That's an interesting piece by Mike Holmans, where he defends Shahid Afridi's entertaining but ultimately flawed performance in the first innings. I wonder if he still believes that Afridi went out there with a 'plan' after watching him bat in the second innings. I understand where Holmans is coming from, but having watched Afridi play over the years, I don't think there is any thinking involved in his batting. I do agree that in the first innings at least, it was probably the right way to go, but what about second time around then?
Afridi defenders, like Holmans, often come up with the 'natural game' defense. His natural game is to attack, there's no point in him hanging around because if he does he's going to get out sooner rather than later etc etc. I think that's a load of bull****. I find this whole Afridi can't bat like Rahul Dravid, so he's justified in swinging at everything really amusing. There are plenty of aggressive players in international cricket. The secret is not going into a shell or 'hanging around' but shot selection. In today's day and age, even tail enders who swing at everything are rarely forgiven. So when a batsman, that too captain goes out and plays like that, its beyond redemption.
No comments:
Post a Comment