@phoenixdesi… sorry, but after watching pathetic performance of Pakistan I went to sleep and could not reply you. Anyhow, please try to understand what I am saying and think unbiased (this is true for all Pakistanis that if they care for Pakistan, they should stop biases and think).
Important thing is that, if team was selected on merit and there was no reason for people to say that team is selected on Parchi, than ‘win or lose’, one could not have said anything. Something that happens most of the time when SL, NZ, Aus or SA loses. If they lose, people know that team is there on merit (no biases, tassub or parchi) but they failed to compete, hence lost the match. So:
Q: Why things are different with Pakistan?
Q: Why, even if Pakistan wins, we (many, including me) believe that this team is not based on merit and is Parchi team?
Q: Why people can quote un-disputable figures (players’ performance data) to show that team is selected on Parchi, connections, contacts, regional biases and so on?
Answer is that, there are many reasons, that not only me but many others, including players themselves can see that team is not selected on merit.
Secondly, you are right that some players are in team who deserve to be in team, but when most of the team are not selected on merit, once in team, they start developing their lobby, as they know that their performance is no guarantee to stay in team. Once they have their lobby, they damn care about performance as now they know they would stay. This introduced politics in team, because it is need for players to keep getting selected and playing.
Players getting selected and once selected, not staying in team on performance, most talented players outside the team never makes the team and thus confidence on merit evaporates. Players playing domestic cricket know that their performance would never going to be criteria to get selected, hence they give up on hard work. Thus, situation of team is effecting Pakistan in creating good players.
Anyhow, saying all this, I would not justify what I wrote, if I could not give any solution.
Solution is simple: ‘Auto Selection processes’ with minimum human decision making and interference.
Further: Teams of all 3 format (Test, ODI and T20I) should be different.
Test team should be based on performance of players in First class.
ODI team should be based on performance of players in ‘list A’
T20I team should be based on performance of players in Twenty20
Selection process: Each format should have players domestic ranking based on their performance figures. Domestic ranking should take into account matches in last 2 years (so that current performance be criteria of selection). It should also see how many runs a player made (for instance, minimum runs = 500) and how many overs player bowled (for instance, min = 100 overs). These domestic ranking should be of several types:
Ranking of batsmen …
Test: Averages
ODI: Ave and SR … could be based on (Ave x SR)
T20I: Ave and SR (where Ave has to be over 20).
Ranking of Bowlers:
Test: Ave per wicket
ODI: Ave per wkt and ER (could be
T20I: Ave per wkt and ER.
All Rounder: Players’ batting average has to be better than bowling average.
Than there should be extra points for fielding and age.
After that, players combined ranking formula has to be made, what all should know and calculate. From that ranking, players should be chosen from top. No interference or personal choice of selector.
So, for batsmen slot, player with highest average should be chosen … same with other departments.
Best would be: Once chosen, they would only get specified guaranteed innings to perform and maintain the figures:
For batsmen, their figures should get re-assessed after getting out 5 times.
For bowlers: Their figures would be re-assessed after X number of overs
And so on.
Now, let me give you co-relation between domestic cricket and international cricket (some believe there is no co-relation).
First of all, domestic cricket should be only criteria for selection to national team, as here players’ performance can be judged best way with respect to each other. If A can have average of 40 in domestic than has to be better than B whose average in domestic cricket is below 40. Simple as that.
Secondly, let me give you average of some top players’ (who continuously played in team) domestic performance with their international performance (as it always converges over long term). I would stick to batting performance only. One can check other areas if one wants to.
Pakistani players (top performers):
[TABLE]
Players
FC
Test
List A
ODi
Miandad
53
53
43
42
Inzamam
50
50
38
40
M Yousuf
47
52
40
41
Younis K
51
53
33
31
Misbah
51
49
47
43
S Anwer
45
45
38
39
Salim M
46
44
36
33
You can check other players and would see similar co-relation. Performance in domestic and International level over long run are close to each other.
International players (top performers):
[TABLE]
Players
FC
Test
List A
ODi
De-villiar
51
52
51
52
Amla
52
53
48
56
Tandulkr
47
52
45
45
Kholi
58
54
51
52
Viv Rich
49
50
42
47
Lara
52
53
40
40
Sangakara
51
58
42
41
Jy-wardne
50
50
33
33
R Ponting
56
52
42
42
M Clarke
48
50
43
45
K Piet-sen
49
47
41
41
Ian Bell
46
45
40
37
You can check other players and would see similar co-relation. Performance in domestic and International level over long run are close to each other.
So, there is nothing wrong in what I am saying. Still, even if performance figures of domestic level and international level were not similar, still, this is the only way team should be selected, as there is no reason that performance of a player ‘A’ at domestic cricket should be worse than player ‘B’ but he is expected to play better at international level, hence he should get preference over B.
Further things become complicated, when selection is not made even when players international performance is better than other player and still he is dropped.
For instance:
Fawad Alam ODI ave is 45 and SR is 75 … dropped.
Misbah (best Pakistani batsmen in ODI playing) ODI ave is 43 and SR is 73 … still he is playing.
Leave other players like Younis Khan, Ahmed Shahzad, UA, Hafiz, etc … as none of these players have average above 35 and SR above 75.
Younis (ave: 31, SR 75)
Ahmed Shahzad (Ave 34, SR 71).
UA (Ave 35, SR 86)
Hafiz (Ave 31, SR 73)
Now, if that would happen, than it is obvious that trust on performance would end.
Just imagine, both Bilawal and Anwer Ali were given break in ODI.
In domestic cricket ‘list A’ both averages 33 runs per wicket and has ER of 5.2.
Anwer’s batting ‘list A’ performance (ave = 25) is obviously better than Bilawal (Ave = 13)
At international exposure, Anwer Ali performance was still much better than Bilawal, both with bat and ball.
Anwer ODI average = 29 … Bilawal ODI average = 15
Anwer took wickets at average of 68.4 with ER = 5.5
Bilawal took wicket at average of 73.2 with ER = 6.4
So, why discriminate?
Anwer performed better than Bilawal, still Bilawal got chance in test.
Anwer performance was better than ODI, still Bilawal was chosen for ODI world cup.
Why?
All this discrimination, biases, and personal likes and dislikes would go, if selection would be automated using well defined performance criteria based on domestic cricket. With Anwer around, team cannot have Bilawal, as one can see their performance. If Fawad around, one cannot have other players in the team as batsmen whose performance are worse than Fawad (and figures confirms that). If that would not happen, than we cannot say that so-called Pakistani team is really Pakistani team (regardless of they win or lose).