Tuesday, 24 February 2009

Amjad? Who the f*** is Amjad?

So this dude I've never heard of is Fedexed overnight from New Zealand to Barbados to possibly cover for Freddie, saviour of the human race. Who's he then? According to Google Images, he looks like this...

I'm first to admit that I'm not infallable in my knowledge of crap county players, but I'd honestly never heard of this guy ever ever ever. But now he's called up for a possible test cap. Another Pattinson? Well, not really as he's been carrying drinks and playing 2nd XI's for Kent for ages.

Last year he played 3 - THREE - county matches for kent. He returned figures of 14-28-2, 5-13-0, 14-27-3, 8-27-0, 9-10-3 (oooh!) and 12-53-3. He provided 4 runs with the bat.

What am I not seeing that makes this guy even remotely worth thinking about? Why pick him?


What about Tremlett, Plunket, Onions, Mahmood even!

In addition to this guy being nothing, he's also almost as old as me. What is the point in trying yet another guy that's almost over the hill? Sure he's younger than Sidebottom and Harmison, but he's clearly not going to be around in 5 years, let alone 10.

Who would be around in 10 years? Chris Woakes would, for example.

With a purely impartial hat on, my cute little bear cub returned figures of ooh loads better than Khan:

10 Haul10

With FIFTY less matches to his name, Woakes is surely a better option right here right now. in 5 years, no idea. But right now...

Now I'd not want him to play yet, he's too busy with the Lions kicking royal ass, and developing properly, but it just goes to put Amjad Khan into perspective.

So I guess I need to ask what his this guy done that I'm utterly ignorant to? There *MUST* be something!

And anyway, he won't play. I reckon Bell will oddly get the nod back in in the gap, Bopara coming a close second but not being proven with either bat or ball to be called on as a test all rounder yet.


Anonymous said...

Played in the first division, against quality batsmen?

Spigot said...

Ohh see what you did there, yeah fair enough. He had vastly better figures than Chris Martin during his time with us, that's for sure.

Ultimately Warwickshire pick him. they *want* him to play. Kent *don't* pick Khan in the first place!

tejaswi said...

That is a picture of the actor Amjad Khan in the bollywood movie "Sholay"

Spigot said...

Correct. Have a biscuit!

Unknown said...

Incorrect. That is a picture of Robert Mitchum with shoe polish on. Takes away biscuit.

Anonymous said...

Not here to argue the merits of Kahn - but want to know - WHO are the selectors? Is it just Miller or is there a committee?

Six & Out said...

So you admit you are over the hill too then do you ?

Spigot said...

Hell yeah.

Anonymous said...

If selectors just went on stats Vaughan, Trescohick & Gough (who had a very similar FC record on test debut to Khan now) would probably never have had an international career.

The selectors it seems are still looking for a seamer who can take wickets with the old ball - we've not had a bowler like that since Simon Jones broke down. The success Panesar had in the first 12-18 months of his test career masked that failing for a while, but alas no longer.

For now they seem to have decided that Khan is a viable 'old-ball' option. Time will tell if they're right.

Spigot said...

OK, nice to see real details on the subject, thanks Len. I mean obviously there are some genuine reasons behind his selection, I can't really understand where these sorts of things came from though with only 3 CC matches last year... I can't see even a sound basis to be a scribble on a fag packet. I like the stats but I'd have never said that that was all conquering, but Vaughan and co at least played a worthwhile number of matches for the selectors to get a good feel...

I'm not saying there isn't... I'm just saying I can't see it!