Pakistan Team Discussion

Are you Pakistani Fan?

  • Yes

    Votes: 92 74.8%
  • No!

    Votes: 31 25.2%

  • Total voters
    123
This seems a sensible use of money...

'The mentor roles have come under scrutiny not least for the salaries involved. Each of the five is believed to be on three-year contracts, earning in the range of PKR 5 million (approx. USD 18,000) per month. Those salaries have raised eyebrows because they are higher than what is paid to all but the most elite Pakistani cricketers - the category A players, Babar Azam, Shaheen Shah Afridi and Mohammad Rizwan, in the central contracts pool.'

 
This seems a sensible use of money...

'The mentor roles have come under scrutiny not least for the salaries involved. Each of the five is believed to be on three-year contracts, earning in the range of PKR 5 million (approx. USD 18,000) per month. Those salaries have raised eyebrows because they are higher than what is paid to all but the most elite Pakistani cricketers - the category A players, Babar Azam, Shaheen Shah Afridi and Mohammad Rizwan, in the central contracts pool.'

PCB finding the most roundabout way to give Sarfaraz a 3 year Category A contract
 
This seems a sensible use of money...

'The mentor roles have come under scrutiny not least for the salaries involved. Each of the five is believed to be on three-year contracts, earning in the range of PKR 5 million (approx. USD 18,000) per month. Those salaries have raised eyebrows because they are higher than what is paid to all but the most elite Pakistani cricketers - the category A players, Babar Azam, Shaheen Shah Afridi and Mohammad Rizwan, in the central contracts pool.'

If they stuck them all in the playing XI it might be a bit of an upgrade
 
wake up babe, new pakistan incompetency dissecting banger just dropped :love::love::love:

Osman is great

"Oh, and three of the five have been head coach of Pakistan within the last decade, and not that anyone's judging but in that time qudrat ka nizam has been the most successful coaching strategy."

Of course I'd hardly call England a model of stability. We change our domestic structure all the time. The women's game has been upended again, although this time with greater alignment with the existing men's county structure. There's also the meltdown every time we get thrashed in Australia. That being said the focus (until the introduction of The Hundred) has been on the success of the men's (and to a certain extent women's) international sides. That does bring consistency, although the round of dishing out 30 central contracts on the eve of a disastrous World Cup wasn't particularly sensible.
 
Random domestic team 'mentors': 5 milly a month

The international players:

ESPNcricinfo understands the change in policy has left a number of the women's players disappointed, with some believing being away from home for a camp merits beyond merely meeting the basic daily needs of lodging and food.
I mean you would fricking assume so, wouldn't you? Bloody cheapskates taking compensation out of the pockets of the women's players, who need it more than the men's, to fill the coffers of 5 semi-retired glorified mascots for competitions that are surplus to need. Clownery.
 
One more tour and that will be it for Gillespie!


Don't think he can survive longer in such an environment.

Kirsten bites the dust!
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top