Is Afridi the worst player to play over 100 Odi's

[Uppercut]

Personally, I think that when you take bowling, batting and fielding into consideration, Afridi was always worth his place in the ODI side because he could effectively change games in all those categories. His batting average may be low, but there are few players with an SR of over 100 and I think he is better suited to the role of batting in the lower order coming in towards the end of the innings than he was at the top.

Agree with that.

 

[zaremba]

I'm no fan of Afridi (his cheating did it for me) but am a bit surprised by the extent to which he gets rubbished on this forum. Ok he's neither Javed Miandad nor Abdul Qadir. But imo he is a talented player who has something different about his batting and his bowling. There is a rare purity to his approach to batting which I can't help but take my hat off to. When he's in full flow he's an extraordinary sight and he has the ability to win matches with both bat and ball. I've no idea (and don't really care) who else has played over 100 ODIs so I can't say how many in that category are worse than he is, but few of them can have been such explosive players.

 

[manali]

Afridi was 20/20 WC best bowler...and holds many world records

 

[Jono]

In answer to the thread title question, no.

Most disappointing? Probably

 

[Precambrian]

Afridi is much better. He's got test centuries as well. His bowling has improved leaps and bounds.

 

[pup11]

Of course he has to be the worst bloke to have ever played over 100 ODI's, this man seriously has nothing upstairs, he bats like a dumb ****, there is no doubt he has got tremendous hitting ability and if he had any brains he could have used that ability very well, but i think more than anything else his ability to bowl good 10 overs in an ODI is what really helps him hold his place in the side,

Anyways having said this a certain Ajit Agarkar comes to mind too, played way too many games then he really deserved...

 

[Salamuddin]

No, I never said he was a good bowler, just not a particularly poor one. And certainly he puts most seamers who've played for SL outside Vaas and Zoysa (and recently Maaalinga and Kulasekara) to shame.

Wickremasinghe >>>>> Eric Upashantha, Pulsathi Gunaratne, Ruchira Perera, Suresh Perera, Dilhara Fernando, RAP Nissanka, Ishara Amerasinghe, Chamila Gamage Lakshitha, Thilan Thushara, Charitha Buddhika Fernando, Ravindra Pushpakumara, Sujeewa de Silva, K Weeratne, Dulip Liyange, Dilhara Lokuhettage and (to date) Farveez Maharoof.

He was no World-beater but he was far from the worst you'll see.

Pulasthi Dicko Pulasthi.......I'm afraid your standards are slipping somewhat.

 

[masterblaster]

Anyways having said this a certain Ajit Agarkar comes to mind too, played way too many games then he really deserved...

He was a good ODI player for India. Sure he was mediocre in test matches, but to say he was one of the worst ODI players to play 100 matches is wrong.

191 ODI's
288 wickets at 27.85
Best bowling figures of 6/42 against Australia

That's a pretty useful ODI cricketer right there. Certainly there have been worse.

 

[Salamuddin]

In answer to the thread title question, no.

Most disappointing? Probably

Augustus once again on the mark.......surprising for a Melburnian


Afridi is arguably one the biggest disappointments in the history of Pakistan cricket, considering his immense talent.

 

[Jono]

He was a good ODI player for India. Sure he was mediocre in test matches, but to say he was one of the worst ODI players to play 100 matches is wrong.

191 ODI's
288 wickets at 27.85
Best bowling figures of 6/42 against Australia

That's a pretty useful ODI cricketer right there. Certainly there have been worse.

Haha I knew MB would come in to defend AA.

I was there for that 6-for. Was epic.

 

[masterblaster]

Haha I knew MB would come in to defend AA.

I was there for that 6-for. Was epic.

Me too mate, was at that match in Melbourne. Would've won that game too had Sourav not been run out in the last few overs of the match.

 

[Jono]

Haha Sanjay Bangar... don't think we ever saw him again after that. You don't run out Sourav and last in Indian cricket. Not back then anyway.

 

[Precambrian]

Of course he has to be the worst bloke to have ever played over 100 ODI's, this man seriously has nothing upstairs, he bats like a dumb ****, there is no doubt he has got tremendous hitting ability and if he had any brains he could have used that ability very well, but i think more than anything else his ability to bowl good 10 overs in an ODI is what really helps him hold his place in the side,

Anyways having said this a certain Ajit Agarkar comes to mind too, played way too many games then he really deserved...

Agarkar was an ODI standard bowler as his bowling avg of 27 suggests. And good SR as well.

Afridi was a matchwinner as compared to Azhar Mahmood. His bowling has improved over his career as well.

 

[NZTailender]

The 'worst player to play over 100 ODIs' doesn't mean they're the worst player full stop. Chances are if you play over 100 you're better than the guy who didn't make ten because they're utterly ****. Plus, in the order of ranking, someone is going to be the 'worst' for simply having the worst stats or the like.

Love him or loathe him, Afridi isn't that bad a player, not in ODIs anyway. But if you look at the esteemed company of people to play over 100 ODIs, he would be at the lower end.

 

[Dasa]

Haha I knew MB would come in to defend AA.

I was there for that 6-for. Was epic.

Me too mate, was at that match in Melbourne. Would've won that game too had Sourav not been run out in the last few overs of the match.

Haha Sanjay Bangar... don't think we ever saw him again after that. You don't run out Sourav and last in Indian cricket. Not back then anyway.

Haha I was there for that match as well, remember it so clearly, was swearing my ass off at just about anyone after that run-out.

 

[SJS]

Statistically speaking......

The following players have both batting AND bowling averages worse than Afridi and have yet played at least a 100 odi's.

[B]Player    	Batting	Bowling[/B]
Wickremasinghe	[B][COLOR="DarkRed"]8.6[/COLOR][/B]	39.64
Mohd Rafique	13.37	37.84
Larsen, Gavin	14.63	35.4
Azhar Mahmood	18.11	39.13
Habibul Bashar	21.68	[B][COLOR="DarkRed"]142[/COLOR][/B]
Whittall, Guy	22.54	39.56
Dharmasena	22.81	36.22
Mohd Ashraful	23.34	36.64
[B]Shahid Afridi	23.52	34.9[/B]

Habibul Bashar seems a prime candidate in that list as is Wikramasinghe

 

[Richard]

The 'worst player to play over 100 ODIs' doesn't mean they're the worst player full stop. Chances are if you play over 100 you're better than the guy who didn't make ten because they're utterly ****. Plus, in the order of ranking, someone is going to be the 'worst' for simply having the worst stats or the like.

I've made that point before vis-a-vis 100 Tests, that it's a pretty poor question of "who's the worst to play 100 Tests".

However, the likes of Afridi and Ricardo Powell really are just stupidly fortunate to have played that many. Powell is not even close to being as good as Runako Morton - and that's saying something. For ODIs, you just very occasionally get a sheer woeful player who gets umpteen chances for no good reason.

 

[Richard]

Statistically speaking......

The following players have both batting AND bowling averages worse than Afridi and have yet played at least a 100 odi's.

[B]Player    	Batting	Bowling[/B]
Wickremasinghe	[B][COLOR="DarkRed"]8.6[/COLOR][/B]	39.64
Mohd Rafique	13.37	37.84
Larsen, Gavin	14.63	35.4
Azhar Mahmood	18.11	39.13
Habibul Bashar	21.68	[B][COLOR="DarkRed"]142[/COLOR][/B]
Whittall, Guy	22.54	39.56
Dharmasena	22.81	36.22
Mohd Ashraful	23.34	36.64
[B]Shahid Afridi	23.52	34.9[/B]

Habibul Bashar seems a prime candidate in that list as is Wikramasinghe

Larsen and Dharmasena especially that's a demonstration of why bowling-average is a very poor way to assess ODI bowlers. Larsen is one of the best ODI bowlers ever in the modern era, and Dharmasena was a very good one indeed. There's no way they deserve to be placed on the same plane as Afridi for woefulness. Look at their economy-rates.

Obviously 3 of them are Bangladeshis and by nature if a team is given ODI-status that doesn't deserve it some of their players will come into the equation, so I don't think that counts for too much.

Guy Whittall, though, sheesh... never realised his record was that bad. Always thought he was a useful lower-order batsman and OK sixth bowler.

Only Azhar Mahmood on that list deserves comparison with Shahid Afridi IMO and as I say, based on county deeds I'd always but Azhar far ahead of Afridi.

 

[Uppercut]

Afridi has a crazy strike rate, though. Big advantage. He's definitely a match-winner, just an especially bad one.

 

[Richard]

Most of the time though that's because he scores 4 off 5 balls, rather than the (perhaps) 20 off 30 balls that some might do, then gets the odd 50 off 34 balls.

Afridi's strike-rate really does need to be assessed on an individual basis, not just looked at as a broad generalisation.