.

Another example is England's mistake of Replacing Malan at opening with Roy and taking Brooks in his place. Irrespective of Roy's form, he was the ultimate X factor at opening, and dropping him proved costly, as malan just wasn't as impactful and deprived England of their bazzball approach this WC.

Rohit sharma was out of form in 2021 and 2022, yet not once did bcci consider removing his captaincy and dropping him, because they know what rohit is capable of achieving on his day, case in point 2023 has to show for it, where rohit in one year alone has hit more sixes in then babar azam has in 8 years of his extended career.

So what should be done?

The solution is replace consistent accumulators with X factors period, irrespective of the results. Pakistan cricket had many problems and this solution sadly will not solve things, it will not make us better then India, nor are we likely to compete against SENA anytime soon, however its a step in the right direction.

We saw fakhar zaman's impact this tournament.

If we look at India, Their 1-6 are all impact X factors.

Rohit can take the game away single handidely. Gill has shown the ability to hit those 200's and dominate the game, kohli has too many chasing achievements to count, Sheryas and Rahul have played blinders this cup.

Pandya is a loss but sky has a few t20 knocks to justify his X factor role.

Now compare that to Pakistan where before fakhar's inclusion we had

Abdullah, Imam, Babar, Rizwan, Saud, Iftikhar as 1-6.

Chacha has clearly shown he's not a finisher due to his lack of 6 hits and is another misbah clone of ducking and occasionally attacking. To his credit he plays for the team but he remains medicore due to lack of X factor impact.

The ones > Him are non impact and haven't achieved much, soft run scorers on which neither one of them have the ability to single handidely win you games.

When fakhar was included, Babar himself claimed that if fakhar bats for 30 overs Pakistan wins.

So shouldn't the goal be to include All X factors? Like saim ayub and fakhar and haris and groom them? Irrespective of their current skill? Something babar himself has claimed, but does not advocate for?

 

[mominsaigol]

Also please don't take this as another babar or rizwan hate thread.

I brought up malan vs Roy

Brought up Smith vs maxwell and other points.

Keep the convo focused on X factors vs accumulators and which side do you wish to take.

Or if you want both included

 

[shamaan]

If Sharjeel is the x factor then I'd choose any accumulators.

 

[shamaan]

Two accumulators and the rest should be X factor players.

 

[jnaveen1980]

Ideally you should have players who can do both roles. X factor roles can be undone in helpful conditions. Then the tuk tukers will go slow. I am kinda happy with Indian top 6 who can shift through gears if needed. Every one of them.

 

[Vikram1989]

I will have an accumulator plus another guy who have multiple gears .At max it's like 1.5 accumulator. we can't trust always one accumulator in difficult conditions as eng proved in wc.

 

[pratiktc]

In modern ODI cricket , a team can afford one pure accumulator in top 7 who will build inns in all situations. This batter needs to have strong technical skills, high success rate and will typically build inns at 75-85 SR while only stepping up pace at fag end of inns (Kohli, Kane, ,Babar, Shai Hope are good examples)

They can also afford one more guy in top 7 who is technically strong to be rebuilder in case of a top 4 collapse but this batter needs to have high gears because such collapses now happen maybe only once in 15-20 games. Other matches this batter will need to be an enforcer. (KLR, Markram)

Rarely teams stumble across the perfect player who can play as a fast anchor and also hit sixes regularly to keep pace of game up. David Warner and Quinton de Kock are today probably the greatest such game controllers (Rohit has moved fully into enforcer role)

Pakistan have been trying to make batters out of substandard sloggers like Asif Ali, Ifthikar Ahmed and this hasn't really worked. They have developed some decent anchor batters in Imam, Rizwan and now Abdullah, Saud but it seems as if these players are obsessed with being stats accumulators like Babar at the cost of their strike rate.

New PCT coach and captain should give role clarity to technically capable players and encourage them to increase their power game by giving them position security. Push the likes of Abdullah/Saud to play role of QdK/Markram rather than being Babar lite. If their failure rate increases then so be it. Let them get 15-18 inns security to try and developm

 

[mominsaigol]

Ideally you should have players who can do both roles. X factor roles can be undone in helpful conditions. Then the tuk tukers will go slow. I am kinda happy with Indian top 6 who can shift through gears if needed. Every one of them.

X factors don't mean bazzball, Maxwell doesn't bazzball 24/7.

It means players who are capable of single handidely winning games.

Fakhar, saim ayub are those players. Because they have an attacking mindset, although skill wise yes their inferior to Indian players.

India is at the top because besides their insane bowling, their batting is filled with X factors.

Even their players who aren't full time squad members like ishan kishan is capable of scoring a 200 and single handidely winning you games.

Babar and rizzu, can't ever do that. Rizzu 131 required Abdullah 111 to function. Rohit or kohli stand on their own.

And entire team of X factors is lethal

 

[mominsaigol]

In modern ODI cricket , a team can afford one pure accumulator in top 7 who will build inns in all situations. This batter needs to have strong technical skills, high success rate and will typically build inns at 75-85 SR while only stepping up pace at fag end of inns (Kohli, Kane, ,Babar, Shai Hope are good examples)

They can also afford one more guy in top 7 who is technically strong to be rebuilder in case of a top 4 collapse but this batter needs to have high gears because such collapses now happen maybe only once in 15-20 games. Other matches this batter will need to be an enforcer. (KLR, Markram)

Rarely teams stumble across the perfect player who can play as a fast anchor and also hit sixes regularly to keep pace of game up. David Warner and Quinton de Kock are today probably the greatest such game controllers (Rohit has moved fully into enforcer role)

Pakistan have been trying to make batters out of substandard sloggers like Asif Ali, Ifthikar Ahmed and this hasn't really worked. They have developed some decent anchor batters in Imam, Rizwan and now Abdullah, Saud but it seems as if these players are obsessed with being stats accumulators like Babar at the cost of their strike rate.

New PCT coach and captain should give role clarity to technically capable players and encourage them to increase their power game by giving them position security. Push the likes of Abdullah/Saud to play role of QdK/Markram rather than being Babar lite. If their failure rate increases then so be it. Let them get 15-18 inns security to try and developm

Asif ali and Ifti aren't X factors though.

X factor doesn't mean hitter or bazzball, it means players who can single handiedlt win you games and have done so in the past, Fakhar being one of them.

Asif hasn't ever single handiedly done anything, neither has babar, rizzu's 131 needed Abdullah 111 to function.

India is succesful cause everyone is an X factor, even their bench strength like ishan kishan is capable of tonking a 200 and he's done it before

 

[jnaveen1980]

X factors don't mean bazzball, Maxwell doesn't bazzball 24/7.

It means players who are capable of single handidely winning games.

Fakhar, saim ayub are those players. Because they have an attacking mindset, although skill wise yes their inferior to Indian players.

India is at the top because besides their insane bowling, their batting is filled with X factors.

Even their players who aren't full time squad members like ishan kishan is capable of scoring a 200 and single handidely winning you games.

Babar and rizzu, can't ever do that. Rizzu 131 required Abdullah 111 to function. Rohit or kohli stand on their own.

And entire team of X factors is lethal

Indian team is essentially a Test team. There is not a single LOI specialist in that team except SKY. Even the reserve Ashwin is a test specialist.

 

[mominsaigol]

Indian team is essentially a Test team. There is not a single LOI specialist in that team except SKY. Even the reserve Ashwin is a test specialist.

They are not a test team. Their an all format team.

Test, odi and t20 are different formats. Being good in test doesn't translate to being good in other formats and vice versa, Case in point younis Khan or sky, their excellent in one format, and average in others.

Indian team is all format, and they are x factors in every format.

As I said X factor doesn't mean bazzball like people think it does.

Kohli doesn't bazzball, he isn't the type of player to smash 45 ball 100's but kohli is a master chaser and he has won games single handiedly in chasing turning 370 scores into cake walks.

An entire team needs to be an X factor. Their shouldn't be any accumulators. Classic Australia during the pointing era had X factors. No babar azam wannabees.

Every player in the Indian team in 2023 from batters to bowlers to allrounders are X factors all capable of winning games.

If you look at Pakistan, Imam, Babar and rizwan aren't X factors. What game have they won?

Rizwan in 8 years of his career has won the moqa moqa Indian game, The Sri lanka wc game and the my semi final 2022 wc game, that's 3 games in 8 years.

Every other game rizwan or Bobby have contributed to losing such as rizwan's Asia cup final innings or 2 hundreds against 2019 aus where despite the 100's the rr increased so high that rizzu couldn't finish the game in the last over and lost the match.

With consistent accumulators they will win you a few games but 90% of the time they will lose you the game cause they don't care about rr.

Secondly they'll never single handiedly win you games they require hand holding. Abdullah and rizzu was a collective effort against Sri Lanka, Babar and rizwan was a collective effort against the 10 wicket win against India.

It's never gonna be like Glenn Maxwell who one shotted Afghanistan on his own, or fakhar who pretty much on his own fixed Pakistan's embrassing no 6 in powerplay issue

 

[Ali Active]

i think impact players provide more value to team than meaning less players such as babar rizwan

i think accumulators build up pressure on the team rather than opposition
and Impact players put pressure on opposition . thats the best way to say it

people often underestimate the power in which shot is played if ball is racing to the outfield and flying high in stands it demoralises the opposition
instead if it is just reaching boundaries opposition will believe they are always in the games

 

[FastBowlingAllrounder]

Asif ali and Ifti aren't X factors though.

X factor doesn't mean hitter or bazzball, it means players who can single handiedlt win you games and have done so in the past, Fakhar being one of them.

Asif hasn't ever single handiedly done anything, neither has babar, rizzu's 131 needed Abdullah 111 to function.

India is succesful cause everyone is an X factor, even their bench strength like ishan kishan is capable of tonking a 200 and he's done it before

Agree with what you're saying, however, wanted to know more about your thoughts on the bolded part. Due to think they're not x factor players due to their technique or their lack of consistency? I think in the current Pakistani setup, Asif and Ifti are the most likely to be modelled into x-factors if they have the right captain and role clarity. They're the only players (barring Fakhar - who you've already mentioned) where, if Pakistan is chasing a large total and is in a dire situation, you'd expect them to try and do something. Everyone else has proven incompetent in such a situation.

 

[mominsaigol]

Agree with what you're saying, however, wanted to know more about your thoughts on the bolded part. Due to think they're not x factor players due to their technique or their lack of consistency? I think in the current Pakistani setup, Asif and Ifti are the most likely to be modelled into x-factors if they have the right captain and role clarity. They're the only players (barring Fakhar - who you've already mentioned) where, if Pakistan is chasing a large total and is in a dire situation, you'd expect them to try and do something. Everyone else has proven incompetent in such a situation.

Skill and mentality.

Asif ali is trying to make a career of hitting a 6 and just departing after. He has no timing or technique or anything. He's a pure slogger and throughout his career, he only once managed to pull a blinder achieving 24 in an over in an important game.

Give anyone 100+ games and they will perform a few tines like Ahmed shehzad, jamshed and other past failures did.

Blind slogging does not make you an X factor, their are more then one ways to become an X factor, Kohli can't hit 45 ball 100's like Butler but he's obv an X factor in chasing terms.

Asif is never ever producing a match winning innings unless it's at the back end and needs a bit of attacking. Another thing is mentally, the dude is mentally shot. I can't blame him, because he lost his daughter and I don't think he's mentally in it. No shame in it, he should focus on his mental health and play franchise. But he's not international material.

As for Chacha

Chacha can be an X factor because unlike Mr no 1 who plays for himself and his personal milestones, Chacha plays for the team and he's shown excellent minnow bashing, Such as in the Nepal game, Babar was spineless and waited to get his tuk tuk 100 before he bazzballed a 50 of 18, Babar didn't take any risks even against minnow Nepal until he got his 100, but chacha attacked and bullied from ball 1, hitting a rapid fire 100, showing Mr no 1 how its done.

The issue is chacha so far has been medicore against decent attacks and I would back chacha but age is not on his side. Logically how much longer can ifti play? And he isn't young, so it's not like he will improve much.

I back Haris because even though he's a hack atm and isn't international standards, he's already played X factor innings suchbas saving Pakistan and helping them reach semi in 2022 wc against bamgaldesh After the embrassment innings from Babar.

So while haris is a hack and not groomed he had age on his side.

Chacha is at his limit in terms of age, and he's been medicore against semi decent bowling so I don't think he'll improve or reach the X factor ceiling for Pakistan.

 

[jnaveen1980]

They are not a test team. Their an all format team.

Test, odi and t20 are different formats. Being good in test doesn't translate to being good in other formats and vice versa, Case in point younis Khan or sky, their excellent in one format, and average in others.

Indian team is all format, and they are x factors in every format.

As I said X factor doesn't mean bazzball like people think it does.

Kohli doesn't bazzball, he isn't the type of player to smash 45 ball 100's but kohli is a master chaser and he has won games single handiedly in chasing turning 370 scores into cake walks.

An entire team needs to be an X factor. Their shouldn't be any accumulators. Classic Australia during the pointing era had X factors. No babar azam wannabees.

Every player in the Indian team in 2023 from batters to bowlers to allrounders are X factors all capable of winning games.

If you look at Pakistan, Imam, Babar and rizwan aren't X factors. What game have they won?

Rizwan in 8 years of his career has won the moqa moqa Indian game, The Sri lanka wc game and the my semi final 2022 wc game, that's 3 games in 8 years.

Every other game rizwan or Bobby have contributed to losing such as rizwan's Asia cup final innings or 2 hundreds against 2019 aus where despite the 100's the rr increased so high that rizzu couldn't finish the game in the last over and lost the match.

With consistent accumulators they will win you a few games but 90% of the time they will lose you the game cause they don't care about rr.

Secondly they'll never single handiedly win you games they require hand holding. Abdullah and rizzu was a collective effort against Sri Lanka, Babar and rizwan was a collective effort against the 10 wicket win against India.

It's never gonna be like Glenn Maxwell who one shotted Afghanistan on his own, or fakhar who pretty much on his own fixed Pakistan's embrassing no 6 in powerplay issue

Fair enough. We can categorize batsmen as

1) Consolidators
2) Stroke players
3) X-factor players

Stroke players can be X-factor players. Consolidators have to make a huge jump to be an X-factor players. Few indicators are very high strike innings, very big overs. sudden acceleration.

 

[mominsaigol]

Fair enough. We can categorize batsmen as

1) Consolidators
2) Stroke players
3) X-factor players

Stroke players can be X-factor players. Consolidators have to make a huge jump to be an X-factor players. Few indicators are very high strike innings, very big overs. sudden acceleration.

My point is X factors are those people who can win you games regardless of how they basically play.

Even consolidators have made fantastic X factors in the past, a good example being Brian lara. He wasn't the fastest, many times you wouldn't even notice him accelerating but he'd win games because graduly the rr would be lowered.

He's the prime example of if the rr is 6, then singles, doubles per over and the occasional boundary is enough. No meed for massive 140 sr per game lol.

Problem with Pakistan is overall mindset and just being ignorant to rr, this stat pad personal milestone culture of Pakistan is Destroying everything.

In the game with I believe bangladesh, Fakhar has a blistering start and Abdullah was run a ball. Any logical captain would send ifti to finish the game but nope, Babar comes at no 3, makes 9 of 16 and voila. At the end of our campaign we had to chase 300 in 6.4 lol.

Babar has regressed a bit but even against Nepal you can see he's never going to be an X factor, because he waited to get to a 100 before bazzballing a minnow team for a 150. Him coming to open in t20 shows he clearly cares about milestones cause in t20 that's the easiest position to het it in.

It's not just Babar, Joe root is in the same boat, So is bavuma and many others.

 

[hassan918]

In modern day cricket, there should be at least a couple of x-factor players in the team especially in white ball cricket. We all saw what Maxwell did against Afghanistan and what Fakhar did against New Zealand in this World Cup. In today's cricket no teams is going to win matches consistently when their batter are going to score run a ball.

 

[mominsaigol]

In modern day cricket, there should be at least a couple of x-factor players in the team especially in white ball cricket. We all saw what Maxwell did against Afghanistan and what Fakhar did against New Zealand in this World Cup. In today's cricket no teams is going to win matches consistently when their batter are going to score run a ball.

India succeeds cause they have an entire team all 11 players that are X factors.

That's why their no 1

 

[jnaveen1980]

India succeeds cause they have an entire team all 11 players that are X factors.

That's why their no 1

THey may not be Maxwell. But they can be aggressive.

Fastest World Cup hundreds by Indian batters​

62 balls - KL Rahul vs Netherlands in 2023 World Cup
63 balls - Rohit Sharma vs Afghanistan in 2023 World Cup
67 balls - Shreyas Iyer vs New Zealand in 2023 World Cup
81 balls - Virender Sehwag vs Bermuda in 2007 World Cup
83 balls - Virat Kohli vs Bangladesh in 2011 World Cup

 

[mominsaigol]

THey may not be Maxwell. But they can be aggressive.

Fastest World Cup hundreds by Indian batters​

62 balls - KL Rahul vs Netherlands in 2023 World Cup
63 balls - Rohit Sharma vs Afghanistan in 2023 World Cup
67 balls - Shreyas Iyer vs New Zealand in 2023 World Cup
81 balls - Virender Sehwag vs Bermuda in 2007 World Cup
83 balls - Virat Kohli vs Bangladesh in 2011 World Cup

X factors are players who have cracked the code of winning games.

All 11 players in the Indian unit besides maybe sky who's a forced change are capable of doing so.

Babar, Imam, Rizwan, these kiddos have no clue on how to win games.

 

[jnaveen1980]

X factors are players who have cracked the code of winning games.

All 11 players in the Indian unit besides maybe sky who's a forced change are capable of doing so.

Babar, Imam, Rizwan, these kiddos have no clue on how to win games.

Yup Kohli even in his worst form on a very fast MCG pitch with large boundaries helped India score 48 runs in 3 overs. You need to have this ability to unlock yourself to go higher than your norm. Back in the 2000s Rahul Dravid has done a lot Lone man standing performance. Deel down we knew he can't win the game on his own in a ODI compared to say if we have Yuvraj, MSD. That is called x factor.

 

[mominsaigol]

Yup Kohli even in his worst form on a very fast MCG pitch with large boundaries helped India score 48 runs in 3 overs. You need to have this ability to unlock yourself to go higher than your norm. Back in the 2000s Rahul Dravid has done a lot Lone man standing performance. Deel down we knew he can't win the game on his own in a ODI compared to say if we have Yuvraj, MSD. That is called x factor.

Dravid was never suited to odi tbf, credit to him for punching > his weight however. But he was always going to be a thorn once the Dhoni and yubi era started. Unlike Sachin, Dravid was unable to adjust to the times.

But ore Dhoni era dravid was an X factor for his time. He just got outdated.

Players meed to adjust to the times as well, that's the thing. Once the standard of 220 par reached 260 to 270 par, dravid was done.

 

[zulfiqar]

I'll comment on this for my perspective on Babar and Rizwan, and not so much Imam-ul-Haq because Imam has not played T20s for Pakistan which means he truly is limited in his rate of scoring.

If an X-factor player is defined as a player who can play a high-impact innings (such as a 100 off 60), then what I argue Pakistan is missing is the intent more than capability. Babar can absolutely hit 100 off 60, and so can Rizwan. Some of Babar's best innings: 122 (59) v SA, 101 (58) v NZ, 85 (49) v Eng, 97 (58) v WI, 110 (66) v Eng, etc. Some of Rizwan's best innings in T20s were 87 (45) v WI, 88 (51) v Eng, 104 (64) v SA, 98 (62) v NZ. Compare their overall S/R against some of the other players you've mentioned as X-factor players above and you'll see these guys aren't that far behind (except if you compare them to some of the generational ODI players on that list). There is no reason Babar/Rizwan cannot up their tempo even further in T20s, or translate their T20 playing styles to ODIs.

So at least in my opinion, at least in the case of Babar/Rizwan specifically, they're held back by a deeply imbedded concept that they are the anchors and must take every innings deep. If you asked me why I think they are this way, I could point to several things:

• Lack of confidence in the rest of the line-up to construct a formidable total
• Treating the 'take it deep' concept as a holy grail from teams of the past and recent coaching/captains (i.e. Misbah, Waqar).
• The team has decided it's best if both Babar/Rizwan (or even Imam) take every game deep as they collectively believe this will give the team their best chance of achieving a good total

Proof of that last bullet is Babar's conference after the world cup NZ game, where he said that he asked Fakhar to play himself in for the first 15 overs and only then "go for it". I mean.. you are chasing 400, can you really afford to take 15 overs to get yourself set? But this is their thinking.

My personal opinion is that the team (and 'accumulators' like Babar/Riz) need to shed the shackles of the way they've been told to play in the past, have more faith in the rest of the team even if it means several failures collectively as a batting unit, and approach ODIs like the way they approach T20s, and approach T20s with even further aggression, as they have clearly shown they are capable of from time to time.

 

[kumjsr]

I have been reading forum for many years now and last few years there has been strong argument given that Pakistan need accumulators to ensure that team bats for 50 overs.

With accumulators, Pakistan were bowled out before 50 overs in 4 out of 9 games.

 

[ads101]

Play 11 “X factor players” from Pakistan and watch them get thrashed be pak accumulator xi. It won’t even be close.

Fakhar isn’t an X factor player. He is someone who has a high average and high sr. That is what we want in a player. A low average with a high sr is useless.

Most games are not won through unique winning moments, it’s through consistency. Pakistan didn’t even play out 50 overs multiple times this wc. This is the issue, even with a team taking less risks we still struggle to last 50 overs. Other teams batsmen can take more risk and still last 50 overs. They’re just better more allrounder batsmen.

In the same argument, if we easily lasted 50 overs, our accumulators would naturally increase sr. As less worry about getting out.

If you look at the games, man of the matches etc. the consistent players usually contribute more to wins and regularly. People remember the odd shock match winning innings from the x factor player, but then forget the next failing for 10 matches.

The youngsters/guys we usually hype don’t have half the domestic records of the Indian batsmen we play. It is silly assume say Haris or whoever will somehow dominate in internationals right now when he doesn’t even do it in domestic.

As I’ve said before, we have PSL every year. And it’s pretty much the same three Pakistani batsman topping the charts every year. even when they have a bad year. When others reach these three’s level, they will start consistently performing in PSL like these three.

 

[SpiritOf1903]

Pakistan need a VVD. Goes from 70 SR to 100+

 

[jnaveen1980]

SR can be boosted many ways. You should be able to score against all kind of bowlers. Some fail against high pace.

Both Kohli and Gill have been untroubled by any extra pace at #CWC2023.

Neither batters have been dismissed off deliveries over 139kph.

Strike Rate off deliveries 120-139kph:

Kohli 90
Gill 114

Strike Rate off deliveries 140kph +:

Kohli 109
Gill 120

 

[Suleiman]

This title only applies to Pakistan. We have players on either extreme.

The other top teams have world class batsmen who can play like “X factors” aka take the game away in a few overs while at the same time accumulate if the need arises.

Pakistan on the other hand have players who are usually stuck in one gear. If the RRR is at 7+ they will continue to knock the ball around. We desperately needed a NRR boost and with the game firmly in our hand Vs Bangladesh, we were still tuk tuking along with not many runs needed and half an innings worth of balls remaining. Rizwan being prime culprit.

Likewise on the other hand, you have brainless sloggers like the forgotten Umar Akmal who had talent in abundance and the ability to take the game away. But if you need 80 off 80 deliveries, he will bottle it due to ADHD or whatever.

We need to restructure how we coach from the grassroots level… I’m not suggesting anything new here… but PCB never listens. As a batsman one of the basic things you learn in longer formats is how to pace an innings… something our guys don’t have in the last 20 years.

 

[FearlessRoar]

X Factor players are the ones who can totally change the game in a snap with their explosive skills such as Glenn Maxwell, while Accumulators are more about steady, reliable contributions over time, such as Joe Root