Percentage of centuries resulting in win/draw matches.

Dravid 25/26 96%
Inzamam 23/25 92%
Tendulkar 33/42 78%
Yousuf 16/24 67%

__________________
Tell Me What You Know About Dreamin’ Dreamin’
You Don’t Really Know About Nothin’ Nothin’

Originally Posted by komal*

^ Whether they like it or not, even his century in that particular test was also a match winning innings, its different that we didn't win thanks to some players. But, if I remember correctly didn't he come when Pak were 55/3 and smashed his century? Yet this isn't being considered 'performing when needed, guiding team home, isn't being good as record looks or all that bla bla"? Its all criticism for sake of criticism, nothing else.

yes, but why didnt he score a century in the second innings? its only fair to expect a batsman of his stature to score 2 centuries in the same match, regardless of whether he is making a come back after 2 years or not, otherwise he is not a match winner? i mean the rest are their for the free trip, good food, nice hotels, lets not expect them to perform alright. that would be unfair.

^ Thats because Yousuf scores more centuries than Inzi..Inzi had a higher rate than Yousuf in scoring centuries.

Inzis century rate in Tests: 4,8
Yousufs century rate in Tests: 3,3
Difference: 1,5 = ~ 2 matches

Inzis century rate in ODIs: 37,8
Yousufs century rate in ODIs: 17,9
Difference: 19,9 = ~ 20 matches

__________________

[Yaad rakho yaaro: "Shahid Afridi, the most unique player in the world."]

Originally Posted by mdmans

yes, but why didnt he score a century in the second innings? its only fair to expect a batsman of his stature to score 2 centuries in the same match, regardless of whether he is making a come back after 2 years or not, otherwise he is not a match winner? i mean the rest are their for the free trip, good food, nice hotels, lets not expect them to perform alright. that would be unfair.

Its ridiculous really. In order to win a match you only need one or two excellent performances with handful of average perfirmances from other players. I'm sure you'd agree that in 90's, there'd been many countless occasions where Tendulkar smacked beautiful centuries but his team would still lose, now that doesn't make him a crap or selfish player; it actually refelcts the fact that one man's brilliance can only do so much, you need the whole team to contribute! Yousuf and Misbah did set the platform in the first innings and all you needed was other at least 3-4 players to contribute their share of "20-30" runs instead seeing the same old man working his ass off when you only have to chase 97 runs?

__________________
Those who matter, don't mind. Those who mind, don't matter...

Average when winning matches in ODIs:
Yousuf: 57
Inzamam: 51


Average when winning matches in Tests:
Yousuf: 59
Inzamam: 78


Inzamam had this world record of averaging the most when winning matches as a captain. He was a class act...and scored in very big pressure situations..this made him so valuable for Pakistan. But Yousuf isn't bad there either..

__________________

[Yaad rakho yaaro: "Shahid Afridi, the most unique player in the world."]

Originally Posted by komal*

Its actually funny how people are gabbling and bemoaning the absence of 20-30 odd runs from him in the second innings. But I bet had we won, all of us would've been singing praises for century that actually gave us the lead in the match and reasonably low total of 165 to chase (with 7 seven batsmen in hand). Just because we lost doesn't mean that runs from him in the first innings weren't 'needed', or helped the team, or contribute to the very possible win. The day we realize that you can't always expect a winning knock from only one or two players out of the entire team, the better it'd get. If I'm not not wrong, I think Yousuf faced Mendis for the first time and considering that he did exceptionally well compare to the flopped players who recently played fair number of matches against him. As with Brain Lara, Inzi and Ricky Ponting, then I must mention those palyers were also known for playing 'captain's knock' but did our captain who apparently is the closest thing to Inzi did what was expected of him? Besides, Inzi infatuation in this forum is at quite ridiculous level, who ever performs under crunch situation becomes the next version of the big man; be it Misbah, Kami, Younus or even Yousuf. For God sake let players be whoever they are, scoring runs is a must for every batsman but only one can take the lead and do something special to win you the match, out of the seven batsmen anyone can be that 'match winner' on a given day.

Its very ridiculous that you'e focusing on just one part of people posts and ignoring the whole post. Who is blaming yousuf only? Every other batsman is to be blamed as well but since the topic is about the yousuf, therefore, he is being discussed here. Making a century in first innings does not mean you're not going to score in the second innings. And then if we go by your logic then we can say younis khan took crucial wickets, If he had not broken those partnership S.L would have scored 400 runs. So this means he played his part in the test match, who cares if he scores or not? right? woah! Pretty messed up right? Btw If you're looking for a 'captain's knock' don't forget his 300 MATCH SAVING innings in the last series.
Yousuf is surely not the only one to be blamed, if fact he was the best batsman from our side but that does not mean he is off the hook.
Btw, go back and read my post again, the first one, I did praise him. I said he was coming back after a big gap and still played well. I don't see any reason why would you get all red.

Originally Posted by pbt099

Percentage of centuries resulting in win/draw matches. Dravid 25/26 96% Inzamam 23/25 92% Tendulkar 33/42 78% Yousuf 16/24 67%

Thank-you!!

Average in Tests when saving a match(draw):
Yousuf: 76
Inzamam: 47


Our batting collapsed in the last match..anyone who blames Yousuf for not scoring in the second innings can't be helped.

__________________

[Yaad rakho yaaro: "Shahid Afridi, the most unique player in the world."]

Originally Posted by ouneeb22

Its very ridiculous that you'e focusing on just one part of people posts and ignoring the whole post. Who is blaming yousuf only? Every other batsman is to be blamed as well but since the topic is about the yousuf, therefore, he is being discussed here. Making a century in first innings does not mean you're not going to score in the second innings. And then if we go by your logic then we can say younis khan took crucial wickets, If he had not broken those partnership S.L would have scored 400 runs. So this means he played his part in the test match, who cares if he scores or not? right? woah! Pretty messed up right? Btw If you're looking for a 'captain's knock' don't forget his 300 MATCH SAVING innings in the last series. Yousuf is surely not the only one to be blamed, if fact he was the best batsman from our side but that does not mean he is off the hook. Btw, go back and read my post again, the first one, I did praise him. I said he was coming back after a big gap and still played well. I don't see any reason why would you get all red.

Then if you blame likes of Malik, Kami, Butt, Misbah than you still have people who come running crying that it won't be as much dissapointing if these fellas don't perfrom but its the end of the world if both You's fail, because they just can't? I still see no logic for people assuming as if his "20-30" would've saved us the innings or that would perhaps be considered us "match winning innings". Because the way I see it, his 100 was indeed a match winning knock but its a shame that it in a sense it went 'wasted' due to few average perfomaces not supporting one's brilliance. To be reasonable, he was supposed to struggle big time after returning from 2 years exile, yet his more than expected score gives you the lead in the match but no its not good enough if there weren't 20-30 runs from him in the second innings. How about for a second we give credit to the fantastic delivery that got Yousuf out, which could've got any batsman out, and for another second focus of disgusting manner which some of other batsmen got out?

Quote:

Making a century in first innings does not mean you're not going to score in the second innings.

But not scoring in second innings doesn't mean you pretend as if his century did not contribute to the very very possible win? If coming at 55/3 and scoring 112 is not 'helping the team when needed' then I don't know what is?

__________________
Those who matter, don't mind. Those who mind, don't matter...

Interestingy, if we divide the 124 he totally scored in the last match through 2(as he got out twice) we get to his average of 62. This is very near to his average when Pakistan wins a match which is an average of 59 runs.

So, overall he contributed his part to the win..it's obvious simply by watching the second innings of Pakistan that the reason we lost was the incapability of the other batsman to score their runs.

Sure, Yousuf could average higher in case of a Pakistan win but in this match he averaged 62 which is very impressive. Inzamam used to average 78 to win a Test match but he is the worlds best in that..nobody is saying Yousuf is a bigger matchwinner than Inzi as Inzi was no doubt the best who won matches from the biggest of pressure situations..but he was just 16 runs on average short to Inzis 78..if you don't go by common sense logic then you have to realise it from here. If people still don't do then really..

__________________

[Yaad rakho yaaro: "Shahid Afridi, the most unique player in the world."]

Ouneeb its pointless saying anything in a Yousef thread here, some people automatically jump on you without seeing the actual point of your post.

__________________

@ Realpk. All you actually needed was people who didn't do enough in the first innings to pull their socks off and play their part in the second innings. For God sake you only had 165 total to chase. That match was the clear example of bowlers excellent effort, and a might century gone wasted becasue of few people decided not to give their 100%.

__________________
Those who matter, don't mind. Those who mind, don't matter...

Originally Posted by Cricinfo

But it was unmistakable that this match was theirs to lose. That no amount of terrific bowling should have taken eight wickets for 46 runs on this pitch. That they shouldn't have been chasing 168 in the first place.

...^

__________________

[Yaad rakho yaaro: "Shahid Afridi, the most unique player in the world."]

Originally Posted by komal*

Then if you blame likes of Malik, Kami, Butt, Misbah than you still have people who come running crying that it won't be as much dissapointing if these fellas don't perfrom but its the end of the world if both You's fail, because they just can't? I still see no logic for people assuming as if his "20-30" would've saved us the innings or that would perhaps be considered us "match winning innings". Because the way I see it, his 100 was indeed a match winning knock but its a shame that it in a sense it went 'wasted' due to few average perfomaces not supporting one's brilliance. To be reasonable, he was supposed to struggle big time after returning from 2 years exile, yet his more than expected score gives you the lead in the match but no its not good enough if there weren't 20-30 runs from him in the second innings. How about for a second we give credit to the fantastic delivery that got Yousuf out, which could've got any batsman out, and for another second focus of disgusting manner which some of other batsmen got out? But not scoring in second innings doesn't mean you pretend as if his century did not contribute to the very very possible win? If coming at 55/3 and scoring 112 is not 'helping the team when needed' then I don't know what is?

Someone here posted the stats, time to read those. Maybe then you don't know what a match winning innings is. Again I didn't say his knock was not a good one, i am just talking about match saving/winning innings. Tendulkar has scored around 37-38 centuries but is still not considered that big of a match winner, ever considered why? cuz most of them are NOT match winnings innings. Simple!

btw that was not a fantastic delivery. It was just an arm ball.

Pakistan should have never chased 168 because Pakistan should have had a lead of 100-150 through a better batting performance in the first innings. It was thanks to Yousuf we got a chaseable target of 168..

__________________

[Yaad rakho yaaro: "Shahid Afridi, the most unique player in the world."]