[MATCH THREAD] 2nd Test Afghanistan v Zimbabwe @Abu Dhabi

[Kriterion_BD]

Going forward now Zimbabwe selectors have a dilemma regarding Donald Tiripano and even Ryan Burl, both players had mixed tours and to be brutally honest failed in their roles as a bowler for Tiripano and for a batsman in Burl. But in the other department of the game with is their secondary skill they both performed very well.

Tiripano is a bowler who can bat, his Test Bowling average of 49.20 over 12 Tests is simply not good enough, I understand that most of his Tests have been played on pitches which are not suited for medium pace bowling, but for Zimbabwe who usually play on these types of decks you need your bowlers to be suited to such decks. If it wasn't for his batting average of 22.27 which was boosted by his heroic 95, Tiripano would have been dropped a long time ago.

Burl who was picked as a batsman who can bowl failed miserably with the bat scoring 8 in the 1st Test and a pair in the second, an average of under 3 for the series says it all, he should be dropped. But Burl bowled really well during both Tests as he took 4 wickets @26 a piece, he was easily the best of the four all-round spinners for Zimbabwe.

So the conundrum facing the selectors is, do you pick a bowler for his batting skills and a batsman for his bowling? It's always good to have both skill sets when you're fighting for selection, sure if Tiripano was bowling well his extra runs would surely cement his spot in the side, but averaging almost 50 in tests proves he isn't good enough as a bowler. If Burl was doing ok with the bat, his wickets would also give him a chance at keeping his place as a batting all-rounder, but looking at him purely as a batsman he needs to play some first class cricket because his test numbers are Maruma-esque.

In my opinion Zimbabwe needs to stop picking bowlers for their batting and batters for their bowling, I'm sure Tendai Chisoro would have bowled just as good if not better than Burl, and he certainly would have made more than 8 runs.

Tiripano can still be picked but ZIM would need 4 other full time bowling options, whether pace or spin. Then his bowling becomes less of a liability, and his batting is fully utilized. The question is, would he then warrant a position ahead of a young batsmen like Wes or Shumba??? Thats a big question.

[jaybro]

Tiripano can still be picked but ZIM would need 4 other full time bowling options, whether pace or spin. Then his bowling becomes less of a liability, and his batting is fully utilized. The question is, would he then warrant a position ahead of a young batsmen like Wes or Shumba??? Thats a big question.

That’s the point, is his batting average of 22 worth selection as a No.6 or No.7 ?? It’s not that’s the point, they’re picking a bowler who isn’t good enough because he averages 22 with the bat.

The Don needs to sort his bowling out, he’s usually accurate at least and keeps the runs down, but this tour he was a bit wayward

If Zim prepare seamer friendly pitches when Afghanistan& Bangladesh tour then yes he can play as the 4th seamer & bat at No.8 but as a third seamer or a genuine all-rounder he’s not quite good enough.

[TapsC2]

It’s a typical Zim problem. A part time batsmen picking a 50 but not taking wickets and a part time bowler picking up 4 wickets but getting a pair.

It’s a ruthless way of doing things but for me you have to do the job you are selected for. The difference between Burl and Don is that Burl hasn’t found his role yet whilst Tiripano has peaked. Just like how Prince moved up the order to get a place in the team I feel like Burl should play at 8 for now. He shouldn’t be discarded because the big guns are 3 years away from retirement.

The main difference is that we have better fast bowlers sitting out but our frontline spinners are not that good. Chivanga for example is faster than all of these guys and we need to create space for him. Mumba is out of form but he is a better bowler than Don. Ngarava for me is a better bowler and under 25. On the other hand the likes of Mavuta and Wellington don’t inspire much confidence

[TapsC2]

The person I think should actually be pushed up the order is Chakabva.

[CrimsonAvenger]

Yeah, the scary part is Burl could actually be the best wicket-taking spinner we have at the moment!

Chisoro did not inspire much confidence in the Pak series (in bad shape with fitness, schoolboy fielding mistakes, difficult to hide on a cricket pitch). In fact, even Ray Price looked more athletic and determined towards the end of his career that what Chisoro looked like in the Pak series.

Mavuta is nowhere near accurate enough to get back into the XI. If we cringed at Cremer bowling a boundary ball every over and easing pressure at his peak, imagine the frustrations that Mavuta would lead us to. His domestic performances indicate that he gets expensive. Burl could be a better head-to-head choice at the moment, with more control over his legspin.

Wellington is no doubt an excellent fielder and a livewire on the field, but may not have the variations needed to trouble a lot of batsmen.

Nobody else even to consider - we saw what a disaster the Ndlovu selection was, not sure if Mufudza fits the bill, or if Roy Kaia can be effective...

[Kriterion_BD]

I feel like a far more important question than the Don or the Burl's positions in the side is being forgotten. And that is do you drop Wesley from the Test squad?

My answer would be a resounding "no!"

I've almost always favored younger players over older or experienced ones. The most salient point for me is whether or not Madhevere is considered a talent and/or if he is the next big Zimbabwe player for the next generation. If he is, then he must play, simple as that.

Almost everyone earlier in the match thread wants him dropped, but I ask, what would dropping him achieve exactly? Their aren't many A tours, the Logan Cup is sporadic at its best, and even then of questionable quality. He's not going to magically develop away from the Test squad. If he's dropped, what happens in 3 years when Taylor, Williams, Ervine, and Raza are all gone and now Wesley is severely undercooked?

My argument is, a truly talented/skilled player will eventually come good. His best chance is if he's right alongside the senior batsmen and learning from them.

[jaybro]

Yeah, the scary part is Burl could actually be the best wicket-taking spinner we have at the moment!

Chisoro did not inspire much confidence in the Pak series (in bad shape with fitness, schoolboy fielding mistakes, difficult to hide on a cricket pitch). In fact, even Ray Price looked more athletic and determined towards the end of his career that what Chisoro looked like in the Pak series.

Mavuta is nowhere near accurate enough to get back into the XI. If we cringed at Cremer bowling a boundary ball every over and easing pressure at his peak, imagine the frustrations that Mavuta would lead us to. His domestic performances indicate that he gets expensive. Burl could be a better head-to-head choice at the moment, with more control over his legspin.

Wellington is no doubt an excellent fielder and a livewire on the field, but may not have the variations needed to trouble a lot of batsmen.

Nobody else even to consider - we saw what a disaster the Ndlovu selection was, not sure if Mufudza fits the bill, or if Roy Kaia can be effective...

Was Chisoro that bad in Pakistan? I know that midfield was bad but I didn’t think he bowled badly at all?

He’s been the standout spinner by a long way in Logan Cup cricket since Cremer retired, plus he’s the best batsman of all the spinners, I still can’t understand why he wasn’t picked for this tour?

[TapsC2]

I feel like a far more important question than the Don or the Burl's positions in the side is being forgotten. And that is do you drop Wesley from the Test squad?

My answer would be a resounding "no!"

I've almost always favored younger players over older or experienced ones. The most salient point for me is whether or not Madhevere is considered a talent and/or if he is the next big Zimbabwe player for the next generation. If he is, then he must play, simple as that.

Almost everyone earlier in the match thread wants him dropped, but I ask, what would dropping him achieve exactly? Their aren't many A tours, the Logan Cup is sporadic at its best, and even then of questionable quality. He's not going to magically develop away from the Test squad. If he's dropped, what happens in 3 years when Taylor, Williams, Ervine, and Raza are all gone and now Wesley is severely undercooked?

My argument is, a truly talented/skilled player will eventually come good. His best chance is if he's right alongside the senior batsmen and learning from them.

This is true. A lot of top players got consecutive ducks at the beginning. For me Kasuza,Burl,Wesley,Tari and Ngarava have to regularly feature in the squads from now on because they are the future. Let’s not forget how long it took for BT and co to get to that level. We suffered for so many years. In fact only BT really became a star before the age of 28. The rest settled in their 30s but were afforded multiple chances.

[eugene]

Zimbabwe plays so few matches that dropping a guy for a few series can mean two years on the sidelines with little more than a handful of domestic matches to play in.

[Kriterion_BD]

Zimbabwe plays so few matches that dropping a guy for a few series can mean two years on the sidelines with little more than a handful of domestic matches to play in.

Its been almost 10 years since Zimbabwe's Test return and they've played 29 games so just 3 Tests a year. I don't know how many got cancelled due to COVID, but it couldn't have been more than 4 since ZIM don't have that many scheduled.

In the coming years, ZIM needs to play at least 5-6 Tests per year at bear minimum. With Ireland and Afghanistan getting promoted to Test status, it shouldn't be that hard (just one bilateral series each year) plus the regular tours against Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, and West Indies. ZIM could easily play 6-8 Tests a year. And that is what it is going to take to for guys like Wesley to develop given the state and quality of the Logan Cup. There is no other way around it.