Shahid Afridi - just scored 5 half-centuries in ODI cricket since 2005

I was looking at the stats on Cricinfo earlier and noticed that Shahid Afridi has in his last 90 ODI matches, since that 100 v India at Kanpur in 2005, he has scored just a mere 5 half centuries with the bat in five years.

That's one score over 50 a year.. sure Afridi has done great in his bowling, and true no one ever expected Afridi to score 100s like a Saeed Anwar or Javed Miandad, but seriously -- the guy is a better batsman than what these stats show, its extremely shocking to think that someone can get a 100 in his first innings in international cricket as a young 16 year old, but after 10 yrs experience where he should have improved his game and reached his peak, he can score no more than one 50 a year!

I still remember Afridi getting two back to back 50s in the Independence Cup, 1997 in India. That was the same tournament where Saeed Anwar got his record of 194. At that time Afridi looked like a really promising talent with the bat, someone who could get useful scores of 40-60 on a consistent basis (if not 100s).

So what and where have things gone wrong, for Afridi to be such a miserable failure with the bat ?

well maybe it's the definition of talent that needs to be revised. if he really had so much talent with the bat, then surely his average wouldn't be pathetic. talent isn't just about how far you can hit a fulltoss.

temperament, ability to read the game, etc, are also part of talent.

I used to go with Imran Khan's theory of the three T's - Talent, Technique and Temperament.

Talent is a subjective thing and not something you can easily measure or compare, but raw talent and natural ability in a player will never go unnoticed.

Afridi has played cricketing strokes of the highest quality, with timing and placement, which make you think that this player is extremely gifted -- but maybe being a batsman requires other talents too - like the talent to build an innings, the talent to handle different kinds of bowling from fast pace, inswing, outswing, leg spin , off spin, and to adjust one's batting style and technique according to the conditions and bowling faced , in reality I suppose this is all talent which is required for a batsman to be successful.

Imran Nazir is a similar case, his talent seems to lie only in playing strokes on bad balls. This may be what is deceiving us into thinking these are extremely talented, sure they are supremely gifted boundary hitters off bad balls, but talented batsman? surely there's much more to the art of batting as you will learn by watching the likes of Lara, Tendulkar, De Silva, Saeed Anwar et al.

I disagree. talent has to be measured keeping in mind mental discipline and temperament.

I'm tired of reading that Afridi and Nazir are so talented (not from mature ppl like you but from their fanboys).

coming to Nazir for example. he played the best cover drive I think I've ever seen in Sharjah against Pollock who back then was one of the best in the world. Nazir absolutely murdered Pollock through cover. does that show his talent? maybe...

because how many times did Nazir try to play that shot, get beaten or nearly get out before FINALLY connecting? honestly if you gave the bat to a loser like and told me that play without a care in the world... after maybe a 100 shots, I think I might have managed 5 gorgeous cover drives as well. Nazir and Afridi play low percentage shots because they think they can get away with it and won't get dropped.

constantly playing low percentage shots, playing unprofessionaly, etc should be not confused for talent. look at Afridi's innings in the RBS T20 semifinal against Sialkot. he played a shot at every ball for the two overs he batted. does that show his talent? do you think if someone like Malik also decided in his innings he was going to bat irresponsibly and just go slam bang, he couldn't have scored a 12-ball 20? instead, he batted slowly, tried to stay on the wicket and take his side to a decent total. that for me is real talent.

imo, most of the guys at the top level are ridiculously talented. they can do things that mere mortals like me can't even imagine. if they wanted to, all of them could play shots like Afridi, Nazir. but they choose NOT to... because they want their team to win and realize that they must contribute with high percentage shots. not by taking outrageous risks like Afridi/Nazir etc. if the likes of Tendulkar/Lara/Waugh/Inzi decided that their only mission in life was to break the 37-ball 100 record and they played every game for that, I firmly believe they could do it. but they did not because all of them were required to bat for their team especially being the premier batsmen that they were.

for me someone like Malik (who is considered workmanlike, etc) is far more talented than a Nazir or Afridi (with the bat). guess my definition of talent incorporates temperament as well.

and I must disagree with this particular part as well. when the ball moves around, he is totally out of his depth. not saying that others aren't as well. but he actually looks scared. he knows he hasn't got a shot of making it, so instead of being dismissed, he chooses to commit suicide. the easy way you know...

a real talent... a la Lara, Waugh, Tendulkar, or even an Inzi would buckle down and play despite the conditions or the bowler. that is talent.

what Afridi does is behave like a scared little child who would rather be back in the nice, warm dressing room than out there fighting it out.

Honestly speaking, I believe that had Afridi been given one specific role in the team he would have had greater success as a batsman. He has floated in the lineup throughout most of his career and that has an effect on his batting. Had he been an opener for his entire career then his numbers would be better.

How many wickets has he taken in that time?