The Ultimate Abdur Razzaq Thread

[Zainub]

As an after thought:

I have always maintained that Razzaq and Flintoff are fairly similar kind of players. So I did a bit of research comparing them, particularly when Andrew Flintoff and Abdul Razzaq were both at similar stages in their careers. I found out that when Flintoff (now aged 27) was the same age as Razzaq (i.e. 25) he found him self having the same problems as Razzaq and therefore having to hear the same sort of criticism as Razzaq, here is a closer look at finding out why, and looking at some of their other similarities as well:

• In the 25th year of his life Andrew averaged in between 50 and 47 with the ball while Razzaq is averaging in between 37 and 36 in the same period. See this (Flintoff’s stats in red, Razzaq’s in black)

http://statserver.cricket.org/guru?s...ds=comparetype

• After Flintoff had played as many games as Razzaq (i.e. 37) he was averaging 39 with the ball, as opposed to Razzaq’s 37. In fact their cumulative career bowling averages show that Razzaq has so far had a relatively smoother ride into test cricket:

http://statserver.cricket.org/guru?s...ds=comparetype


http://statserver.cricket.org/guru?s...ds=comparetype
• In batting too both players showed remarkable similarities at similar stages in their careers. There is nothing to choose in between there averages when they’d both played 36 games each, Andrew was averaging 29, Razzaq is averaging 28.

http://statserver.cricket.org/guru?s...ds=comparetype

• In the 25th years of their life Flintoff averaged in between 19 and 26, while Razzaq averaged in between 29 and 27.

http://statserver.cricket.org/guru?s...= comparetype

http://statserver.cricket.org/guru?s...ds=comparetype

• Razzaq today is criticized for being all or nothing type batsmen, who either blocks or blasts – a criticism Andrew was all too often the target off in his post SA-2003 days. And despite Flintoff’s timing and placement improving by at least 100% in the last 2 years this is something that still comes to haunt him time and again, like during his Sri Lanka tour. Both players essentially have a very similar game plan, revolving around their sheer brute force. Many people in England believe Flintoff hits the ball hardest of any one in international cricket but Stephen Flemming, who has played test cricket for all but a matter of 11 years, said in early 2004 that he’d never come across a player who could hit the ball as hard and as long as Razzaq. Ability to hit the ball hard is a double edged sword; it is amongst both players’ biggest strengths and biggest weaknesses. What is now the difference between the two players is that Flintoff has through experience and time learned to curb his natural ability to some extent while Razzaq is still figuring out how to.

• Both players are also perceived as having a weakness against high quality spin bowling.

• Both players generally struggle away from home.

• Both players were introduced into test cricket earlier then they should have been.

• Both players were unjustifiably compared to former greats all rounders of their country at very early stage of their careers, putting far too much pressure on them. Razzaq’s cricinfo profile still says that in his hay days Razzaq was the most complete all rounder Pakistan have produced since Imran Khan. Flintoff still has to remind every one every now and again that he’s not the new Beefy; he’s the new Andrew Flintoff.

• Both players have an awful lot of catches dropped off their bowling. In this respect Flintoff’s luck has some what improved in the last couple of years, Razzaq’s still hasn’t.

• Both players have suffered major injuries at crucial junctures in their careers. Andrew has been far unluckier in this respect.

• Both players are the best exponents of reverse swing in their respective sides.

• Both bowl very well to left handers.

• Both players are the respective work horses of the either side.

• Both players are down to earth blokes.

• Both players have nicknames after cartoon characters. Andrew is Fred after Fred Flintstone, and Abdul Razzaq is Popeye after Popeye, The Sailor Man.

• And not that this matters, but for the sake of it, both are married and have a daughter.

Now I know you all will point towards the dissimilarities (Flintoff can bowl at higher pace, Flintoff is a hit the deck kind of player, Razzaq is lesser so, etc)...but all of the above has given me enough hope to believe that some day in the not so distant future Razzaq if nothing can at least become as good a player as he’s truly capable of being. So far he’s underachieved.

What do others think In 2 years time, when Razzaq will be 27 how far will he have come along in his international cricket career? Will he ever manage to create the sort of impact on Pakistan as Flintoff has on England?

[Zainub]

PS: From now I on, I shall use this thread to discuss anything and everything about AR. Please use this thread to discuss him in any capacity, this is now his official thread.

[Maranello]

I agree with most of what you say Zainub, and some excellent research here (though the similarities on 'nicknames', cartoons, off-spring etc are somewhat irrelevant, I am sure you will not be surprised to hear!)

Razzaq does have one disadvantage compared to Flintoff, in that he is not a giant of a man; he is a frail looking, medium height, spinach loving chap. Despite this, he is a very powerful hitter indeed, due to that amazing use of the bottom hand; however the difference in physical strength is most telling in his bowling pace; unlike Flintoff, Razzaq does not bowl at 90mph or even 80mph consistently. I fear he will remain a 'support' bowler unless he addresses this, or develops into a very good swing/seam bowler. By no means am I ruling this out, simply sounding a word of caution.

He is one of the most decent, modest and self-effacing chaps in the team though, and that counts for a lot with me.

[Zainub]

Razzaq used to bowl at a lot higher pace before Brett Lee injuired his wrist.

And there is no reason why Razzaq can't improve his built - Andrew was never in this good shape either, in fact in 2000 he was rivalling the likes of Inzamam and Aravinda DeSilva for the tad of 'bulkiest cricketer in the world' - with Neil Fairbrother and Chubby Chandler as his buisness manager though he was forced to take a serious approcach to his career or fear the worst. I'm inclined to think Razzaq could do with that sort of professional guidance, in fact most of our young players could for that matter.

[Orchid]

I personally belong to the Azhar Mahmood camp and sometimes blame Razzak for Azhar not getting enough opportunities. However, I do see Razzak as a valuable member of the team.

Without going into statistics or his technical strengths/weaknesses, Razzak to me, comes across as a player who can deliver what is required of him, if he is clear about what is required of him, that is. His numerous ODI batting performances, the innings in Mohali, or his good bowling performances whenever the lead bowlers like Akhtar are not playing show that he can deliver.

However, sometimes he appears completely confused and that’s when I feel that he is not sure about what he is required to do. Is this a bad thing? Not necessarily, it could just mean that he is not a potential leader and we don’t really need 11 potential leaders in a team.

I also have absolutely no doubt that he is a complete team player (and we do need as many of those type as we can) but his body language sometimes tells a different story. While bowling, I can’t help feeling that he is not exerting himself enough, that he can actually bowl faster or put more effort but doesn’t want to, just so that he doesn’t end up hurting himself or something. Every time he comes to bowl, I get this image of a young skinny bowler (I think it was Mohd. Akram) who had a very deceptive and slow run up but when he bowled, it was fast! Evertime Razzak comes to bowl, I hope that’s what he will do as he certainly looks capable of doing that, but it doesn’t happen.

While batting, he appears so disengaged from it all, it feels akward. Ditto while running between the wickets. However, these could just be how he plays or my biased opinion.

[Maranello]

I think the fact that Razzaq is so laid-back, calm and down-to-earth is one of his big assets - he does not let the game or the pressure get to him. However it can also be a negative: is he bothered enough about it all to work hard at it? Sometimes, it appears he isn't.

Also I agree that when not properly guided, or when there is no obvious target for his endeavours, he can produce some very perplexing and poor performances...4 off 71 balls anyone? But then the team management should ensure he always has manageable targets to work to, and is not left to his own intellectual devices.

[Orchid]

Yes, that's my feeling too that his calm exterior can be interpreted in a negative way and can even frustrate his teammates (it frustrates me anyhow). Plus, he probably needs somebody else (ie captain) to clarify his role during the match.

I also noted that after the Mohali innings, he hasn't completely managed to switch gears back to ODI mode even in ODI matches.

[Zainub]

that's why he needs a professional sports manager, a proper agent, a personal performance enhancing advisor too...and a decent sponsorship deal to get him some money for paying these guys!

[Orchid]

Originally Posted by Zainub

that's why he needs a professional sports manager, a proper agent, a personal performance enhancing advisor too...and a decent sponsorship deal to get him some money for paying these guys!

Are you thinking of applying for one of the obove positions?

[Zainub]

Not really. I am not a professional.