WATCH: Tim Seifert slams Shaheen Afridi with 4 huge sixes in one over

Shaheen Afridi conceded 26 runs in an over as Tim Seifert smashed four sixes in New Zealand’s six-wicket T20I win.


Sports Desk March 18, 2025

Pakistan’s premier fast bowler Shaheen Afridi endured yet another tough outing as New Zealand’s Tim Seifert took him apart in the second T20I at the University Oval in Dunedin. Seifert smashed four sixes off a single over from Afridi, en route to New Zealand's victory to lead the series 2-0.

The match, reduced to 15 overs per side, saw Pakistan post 135/9 after valuable contributions from Agha Salman, Shadab Khan, and Afridi. However, New Zealand chased down the target with six wickets in hand, with Seifert’s 22-ball 45 setting the tone.

Afridi, who has struggled for rhythm in recent games, conceded 31 runs in three overs, including 26 in his second over. Seifert, who initially faced six consecutive dot balls, launched an assault on Afridi, dispatching four of his deliveries over the ropes, including a 119-meter maximum.

His 26 runs conceeded equaled the unfortunate record for most sixes conceeded by a Pakistani bowler in a T20I over.

Social media had a field day with criticism of Shaheen Shah Afridi reaching new heights, with many pointing out the Eagles recent struggle for form.

Many seised the opportunity to poke fun at Afridi after Grant Elliot, who was on commentary, took a dig at Shaheen's pace and bowling length.

Pakistan, trailing 0-2 in the five-match series, must win the next match to stay alive. Captain Agha Salman acknowledged the team’s shortcomings, particularly in the powerplay.

“We batted better, and our fielding was outstanding, but we need to improve both our batting and bowling in the powerplay,” Salman said post-match.

With Pakistan’s bowling attack under pressure and Afridi struggling to find his best form, the visitors face an uphill battle in the series.

 

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