For what it's worth, I agree with you, I'm glad to see Kenyans back involved in Zim domestic cricket. I even know Alex, as I opened the batting with him in Nairobi club cricket a few years ago, he's a decent lad and a good player. However, his ODI/T20I figures are massively helped by the standard of the opposition that Kenya often face. No one can argue that he looked anything other than an imposter at number 3 against Keegan Meth the other day. (and he is definitely not a bowler)Conant wrote:Oh, come on!! That last sentence was a deliberate ploy to make Alex Obanda's name more prominet than the rest and by implication the most hopeless of all buys by the Fanchises.aydee wrote:The criticism of Tom Smith is a bit harsh, he's a very decent player, as he has demonstrated in the tourney so far. Have a go at the inclusions of Nel or Kent, who aren't even contracted players in SA anymore! Or Obanda.foreignfield wrote:
The criticism of Tom Smith is a bit harsh, he's a very decent player, as he has demonstrated in the tourney so far. Have a go at the inclusions of Nel or Kent, who aren't even contracted players in SA anymore! Or Obanda.
Have you bothered to look through his stats? The man averages 32 in ODIs and has a strike rate of 94 in limited (high score 79: how many can claim to have scored 80 yet?) T20 internationla which will no doubt increase. Moreever he's a fast bowler and in essence an all rounder. He's played in an African XI, which puts him on par whith the Eltons and Vusis. If I'm not mistaken he's more potential than the former.
Greater than all the other reasons, he's African, and these are precisely the kind of players who need the exposure just as much as Zim needed South Africa back in the days.
Of all unjustified critiscisms of players yet, this one stinks!!
I hope he comes good, as he can hit a very long ball. But his prescence is of much more benefit to him than the standard of the tourney, and Tom Smith is by a long stretch the more accomplished cricketer of the 2.
