Afridi criticizes PCB's decision-making

He questions appointment of Salman Agha as T20 captain


News Desk March 12, 2025

print-news
Listen to article

Former Pakistan cricket captain Shahid Khan Afridi has raised concerns about the decision-making process within the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB).

Speaking to the media at a private event, Shahid Afridi expressed his frustration, stating that Pakistan's cricket has been in the ICU for a long time.

However, he pointed out that after every failure, they only start doing surgeries, without addressing the underlying issues.

Afridi also questioned the selection process, noting that players who fail to perform often make a return to the team. He remarked that those who have been dropped today would likely be included in the ODI or T20 teams in the future, suggesting a lack of consistency in selection.

He emphasized that unless a clear example is set, the situation will remain unchanged.

The former cricketer also criticized the PCB leadership, highlighting that every time a new chairman takes over, he makes sweeping changes, believing that he alone can fix everything.

Afridi urged the need to place the right person in the right position, stressing the need for better management and leadership in the PCB.

He believes Mohammad Rizwan is the best choice as captain and he has greatly supported the wicketkeeper-batsman when it comes to the leadership role.

"Rizwan is the [best] of all the choices. I have greatly [supported] Rizwan as the captain," Afridi.

Meanwhile, Former Pakistan captain Sarfaraz Ahmed has extended his support to the Pakistan cricket team following their early exit from the Champions Trophy 2025.

The hosts and defending champions were knocked out of the Champions Trophy 2025 after successive defeats at the hands of New Zealand and India.Fans and several former cricketers bashed the national side for their winless campaign in the tournament.

COMMENTS

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ