the true passionist
16th December 2006, 23:29
There has been a lot of questions about Abdul Razaq's performance lately. While it is clear that he is not a test player, his value as an odi player has also been questioned.
I have always believed that Razaq is an integral part of the Pakistan ODI team. So just to look deeper into this i compared leading all-rounders in world cricket who play solely because of their all-round abilities. Hence i did not include players like Kallis, Gayle and Pollock because they are top player but are not really selected into the team as all-rounders.
I looked at last 50 matches since that seems to be an adequate way to look at a players form and ability.
Here are the results:
Mat Runs HS BatAv 100 50 W BB BowlAv 5w Ct StA Hall (SAF) 50 429 56 22.57 0 2 66 4/23 26.07 0 18 0
S Styrus (NZ) 50 1434 101* 34.97 2 11 40 4/40 30.65 0 20 0
J Oram (NZ) 50 709 81 20.85 0 2 59 5/36 30.30 1 13 0
I Pathan (Ind) 50 817 83 26.35 0 5 75 5/27 25.66 1 7 0
A Flintoff (Eng) 50 1615 123 42.50 3 9 61 4/14 24.80 0 13 0
S Watson (Aus) 50 724 79 32.90 0 5 52 4/39 30.11 0 13 0
A Symonds (Aus) 50 1576 156 41.47 3 9 41 5/18 38.17 1 25 0
D Bravo (W.I) 50 668 112* 23.85 1 2 52 3/14 33.09 0 23 0
S Afridi (Pak) 50 857 102 20.90 1 3 50 4/38 33.48 0 15 0
A Razaq (Pak) 50 976 88 30.50 0 5 49 4/29 37.46 0 3 0
As we could have gussed Flintoff is the best of them all.
But then Razaq, Symonds, Watson and Pathan are pretty much at the same level. There's not much of a difference in all-rounders in the world.
So, i conclude that Razaq is as good as other all-rounders in the world apart from obviously Flintoff.
How do you see, Razaq's value?
I have always believed that Razaq is an integral part of the Pakistan ODI team. So just to look deeper into this i compared leading all-rounders in world cricket who play solely because of their all-round abilities. Hence i did not include players like Kallis, Gayle and Pollock because they are top player but are not really selected into the team as all-rounders.
I looked at last 50 matches since that seems to be an adequate way to look at a players form and ability.
Here are the results:
Mat Runs HS BatAv 100 50 W BB BowlAv 5w Ct StA Hall (SAF) 50 429 56 22.57 0 2 66 4/23 26.07 0 18 0
S Styrus (NZ) 50 1434 101* 34.97 2 11 40 4/40 30.65 0 20 0
J Oram (NZ) 50 709 81 20.85 0 2 59 5/36 30.30 1 13 0
I Pathan (Ind) 50 817 83 26.35 0 5 75 5/27 25.66 1 7 0
A Flintoff (Eng) 50 1615 123 42.50 3 9 61 4/14 24.80 0 13 0
S Watson (Aus) 50 724 79 32.90 0 5 52 4/39 30.11 0 13 0
A Symonds (Aus) 50 1576 156 41.47 3 9 41 5/18 38.17 1 25 0
D Bravo (W.I) 50 668 112* 23.85 1 2 52 3/14 33.09 0 23 0
S Afridi (Pak) 50 857 102 20.90 1 3 50 4/38 33.48 0 15 0
A Razaq (Pak) 50 976 88 30.50 0 5 49 4/29 37.46 0 3 0
As we could have gussed Flintoff is the best of them all.
But then Razaq, Symonds, Watson and Pathan are pretty much at the same level. There's not much of a difference in all-rounders in the world.
So, i conclude that Razaq is as good as other all-rounders in the world apart from obviously Flintoff.
How do you see, Razaq's value?