Afridi as a test match option?

[Sanz]

he admitted himself he shuts his eyes and swings as hard as possible (hardly a mature outlook for a professional cricketer).

I would like to see that article where Afridi has said the above.

 

[Richard]

That’s rather harsh. I doubt you watched the Twenty20 WC based on your signature, but Afridi did show signs of maturing as a batsman. Granted it’s only Twenty20, but if he can improve in one format, there’s no reason to doubt that he can’t apply himself in others. Certainly he’s shown that he’s got the talent to do it. And this is coming from one of his harshest critics btw.

2 good innings does not show he is maturing as a batsman! Over the past two years his batting has been dreadful and he admitted himself he shuts his eyes and swings as hard as possible (hardly a mature outlook for a professional cricketer).

AWTcraigy43.

 

[Richard]

Not what you said earlier esp when you made a bold statement like

"....playing mostly when conditions were overwhelmingly in his favour (and being dropped promptly when they weren't for the knowledge of how embarrassing he'd make the side look if retained for long)...."

Well those test matches in India show just the opposite.

No actually they don't. Those Test matches in India in 1998/99 show precisely nothing, as no couple of games ever do. Afridi since early-2002 or so has been a batsman completely incapable of playing with the remotest of apparent care for whether he actually scores or not. Ergo, he's barely played in the remotest of tough conditions and only played a handful of games, far more than not of which have come on utterly lifeless decks. Because Pakistan's selectors have known that he's only got a chance when the odds are stacked in the favour of batsmen.

Afridi up to about 2000/01 or so was a slightly different batsman (still not that good) and that Afridi is a slightly different kettle-of-fish, no longer relevant because all signs are that that Afridi has disappeared without trace.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Shahid Afridi should have played far more Tests than he has. I've always said that. He's basically a victim of being able to bat a bit and so people focus on that when he gets out in a dumb way. His bowling as good if not better than Kaneria, who doesn't have anything like the same all-round contribution. If you just look at what you're going to get from a player, not *how* you're going to get it - it's a total no-brainer. I think an awful lot of people out there would sooner have a tidy batsman who averages 40 and gets out conventionally than an aggressive technically incorrect batsman who averages 50 but gets himself out a lot.

 

[Fusion]

Over the past two years his batting has been dreadful and he admitted himself he shuts his eyes and swings as hard as possible (hardly a mature outlook for a professional cricketer).

Like Sanz, I would like to see the article where Afridi apparently admits to playing with his eyes closed.

No actually they don't. Those Test matches in India in 1998/99 show precisely nothing, as no couple of games ever do. Afridi since early-2002 or so has been a batsman completely incapable of playing with the remotest of apparent care for whether he actually scores or not. Ergo, he's barely played in the remotest of tough conditions and only played a handful of games, far more than not of which have come on utterly lifeless decks. Because Pakistan's selectors have known that he's only got a chance when the odds are stacked in the favour of batsmen.

Afridi up to about 2000/01 or so was a slightly different batsman (still not that good) and that Afridi is a slightly different kettle-of-fish, no longer relevant because all signs are that that Afridi has disappeared without trace.

Richard, those Test innings in India came under extremely high pressure situations. Any match between Pak/India inherently contains immense expectations from the fans of the two countries. Failure is not an option, so his innings in those two matches were worthy of praise. Also, 2 innings or not, Afridi’s batting in the Twenty20 WC came under extremely high pressure and he performed great. When you state that Afridi’s slide as a batsman is “irreversible” or that he’s “completely incapable of playing with the remotest of apparent care for whether he actually scores or not “, well with all due respect, his innings in the WC just showed the opposite. He’s got talent, I think that much is undeniable. The question is whether he can apply that talent and succeed. I say that there’s a good chance he can. He should be given a chance in the Test team in place of Kaneria. At worse he performs equal to Kaneria as a spinner and batsman, but is a better fielder. At best, he gets more wickets while being a far superior batsman and fielder. I’m willing to roll that dice.

 

[Xuhaib]

Afridi is a capable bat, when he gets going he does not look like a slogger or a tailender getting lucky he comes across as a competent aggressive batsman. I think if Afridi puts his head in he is as good a test batsman as Flintoff or Symonds.

 

[DaRick]

You know, I've always had a soft spot for Shahid Afridi.

I mean, sure, he's done some incredibly stupid things (like that tizz in late 2005 vs England) and he has always fallen victim to his impulses (as he admitted in an interview with Inside Cricket some years ago).

Even so, I've always found it difficult to understand why he hasn't played more Tests. I understand that his influence may have been potentially disruptive in the past, but he's been less wasteful of late (batting with a maturity that I thought was beyond him vs Australia, even though he was still clearly struggling with himself). As such, being a fairly experienced (and surprisingly young) player, maybe he can set an example for others in the Test team that would've been unfathomable in, say, 2005.

Although his batting average is misleading (having got to play on dead tracks), I've seen enough of him to surmise that, if he tones down the slogging a touch, he has the ability to do better. He is still one of the best Pakistani fielders and he is a clever bowler, possessing some drift, a marginal amount of turn, some variation and of course, that faster ball. He can't do any worse than Kaneria (who took 0/180 in his last Test innings), who conceeds so many runs that his wickets become almost redundant.

 

[pup11]

Afridi is a capable bat, when he gets going he does not look like a slogger or a tailender getting lucky he comes across as a competent aggressive batsman. I think if Afridi puts his head in he is as good a test batsman as Flintoff or Symonds.

He is hopeless in that regard, so that's something that one shouldn't even be hoping for, but his spin bowling has improved massively in the last few years, and I think he should be looked at as a genuine bowling option from now on.

I think Kaneria is a decent bowler, but he hasn't really won Pakistan many games, even in favorable conditions, so therefore Ajmal and Afridi could be tried instead of him, in the future.

 

[DaRick]

I think Kaneria is a decent bowler, but he hasn't really won Pakistan many game, even in favorable conditions, so therefore Ajmal and Afridi could be tried instead of him, in the future.

In 2005 or so, he was quite good, taking 6/150+ on a consistent basis. Nowadays, he takes 2/150+ or worse on a consistent basis, thanks to Kamran Akmal's decline and his lack of variation beyond that googly, which is far easier to pick these days.

 

[Richard]

As such, being a fairly experienced (and surprisingly young) player

I have to very much doubt that. If Afridi isn't at least 3 years older than his official birthdate I'll be very surprised.

 

[Richard]

Richard, those Test innings in India came under extremely high pressure situations. Any match between Pak/India inherently contains immense expectations from the fans of the two countries. Failure is not an option, so his innings in those two matches were worthy of praise. Also, 2 innings or not, Afridi’s batting in the Twenty20 WC came under extremely high pressure and he performed great.

I haven't denied this. But such small examples mean precious little.

When you state that Afridi’s slide as a batsman is “irreversible” or that he’s “completely incapable of playing with the remotest of apparent care for whether he actually scores or not “, well with all due respect, his innings in the WC just showed the opposite.

I don't think they do. No couple of innings' ever do that. I'm sure I could find a couple of examples of relatively similar knocks from, say, 2004 or 2007.

He’s got talent, I think that much is undeniable. The question is whether he can apply that talent and succeed. I say that there’s a good chance he can.

I say there isn't. And if he does, I'll be more astonished than I've been about a turnaround from just about any cricketer. Mind, Afridi is a Pakistani and I've learnt to expect the unexpected there before now.

He should be given a chance in the Test team in place of Kaneria. At worse he performs equal to Kaneria as a spinner and batsman, but is a better fielder. At best, he gets more wickets while being a far superior batsman and fielder. I’m willing to roll that dice.

Picking him for Tests based on his bowling is a perfectly fair enough alternative and not one I'm decrying. I'm merely saying anyone who expects him to contribute anything much with the bat if he gets a lengthy run is very likely to be disappointed.

 

[DaRick]

I have to very much doubt that. If Afridi isn't at least 3 years older than his official birthdate I'll be very surprised.

I have heard some surmise that he'd be no more than a year overage. He doesn't look like a man in his early-to-mid 30's, either.

 

[Xuhaib]

I have heard some surmise that he'd be no more than a year overage. He doesn't look like a man in his early-to-mid 30's, either.

yeah I think he is much younger then Razzaq though they both are shown as 29.

 

[subshakerz]

Anyone who saw Afridi's 141 in the famous Chennai tests knows his capability as a player when he decides to give the bowler a bit of respect. I think it also depends on how well Younis Khan's captaincy can improve his approach.

 

[Richard]

I have heard some surmise that he'd be no more than a year overage. He doesn't look like a man in his early-to-mid 30's, either.

Officially, he was, what, 17 when he made that fastest ever ODI century in his maiden innings.

Does anyone really believe someone under the age of 21 would be capable of that?

If you're lucky with your complexion you can easily look 5-6 years younger than you are. I'm not far off 24 and some people, upon seeing various pics of me, think I'm 14-15.

 

[Sanz]

Official page says that Afridi is about 29-30, seems about right to me.

 

[Xuhaib]

Officially, he was, what, 17 when he made that fastest ever ODI century in his maiden innings.

Does anyone really believe someone under the age of 21 would be capable of that?

If you're lucky with your complexion you can easily look 5-6 years younger than you are. I'm not far off 24 and some people, upon seeing various pics of me, think I'm 14-15.

The race Afridi belongs to most of them appear much older then their orignal ages these guys are just naturally well build and they develop strength and power very early on in their teens. I had a few with me in school and they all looked 3-4 years older then the rest of us even though we were all mostly of the same age.

 

[Sanz]

Was going to post the same thing, but last time I posted something about Pathans, I got my ass whooped by an Afghan member for being so ignorant on the subject.

 

[Richard]

The race Afridi belongs to most of them appear much older then their orignal ages these guys are just naturally well build and they develop strength and power very early on in their teens. I had a few with me in school and they all looked 3-4 years older then the rest of us even though we were all mostly of the same age.

I see. A bit odd then that none of them have ever come close to doing what Afridi supposedly did at 17 though, no?

 

[Sanz]

No.