Does Afridi have faith in the rest of his bowlers?

[Genghis]

Of course he is in the form of his life, so Afridi rightly is using himself as an attacking option. But does he have enough faith in the rest of his bowlers to do the job?

Often when Afridi is bowling the fielders are in close, but if someone else is bowling, it is generally a much more defensive field. Ajmal was a classic example yesterday. He is an attacking spinner unlike Hafeez/Rehman, but it was probably the most defensive field I have ever seen him bowling to (and that too against an associate team). Even with the quicks, he has been quick to remove fielders from catching positions.

And then there is him always talking with the bowler a bit too much and showing plenty of emotion when there is a bad ball.

I beleive he even said they were "trying to bowl maidens to increase the run rate" - which is quite surprising considering they were only defending a small score against such a weak team. Such tactics might work here, but if we make it further and play in India where there have been some high scoring games, the team which plays attacking cricket with both bat and ball is going to go furthest..

[cric]

It's funny how every body was complaining 2 months ago, that afridi sets defensive field set for him self and attacking for ajmal. no meter what the result of the game, the hater will always find mistakes. before the world cup the insaniyat guy almost all his post about how bad afridi is. he wouldn't be able to win against kenya and Zimbabwe, but since the world cup started, he is no where near to be seen.

[ads101]

I do have the sneaky feeling he has a slight lack of faith with ajmal these days. But with the others I'd say no.

[Looney]

More than that , what i found more objectionable was that he kept talking to his bowlers after every delivery .

[ads101]

Originally Posted by cric It's funny how every body was complaining 2 months ago, that afridi sets defensive field set for him self and attacking for ajmal. no meter what the result of the game, the hater will always find mistakes. before the world cup the insaniyat guy almost all his post about how bad afridi is. he wouldn't be able to win against kenya and Zimbabwe, but since the world cup started, he is no where near to be seen.

I think Afridi just doesn't know how to handle and set fields to Ajmal. Doesn't know if he should go aggressive or defensive in his field placings. He sets aggressive fields, but then gets worried about ajmal going for runs (when usually the role of spinners has been to keep the run rate down in limited overs for us. We mainly rely on our quicks). When defensive fields are set, and ajmal doesn't take a wicket, yet ajmal is still giving away runs, again he feels the urge to take him off.

I think if ajmal is perhaps better off setting his own fields.

[ads101]

I thought the defensive overs in the middle was actually a good idea. It tricks the batsmen into playing defensively. If you bowl aggressively, batsmen will have to play aggressively and go for the boundaries. If Canada had batted aggressively from ball one (and especially when the spinners came on), there's a good chance they may have won.

What Afridi did was put a defensive field and as a result, and their batsman played defensively. The run rate crept up to around 4.5 an over, something which was defendable even with the occasional boundary off an over. When the run rate was climbing, and the batsmen set, tried to go aggressive, he brought himself on set a more attacking field. And he got their wickets.

Against a strong team this wouldn't have worked. But it worked against a weaker team perfectly.

[Genghis]

Originally Posted by ads101 I thought the defensive overs in the middle was actually a good idea. It tricks the batsmen into playing defensively. If you bowl aggressively, batsmen will have to play aggressively and go for the boundaries. If Canada had batted aggressively from ball one (and especially when the spinners came on), there's a good chance they may have won. What Afridi did was put a defensive field and as a result, and their batsman played defensively. The run rate crept up to around 4.5 an over, something which was defendable even with the occasional boundary off an over. When the run rate was climbing, and the batsmen set, tried to go aggressive, he brought himself on set a more attacking field. And he got their wickets. Against a strong team this wouldn't have worked. But it worked against a weaker team perfectly.

But the two Canadian batsmen were going at about 3 RPO. They were not attacking batsmen, they were both defensive by nature (as you could tell from their career strike rates as well). Afridi should have set a more attacking field and may have finished the game off earlier. There were a few balls which dropped just before fielders or went through slips because Afridi had pushed players back. Against the better teams, we will not get as many chances, so I hope Waqar and co. are working out better fielding plans for our bowlers.

[Afridi_Fan]

I think yes, Afridi only sees either himself or Akhtar as attacking options (he usually gives Akhtar a slip even if he is bowling in the middle overs). Where as I think yesterday he should have been more attacking against the Canadians with Ajmal perhaps.

[ads101]

Originally Posted by genghis81 But the two Canadian batsmen were going at about 3 RPO. They were not attacking batsmen, they were both defensive by nature (as you could tell from their career strike rates as well). Afridi should have set a more attacking field and may have finished the game off earlier. There were a few balls which dropped just before fielders or went through slips because Afridi had pushed players back. Against the better teams, we will not get as many chances, so I hope Waqar and co. are working out better fielding plans for our bowlers.

Fair point.

Maybe Afridi just didn't want to take the risk of them going attacking in this situation. Or maybe he just simply didn't know the canadian batsmen very well (and thought they could all be like Cheema).

What you've said, I guess makes more sense. I guess I'd do what you'd have done now. You've convinced me

But I still got the feeling that Afridi really wanted something to defend. When the run rate was high enough, only then did he really feel comfortable attacking.

Afridi did pretty much attack with most of his bowlers I felt. It was just in the middle stages with Ajmal and Hafeez. And I think he tailored his fields more to what Hafeez would have wanted rather than ajmal. He didn't exactly change his fields much for Ajmal from Hafeez (or vice versa). I think perhaps the reason is he knows how to use Hafeez a lot better than ajmal.