Would all depend on Bond, imo. I just don't see most of our batsmen being able to play him with his pace and swing, and doubly so if the match is being played on a stereotypical New Zealand pitch.
Hes an accurate ODI bowler. Complements many of our other bowlers well with his abilty to keep it tight. Might not get a run in many other ODI standard sides, but what he does is much more valuable to the Pakistani side than might be obvious.
Salman Butt is a good limited overs option, but he does look a lot better than he actually is, imo. By no means the best opener in Pakistan by far, if at all.
Would have fallen a lot more in their rating as opposed to their actual ranking, and seeing that the former is what determines the latter, I would find maintaining it to be very, very important.
We were fourth though, IIRC.That's alright, we'll be back up in the rankings after we beat India in India.
Still, takes some doing dropping from 2nd all the way down to 7th. Not every team can manage that.
AWTA. NZ bowling incl Bond creamed an India batting lineup of Sehwag-Tendulka-Dravid-Ganguly-Laxman in NZ , all then in their prime.
Khalid Latif has only played a few games though, so I think it could be a bit early to judge him. Very talented though, but needs another season or two to show some consistently, same thing applies with Khurram Manzoor. Butt is better than Taufeeq Umar, he has performed much better in the ODI's he has played and has a better domestic record. Also has leadership potential, meaning he will almost always be picked ahead of Taufeeq.
Shoaib Akhtar and Mohammad Asif would annihilate us, especially if we were playing in New Zealand. Bond is our only class bowler, while Franklin is good but nothing special. Pakistan have classy batsman like Mohammad Yousuf and Younis Khan, we wouldn't be able to match them.
He might be accurate but his economy rate is still too high for a specialist bowler who takes less than a wicket per game.
Nah we were 2nd for a few weeks after Sri Lanka's drawn series with England, but we were third for quite a while.
I'm not claiming hes Ewen Chatfield or anything, but you really think that 4.55 is too high? Positively Richardesque.
Not too high for a normal bowler who takes wickets, but it is a bit high for somebody who doesn't offer much with the bat and who rarely takes wickets.I'm not claiming hes Ewen Chatfield or anything, but you really think that 4.55 is too high? Positively Richardesque.
Not long ago he averaged 80 odd with the bat. Not outs for the win.
Disagree, especially with your assessment of the impact of Shoaib and Asif. Shoiab would be as effective as he is in any other place as he depends more on pace and swing to get his wickets, and those are not particularly tied to the pitch. Asif is not quite as good as his early results would indicate and his figures against SA show that he can be quite ordinary. And all of our other batsmen are dire at handling seaming conditions, so I'd actually say that New Zealand batting>Pakistan batting in New Zealand.
Yes he was very ordinary coz he has been carrying an injury since the twenty cup.Ever since his injury, he has been bowling at a much reduced pace and his performance has been below par.
Bowling allrounder or not, I'd still bat him above Iftikhar Anjum.
Yes, I would too, but you get the idea. I don't rate his batting very much at all, and you do have to place your genuine allrounders above your bit-piece players.Bowling allrounder or not, I'd still bat him above Iftikhar Anjum.
A fit Anjum can do much better job than a half fit Asif, and i think Asif shouldn't be played in any onedayers. Anjum,Gul and S Tanvir can do a good job for Pakistan, with backup bowlers being Afridi, Malik,Hafeez and rehman
