Should Afridi be in or out?

[Shaggy Alfresco]

His age is shocking certainly.

As for quick 20s and 30s being inneffective, I disagree. At the rate he scores, that can be an extra 15 runs than what other people would get in the time.

250-->275: Difference there
175-->200: Difference there too

Clearly the effect can be profound, especially with a large number of ODIs going down to the wire these days.

How he did in the Abu Dhabi Series is proof of his effect. Good batting, wins one match. Good bowling, wins another. Afridi wins the series! You cannot drop someone who can do that.

The problem is, his batting is so aimless, he blocks one and hits the exact same one for six, where is the logic, this angers many but he must be coached before a great talent goes to waste.

Why would anyone want someone who averages 24 opening?

 

[Manee]

To make vital use of the powerplays and get the team off to a good start?

 

[haroon510]

i think inclution of batsman afridi in pakistan team is not only important for pakistan cricket but also for the whole cricket game. i am not saying only afridi but all the players who have the style of afridi. lets say, sehwag, chris gayle,Ashraful and other players who play strokes very often. the reason for that is the image that people who doesn't like cricket or who are against cricket game is gets from cricket. they consider cricket a very boring game. i often talk to them and they say that u barely see a batsman playing strokes. what they are describing is that cricket lacks aggrasiveness. something that really entertains the crowd. batsman like afridi can change thier point of views.
i personally don't hve problem with his style but he has to get ability to find the gap and hit the ball in the gaps. this guy already has power and what he needs to learn is how find a gap and play the ball in the gaps. for that he has to play stright shots more often. between mid on and mid off and the other parts of the ground where there is not alot of fielders. i dont mind him hiting all six delivers for four as long as he hits it in the right place. as long as he hits it between the gaps.

i think afridi should be in Test cricket instead of one dayers. i would pick him over Danish kaneria in test because of his bowling. bating would come as bounis with that.

his bating position should be 7 or 8.

 

[PhoenixFire]

i think inclution of batsman afridi in pakistan team is not only important for pakistan cricket but also for the whole cricket game. i am not saying only afridi but all the players who have the style of afridi. lets say, sehwag, chris gayle,Ashraful and other players who play strokes very often. the reason for that is the image that people who doesn't like cricket or who are against cricket game is gets from cricket. they consider cricket a very boring game. i often talk to them and they say that u barely see a batsman playing strokes. what they are describing is that cricket lacks aggrasiveness. something that really entertains the crowd. batsman like afridi can change thier point of views.

But why should we care about people who are only in for the slap-dash excitement of 20-20 and ODIs? Personally, I couldn't care less about people who want to see 6s and big hitting if that's all they're interested in.

 

[Richard]

To make vital use of the powerplays and get the team off to a good start?

Scoring 22 off 13 balls isn't really doing that, though.

 

[Jamee999]

But why should we care about people who are only in for the slap-dash excitement of 20-20 and ODIs? Personally, I couldn't care less about people who want to see 6s and big hitting if that's all they're interested in.

Because money into the game != bad

 

[Manee]

Scoring 22 off 13 balls isn't really doing that, though.

22 off 13 balls, say the other guy scores 13 off 13 and you are: 35/1 off 4.2 overs, good start if you ask me,

 

[Fusion]

But why should we care about people who are only in for the slap-dash excitement of 20-20 and ODIs? Personally, I couldn't care less about people who want to see 6s and big hitting if that's all they're interested in.

The long term success of the game is dependent on attracting new fans. There will always be the hard core fans, but cricket would need to attract the casual fans to compete with football (both versions), basketball etc. Look at what's happening to WI cricket for instance. Their young talent are no longer choosing cricket and the game is dying there. So players like Afridi are a necessary evil, IMO. You need the big hitting to engage potential new fans. Of course you hope that once they're hooked on the game, they begin to appreciate a Dravid more than an Afridi. But even if all they want is "boom boom", I say give it to them as long as it serves the team's interest. In the case of Afridi, for example, his selection in the team is now based more on his bowling than hitting. Anything that he does with the bat is just a bonus to me. So let him entertain the boom boom crowd, while truly serving the team's purpose with the ball. No harm in that IMO.

 

[Pup Clarke]

I think people are vastly overating Afridi's leg spin tbh. Yes, he has improved his bowling in the last 2 years but he really shouldn't be getting into the Pakistani od team with his bowling alone.

 

[Richard]

22 off 13 balls, say the other guy scores 13 off 13 and you are: 35/1 off 4.2 overs, good start if you ask me,

The other guy isn't remotely relevant to Afridi, though, we're talking purely about one guy's contribution. 22 is not a significant innings in anything but the lowest-scoring games. 44 off 31 balls would be a different matter, but 22? I'd rather someone who could make me a significant, if slower, score.

 

[Richard]

But why should we care about people who are only in for the slap-dash excitement of 20-20 and ODIs? Personally, I couldn't care less about people who want to see 6s and big hitting if that's all they're interested in.

Because money into the game != bad

The long term success of the game is dependent on attracting new fans. There will always be the hard core fans, but cricket would need to attract the casual fans to compete with football (both versions), basketball etc. Look at what's happening to WI cricket for instance. Their young talent are no longer choosing cricket and the game is dying there. So players like Afridi are a necessary evil, IMO. You need the big hitting to engage potential new fans. Of course you hope that once they're hooked on the game, they begin to appreciate a Dravid more than an Afridi. But even if all they want is "boom boom", I say give it to them as long as it serves the team's interest. In the case of Afridi, for example, his selection in the team is now based more on his bowling than hitting. Anything that he does with the bat is just a bonus to me. So let him entertain the boom boom crowd, while truly serving the team's purpose with the ball. No harm in that IMO.

Hate to say it because "fans" like the ones in question irritate me to death, but Jamee and Fusion are right. Sadly, those "only in it for the slapdash excitement" as Sam puts it, are important to the welfare of cricket.

As Fus said - neccessary evil, both Afridi and the types who come only to watch batsmen like him. Brilliantly put.

 

[Manee]

Hate to say it because "fans" like the ones in question irritate me to death, but Jamee and Fusion are right. Sadly, those "only in it for the slapdash excitement" as Sam puts it, are important to the welfare of cricket.

As Fus said - neccessary evil, both Afridi and the types who come only to watch batsmen like him. Brilliantly put.

Just like to add that I do not support Pakistan nor am I an Afridi fan, I look at this strictly from a point of view beneficial to the Pakistan team (even though I am an India fan).

 

[Richard]

Oh, I hope no-one was suggesting otherwise. I certainly wasn't.

 

[deeps]

I think people are vastly overating Afridi's leg spin tbh. Yes, he has improved his bowling in the last 2 years but he really shouldn't be getting into the Pakistani od team with his bowling alone.

I think you're vastly under-rating his bowling. He's consistently bowled 10 overs per match, with the minimum of fuss, and usually picks up 2 or 3 handy wickets. Definately makes the team as a bowling all rounder for mine

 

[Richard]

Haha, "usually" picks-up 2 or 3 wickets? If he did that he'd average about 18.

 

[Perm]

I think you're vastly under-rating his bowling. He's consistently bowled 10 overs per match, with the minimum of fuss, and usually picks up 2 or 3 handy wickets. Definately makes the team as a bowling all rounder for mine

He bowls 6.3 overs a game and picks up less than one wicket.

 

[deeps]

He bowls 6.3 overs a game and picks up less than one wicket.

In the past 2 years?

 

[Perm]

In the past 2 years?

No, that was his career record.

For Pakistan in the past two years he has played 27 ODI games and taken 31 wickets, on average bowling just a touch above 7 overs per game. Far from what you suggested anyway.

 

[Xuhaib]

No, that was his career record.

For Pakistan in the past two years he has played 27 ODI games and taken 31 wickets, on average bowling just a touch above 7 overs per game. Far from what you suggested anyway.

56 Ms -- 1059 runs @ 23.53 avg -- 69 wkts @ 27.46 avg

Thats Afridi's record since Jan 2003 which I think is quite impressive for a bowling all-rounder

 

[Prince EWS]

56 Ms -- 1059 runs @ 23.53 avg -- 69 wkts @ 27.46 avg

Thats Afridi's record since Jan 2003 which I think is quite impressive for a bowling all-rounder

Indeed, but only if he was actually selected as one. He often occupies the position of a batsman (or a batting allrounder at times), disturbing the team balance. If people recognised him as a one day bowler who can hit out a bit, it'd be fine - but his claim to fame is his quick scoring with the bat and he's even been selected for such.