Pakistan’s opener Fakhar Zaman is reportedly considering retirement after being left out of the recent central contracts and white-ball squads for Australia and Zimbabwe.
Sources close to Fakhar reveal that his morale has been affected by the selectors’ handling of his case, as well as what he perceives as inconsistent standards in fitness evaluations.
Fakhar was recently asked to undergo another fitness test scheduled for January 2025, but questions are arising over perceived double standards in the selection process.
While Fakhar was reportedly unable to complete the 2-kilometer run in the required 8 minutes due to a knee issue, another player, Usman Khan, received a contract and a place on the Australia and Zimbabwe tours despite stopping in the third lap of his fitness test.
The Pakistan Cricket Board’s (PCB) recent announcement of centrally contracted players notably excluded Fakhar, who had been in the B category last year. Some sources within cricket circles link this to Fakhar’s outspoken stance in the connection camp and his support for Babar Azam, which he publicly expressed through a tweet.
Fakhar has not made a final decision about retirement, but close friends have advised him to avoid making an emotional decision, reminding him of his ability to continue representing Pakistan for years to come.
Insiders also report discrepancies in the treatment of other players.
Imam-ul-Haq completed his run in 8 minutes and 11 seconds, narrowly missing the mark, and was excluded from contracts. Meanwhile, Kamran Ghulam, who finished in 8 minutes and 22 seconds, secured a contract.
Furthermore, despite taking fewer wickets than Haris Rauf in the same period, Naseem Shah was awarded a B category contract, and Shaheen Afridi, Pakistan’s leading wicket-taker across formats since July 2023, was demoted from the A category to B. On the other hand, Babar Azam, despite his extended run of below-par form, remains in the A category.
COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ