Which pace bowler...

[Shaka]

Originally Posted by Rachael

What I take from your coments AND from Shaka's comments is that Sami might almost be worth his place ahead of considerably better bowlers in the way that Matthew Hoggard and Ashley Giles would be worth their places above beter bowlers: they are all the sort of team men who help the team as a whole to punch above its weight.

The thing is, there aren't any considerably better bowlers out there. In Shoaib, Sami, Gul and Shabbir you have four bowlers who can all produce the goods on a given day, but none of them are doing it day in day out. Although i'd consider all to be better than Hoggard - but then he probably has other qualities like reliability. With Sami you know what you are going to get and that is desire and commitment...plus he's one hell of an athlete all over the pitch when fielding. So show pony probably isn't quite the right term for him!

But it's a valid point that he needs to push on now and deliver just a bit more. Picking up more wickets with the new ball is a case in point.

[Shaka]

Originally Posted by Maranello

About home conditions..well Pakistan did experiment with green-tops in the early 1990s (against Sri Lanka) when Wasim, Waqar and Aqib were around..they did ok, but our batters really struggled!

Well I doubt they'd do any better this time round! But Sami's poor bowling average could be partly down to having bowled a lot in unfriendly conditions.

[Maranello]

Originally Posted by Rachael

Is Sami likely to have a lifelong problem with consistency due to an unorthodox action.. or is this youthful wildness going to give way to something far, far more impressive?

I always fear for the guys who have to find their rhythm and get things absolutely right to be effective: they so frequently prove such a liability when things ain't clicking. Is that a fair characterisation of Sami?

Time will tell about his action..its not that unorthodox, as at the the point of delivery the right arm is high (hence sling-shot was probably not the optimal description! )

Originally Posted by Rachael

If he's the future of cricket in Pakistan.. I hope not!

hey, steady on! by no means the future! Merely suggesting that he should part of the mix for the next couple of years, if he doesn't perform, there are plenty of other younger guys with pace and swing who can be groomed. In fact, if Woolmer is allowed to stay and do a decent job, the rookies may have a better chance than the more established players, since they will benefit from professional advice and coaching from their teen years.

Also, in the longer term future, Umar Gul (provided he is fit) will be a much better bit. He is accurate, gets lift off the pitch, bowls to his field and is a very intelligent cricket. 25 wickets in 5 tests at 25rpw is a good start, and he is only 20!

[Zainub]

That my dear friend, is a great question, a scenario the team think tank would dream to be in - does slack off though those of have been on record ranting about the lack of depth in our resources, and supposed over hyped. Who will I pick? I'd have Akhtar Sami as the first 2, which despite the big fuss made out of Sami's form should in the end prove to be a simple, straightforward and logical decision when the time comes. For the third spot you obviously would have a toss between Naveed-ul-Hassan, Shabbir Ahmed and Umar Gul (Rao Iftikhar misses out on lack of enough exposure at the international level, but he is a good talent to have on the benches all the same).

I'd cut that down to Gul and Ahmed because both are taller than Naveed and would hence forth have an advantage. That leaves Ahmed and Gul - though Ahmed is taller Gul is younger, and a better bet with the bat and more energetic in the field (since he is younger) than Ahmed in my opinion so he will get the nod as far as I'm concerned. So Akhtar, Sami and Gul then, that would be it. Perfect. Azhar Mahmood did not qualify for me as he was an allrounder, and in my first choice XI I would rotate between him and Afridi or Razzaq in the first place any way. This was the exact same combination we fielded when we won the second test in NZ by 7 wickets to win the series 1-0, and Mark Richardson said after that he found facing this Pakistani attack more difficult than any others he has come across in his career, he said "even Australia". Please read his Exclusive Column for the BCC Website for the whole story.

Now to the fuss - yes I call it the fuss - about Sami's form. I quote Imran Khan here "I would pick Sami hands down and eyes closed - calls to drop him for me don't exist. He's a strike bowler and strike bowlers win you matches". He said this while commentating in a post match show during the ODI series involving Pakistan and India. He has often compared Sami to Malcolm Marshall. He my fellow cricket aficionados has seen, known and experienced cricket more than any of us have or can imagine to, and when he suggests some one has the goods to make it big at this level he can't be saying just because he likes the look of his face or something.

I rate Sami, yes, because I have seen him bowl spells where he has won us matches for us single handedly - stats reveal just as much as they conceal, his average in tests is disappointing for a player of his quality and potential and he should improve them I don’t disagree but in one-days he averages in the 20s and has a phenomenal strike rate. He unlike, I agree with Marnello, does not have a reluctance to bowl to a plan , and is not the over intimidating type that will start pitching it in short if they are taken for a few early on - he will try few bouncers like every fast bowler would be by and large he will persist with one focused plan of attack. His strength I have always opined is in bowling full, he is best when he bowls fast and straight, and in recent times he hasn’t done that enough which is why he has had a slump, but if keeps trying as hard as he does (he is the most, I repeat the most enthusiastic of all players in the squad) he is bound to succeed.. He bowled well against Sri Lanka the other day in Karachi, and I can only hope he will prove his detractors wrong him self without me having to try and convince any one about his endowments again. Come the day we play Australia in Australia and we will see how he measures up against the best in the world. Reality will prove it self.

[Rachael]

Shaka - I'm not wanting to pour cold water on your hopes or anything.. but I've just looked on the PWC ratings.. and to say that Sami isn't exactly setting the world alight is a bit of an understatement:

Originally Posted by pwc ratings

4  -1  Shoaib Akhtar  PAK  826 24.47 861 v New Zealand, Wellington 2003  
 
21   Saqlain Mushtaq  PAK  564 29.84 764 v New Zealand, Auckland 2001  
 
24   Danish Kaneria  PAK  535 28.97 615 v Bangladesh, Chittagong 2002  
 
27   Umar Gul  PAK  520 24.56 525 v India, Lahore 2004  
 
29   Shabbir Ahmed  PAK  494 25.48 588 v New Zealand, Wellington 2003  
 
44   Abdul Razzaq  PAK  377 36.04 480 v Australia, Sharjah 2002  
 
54  -1  Mushtaq Ahmed  PAK  323 32.97 827 v New Zealand, Rawalpindi 1996  
 
60   Mohammad Sami  PAK  274 46.95 305 v New Zealand, Auckland 2001  
 
95   Shoaib Malik  PAK  84 41.57 98 v South Africa, Lahore 2003  
 
97   Imran Farhat  PAK  81 33.33 81 v India, Rawalpindi 2004  
 
132   Fazal-e-Akber  PAK  4 46.45 209 v New Zealand, Hamilton 2001

From Sami's point of view it's hard to find much encouragement here: he's not even in the top flight of Pak bowlersr let alone the top flight of world bowers!

Look at it this way... Sami's rating after 15 Tests is 274, down from a high of 305.. which was actually achieved on debut! Where his rating puts him in the world ranking is immaterial.. but it's instructive to note that Pathan has eclipsed Sami's best in just 5 Tests.. and that after a similar number of Tests.. the PWC ratings suggest that not only Agarkar, Fernando and Nehra have made all made a better start.. but so also have Mashrafe bin Mortaza, Upul Chandana, Kumara Dharmasena and Fidel Edwards.

I'm not averse to giving the kid time.. but the fact that Shabbir Ahmed and Umar Gul have already comprehensively outclassed Sami in the PWC rating (albeit on very few results) does not inspire confidence: right now, on ranking, he looks more like an occasional bowler (compare Tendulkar or Lehman) than a frontline guy!

ps.. there is one thought that might offer consolation... Akhtar also started slowly in the rankings.. failing to break 500 in his first 20 Tests.. indeed, statistically speaking.. looking a complete flop... but from 483 in his 20th Test he raced to 800+ inside 10 Tests - a level he seems to be just about sustaining

[Shaka]

Rachael, with all due respect, you are looking at stats the likes of me Zainub and Maranello watch the guy bowl day in day out. He causes batsmen a lot of problems, and a lot of different factors have to be considered when picking a bowler. Gul can be lethal with the new ball and in fact I think he uses it better than all of our frontline bowlers...I'd give it to him ahead of Shoaib any day. But once the shine wears off these bowlers lose their bite but the likes of Sami and shoaib still can look dangerous through speed and hostility.

Those PWC ratings don't really mean that much, Razzaq is ahead of Sami on there which is funny as until recently he couldn't buy a wicket with his military medium pace stock deliveries. All the stats show us is that Sami isn't doing himself justice. When I watch him he rarely bowls really badly, he just doesn't keep the pressure on the batsman by bowling in the right channel. Reminds me of Waqar Younis who probably bowled better with the new ball once age caught up with him and he stopped trying to blast the batsman out. Suddenly we started seeing Younis' textbook away swing! So I think you were probably right in your initial assessment that there is tendency to showboat and lose focus. Well he could probably have a better role model than his opening bowler partner at the other end!

[Rachael]

Originally Posted by Shaka

Gul can be lethal with the new ball and in fact I think he uses it better than all of our frontline bowlers...I'd give it to him ahead of Shoaib any day. But once the shine wears off these bowlers lose their bite but the likes of Sami and shoaib still can look dangerous through speed and hostility.
{...}
When I watch him he rarely bowls really badly, he just doesn't keep the pressure on the batsman by bowling in the right channel. Reminds me of Waqar Younis who probably bowled better with the new ball once age caught up with him and he stopped trying to blast the batsman out. Suddenly we started seeing Younis' textbook away swing! So I think you were probably right in your initial assessment that there is tendency to showboat and lose focus. Well he could probably have a better role model than his opening bowler partner at the other end!

When all is said and done... I take the criticisms included in this assessment as being the harshest criticisms that can ever be set against a seam bowler: you describe a guy who is basically not applying himself to the basic, traditional virtues of seam bowling... a player lacking lacking in patience.. always looking for the miracle ball (that no bowler on earth gets regularly) rather than pressuring for the poor shot (which is the way almost all great bowlers take wickets).. and perhaps a player in thrall to his own pace and needing to start learning from less glamourous compatriots (like Gul) who have been getting considerably better results (and therefore eclipsing him in the PWC ratings) WITHOUT the pace.

I don't doubt for one moment that if bowling alongside Warne, McGrath and Gillespie.. Sami would be an effective bowler in Test cricket (in much the same way that Brett Lee was effective): with everyone else able to strangle the opposition for runs.. and to shoulder the bulk of the workload.. a guy like Sami (used in short bursts) can be a wild-card "partnership buster" who is fully worthy of his place. Trouble is.. as the Aussies discovered when Brett Lee had to bowl without such illustrious bowling partners: it's pressure that wins Test matches.. and in-disciplined bowling that loses them.

My first thought is that in the long term.. Pakistan would be better off with either Shoaib (who currently towers over Sami on results) OR Sami: a lack of alternatives might dictate otherwise.. but I just don't see that the two of them (neither seemingly able to go into "containment mode" during vital periods of a Test match when taking wickets is a long-shot) naturally compliment each other or allow for a balanced attack.

[Maranello]

Originally Posted by Rachael

When all is said and done... I take the criticisms included in this assessment as being the harshest criticisms that can ever be set against a seam bowler: you describe a guy who is basically not applying himself to the basic, traditional virtues of seam bowling... a player lacking lacking in patience.. always looking for the miracle ball (that no bowler on earth gets regularly) rather than pressuring for the poor shot (which is the way almost all great bowlers take wickets).. and perhaps a player in thrall to his own pace {...}

Rachael, those are eminently sensible conclusions. I do feel that many young pace bowlers, when 'raw', are lacking in patience and develop this over time. A fast bowler seldom matures or reaches his best in his first 2/3 years. This is particularly true of Pakistanis, where the non-competitive and weak domestic cricket set-up means that players come into international cricket with a lot of the 'building blocks' missing.

On your second comment (highlighted in bold)... there is probably a level of focus in between searching for the miracle ball and waiting/pressuring for a mistake - the truly great and exciting pace bowlers would go for that - namely, getting the batsmen by consistently bowling to a well thought-out plan and executing it. Waqar Younis was the best pace bowler of the early 1990s and one of the best ever - he did not wait for batsmen to make mistakes, but pressurised them with his strength (late inswinging yorkers) and it worked wonders.


I agree that playing both Shoaib and Sami, if either does not develop the "containment mode", would be a luxury - however, Shoaib is only around for a few more seasons at best so the choice may very well take care of itself! Also, Sami has the attitude, the desire and the fitness to be someone who "strangles the opposition for runs.. and shoulders the bulk of the workload" - getting decent coaching now for the first time in his cricketing life has already made a difference in his last few ODIs.

[Shaka]

I think there's a lot of truth in what you say Rachael, Sami has played enough at this level now for people to expect progress...in fact it could be argued he's gone backwards. Again, I know Woolmer's a big fan, it will be interesting to see whether Sami will be able to produce more sustained pressure on a batsman especially with the new ball - and whether Woolmer will accept anything less. I would say Sami is at a crossroads right now where he has to step up from doing 'just ok' to fulfilling what everyone has felt should be a very successful career.

[Shaka]

A similar question was put to Woolmer regarding Sami's lack of progress and this is what he replied:

"I rate Sami highly and he just needs some confidence, it is coming one good performance and I am sure we will see him turn th corner, there are signs of that happening in the last game against Sri Lanka."

Will be interesting to see where Sami is headed over the next few months.