ICCCT2006: SCMODS' assesment of every teams chances

[kodos]

Pakistan to me have the strongest pace bowling attack at the moment. Akhtar is always dangerous in ODI's, Rana is pretty much a ODI specialist bowler and has good variation, Asif who to me is the best young and up coming bowler in the world and Razzaq who can keep it accurate and tight at one end. So the bowling to me won't decide the outcome of Pakistan's achievements in the tournament. It has to be the batting and missing Inzi is a massive blow. Also the fact that they haven't decided who will be the permanent openers may be detrimental to their chances of winning the trophy.

 

[irottev]

Hahaha I actually enjoyed your reviews. They made me laugh.

 

[Kal-El]

Hahaha I actually enjoyed your reviews. They made me laugh.

I figure everyone could write a preview outlining strengths and weaknesses, so I thought I'd do one that was entertaining to read.

 

[sohum]

India has actually performed commendably in the ICC Champions Trophy/Knockout in the past. They lost to New Zealand in the final in the first version of the tournament and shared the trophy in the second one, in two games that we looked capable of winning before rain interrupted. Add to that the fact that we got to the finals, super six and semifinals of the last three World Cups, I'd actually say we play better on a world scale than on a bilateral or trilateral scale.

 

[Kal-El]

India has actually performed commendably in the ICC Champions Trophy/Knockout in the past. They lost to New Zealand in the final in the first version of the tournament and shared the trophy in the second one, in two games that we looked capable of winning before rain interrupted. Add to that the fact that we got to the finals, super six and semifinals of the last three World Cups, I'd actually say we play better on a world scale than on a bilateral or trilateral scale.

You make semi finals and finals yes, it's just you seem to have an extraordinary knack for losing them.

 

[Sureshot]

yea but afridi will get u 20/30 quick runs and on top of that his bowling is better than KP's.

And Kp doesn't get his runs quick?

KP has the ability to bat longer and get bigger hundreds than Afridi. Afridi is a talent but would be better if he used batting with more sense.

 

[aussie_ben91]

I can't believe some people are actually comparing Kevin Pietersen to Shahid Afridi.

Pietersen is someone who likes to dominate the bowling with coverdrives & shots through mid-wicket throughout his innings and towards the end likes to pull out the big shots when it's actually nessicery.

To me, Afridi's like what Mark Waugh used to be for Australia. Can't really bowl but once put on put's relief on the batsman's mind, enabling them to not concentrate as much which leads to silly shot.

Afridi's batting is flat out useless though... something you'd expect from a number 11 batsman. I'd probably take someone like Brett Lee or Ashley Giles as a batsman over Afridi.

Though, Afridi will most likely play in the Champs trophy now that Asif & Akhtar have been omitted.

 

[langerrox]

I can't believe some people are actually comparing Kevin Pietersen to Shahid Afridi.

Pietersen is someone who likes to dominate the bowling with coverdrives & shots through mid-wicket throughout his innings and towards the end likes to pull out the big shots when it's actually nessicery.

To me, Afridi's like what Mark Waugh used to be for Australia. Can't really bowl but once put on put's relief on the batsman's mind, enabling them to not concentrate as much which leads to silly shot.

Afridi's batting is flat out useless though... something you'd expect from a number 11 batsman. I'd probably take someone like Brett Lee or Ashley Giles as a batsman over Afridi.

Though, Afridi will most likely play in the Champs trophy now that Asif & Akhtar have been omitted.

Flat out useless?.... lol, you can dislike the guy but don't be such a fool with your posting. He holds the record for the fastest ODI hundred and the third fastest or something like that, Oh and the fastest hundred ever made was on debut too. He isn't in the team for his batting, its the combination of fielding,batting and bowling. Sure he averages 26 but look at the strike-rate; 107.83. Lance Cairns was one the finest big hitters ever to play the game, he averaged 19 and a SR of 104.

Afridi holds the record for fastest ODI hundred and the most sixes ever. You can dislike him but don't call him a joke because you obviously don't know what your talking about.

 

[aussie_ben91]

Flat out useless?.... lol, you can dislike the guy but don't be such a fool with your posting. He holds the record for the fastest ODI hundred and the third fastest or something like that, Oh and the fastest hundred ever made was on debut too. He isn't in the team for his batting, its the combination of fielding,batting and bowling. Sure he averages 26 but look at the strike-rate; 107.83. Lance Cairns was one the finest big hitters ever to play the game, he averaged 19 and a SR of 104.

Afridi holds the record for fastest ODI hundred and the most sixes ever. You can dislike him but don't call him a joke because you obviously don't know what your talking about.

So? Anyone can swing their bat and make runs. The point I was trying to make is that their is most likely batsman out their who deserve their place more then Afridi who strike-rate at about 70 and could average 30-35 who would surely be more useful to the team then a strike-rate of 108 and an average of 20. A strike-rate a good to have but if you can't back it up with consistant scores like players like Gilchrist, Symonds, Sehwag, Jayasuria, Flintoff have all done in the past then by all means you really aren't that much of a batsman but a tailender who can pitch hit a few runs. I don't rate his fielding either, because I haven't paid enough attention to it.

I don't dislike the guy at all, I just think he is merely overrated. It seems to me that you're the one who knows nothing of what their talking about.

 

[langerrox]

So? Anyone can swing their bat and make runs. The point I was trying to make is that their is most likely batsman out their who deserve their place more then Afridi who strike-rate at about 70 and could average 30-35 who would surely be more useful to the team then a strike-rate of 108 and an average of 20. A strike-rate a good to have but if you can't back it up with consistant scores like players like Gilchrist, Symonds, Sehwag, Jayasuria, Flintoff have all done in the past then by all means you really aren't that much of a batsman but a tailender who can pitch hit a few runs. I don't rate his fielding either, because I haven't paid enough attention to it.

I don't dislike the guy at all, I just think he is merely overrated. It seems to me that you're the one who knows nothing of what their talking about.

Gilchrist? Jayasuria? Sehwag? they are the most inconsitent big hitters, just as much as Afridi. They will either get 1 or 100 and I'd prefer 100 at 108 rather than 80-odd.

 

[aussie_ben91]

Gilchrist? Jayasuria? Sehwag? they are the most inconsitent big hitters, just as much as Afridi. They will either get 1 or 100 and I'd prefer 100 at 108 rather than 80-odd.

Absolutely not. Their converison rates and averages are much better then Afridi's that it isn't even close. If the strike-rate is minus about 10 then it doesn't really matter as their strike-rates are so high.

 

[langerrox]

Absolutely not. Their converison rates and averages are much better then Afridi's that it isn't even close. If the strike-rate is minus about 10 then it doesn't really matter as their strike-rates are so high.

conversation rates nor averages protray constitencity..

 

[evertonfan]

I can't believe what i'm reading here. Jayasuriya, Sehwag and Gilly are as inconsistent as Afridi? Tell that to their averages. :

Afridi is nothing but a mindless slogger and it's a shame that Pakistan pick him as an allrounder or a batsman because he's actually a half-decent bowler.

Scoring the fastest ever ODI century means nothing; It was just his day when all of his mindless swipes across the line payed off and he has failed to do that repeatedly which is why he is the biggest liability in the Pakistan team.

 

[ZoraxDoom]

He isn't a mindless slogger. He has a special skill, a gift. No one else in the world can hit like Afridi. Just saying that anyone can slog across the line and make runs is foolhardy. He made it into the team primarily as a bowler, and managed to force himself into a strong Pakistani batting lineup as a batsman alone on several occasions. That must tell you something of his skill. When he is in for 30 deliveries, the opposition is dead.

 

[Simbazz]

i totally disagree Matt

I believe Afridi is valuable in all areas of the game, yes his bowling is improving with age, but batting he may be a bit of a slogger with not a great technique, but thats what a team like Pakistan need.

Ok with his mentality he is likly, and has been, incosistant but if he is on a his game then he can score 150 off 80 balls which is valuable to any team. Kevin Pietersen is kinda the same for England, but he doesnt take the risks which Afridi does.

I would always pick Afridi in my Pakistan squad, because of his batting if anything. If he gets on a run in this Champions Throphy he will rule all, you cant just discredit his Fastest Century, because he was 16 at the time and im that age and im telling ya straight, i dunno how he did it, to be that strong with his shots is unbelievable.

Anyways, whats this i hear about the two opening bowlers not in the CT because of a drugs trial saying they were positive for nanodene or somthing.

If that is so, Afridi will almost certainly have to fire in all areas of his game.