Pakistan’s T20 World Cup squad announcement was meant to inspire confidence. Instead, it has triggered serious questions about the thinking, or lack of it, behind the selection process. Among all decisions the inclusion of Usman Khan stands out as the most difficult to defend.
This is not a personal critique of the player. It is a fundamental question about standards, merit and consistency in Pakistan cricket.
What has Usman Khan Done at international level?
The honest answer is: very little. In his recent T20 internationals, Usman Khan’s scores read 1, 7 not out, and 18. There is no match-winning innings, no game-changing contribution, and no sign of momentum.
His overall T20I record makes the case even weaker: 361 runs in 26 innings at an average of 18 and a strike rate of around 117 with only one fifty to his name.
In modern T20 cricket these numbers are not just below par, they are non-competitive. This is not a short-term dip in form. This is a weak profile over a meaningful sample size.
No impact, no finishing ability, no special value
Beyond raw numbers, Usman Khan has not shown the qualities that justify selection on potential or role-based value. He does not finish innings. He does not consistently score at a high tempo. His strike rate remains modest, and his ability to change games is unproven.
Even his wicketkeeping is not rated highly by many experts which removes the only possible justification of him being a specialist dual-role player.
In short, he is neither an impact batter nor a standout wicketkeeper at international level.
The benchmark that was ignored: Mohammad Rizwan
Now compare this with Mohammad Rizwan’s record. In T20 internationals, Rizwan has scored 3,414 runs in 106 matches at an average of 47 and a strike rate of over 125, with 30 fifties and a century. He has performed against top teams, in pressure situations and across multiple years and conditions.
This is not about claiming Rizwan is perfect. It is about asking a basic question: if a player with this record is not good enough, what exactly is the standard?
The dangerous message this decision sends
Selections like this send a deeply damaging message to Pakistan’s cricket system. They tell domestic performers that numbers do not matter. They tell senior professionals that past performance carries no weight. They replace competition with confusion and merit with uncertainty.
When players cannot understand what is being rewarded, the entire structure begins to lose credibility.
Is there even a coherent selection policy?
Are players being picked on form? On potential? On fitness? On future planning? On roles? In this case, none of these explanations stand up to scrutiny. Rizwan fails on none of these counts. Usman Khan does not convincingly pass any of them.
This makes the decision look less like strategy and more like guesswork.
Why this matters in a world cup
World Cups are not the place for hopeful experiments. T20 tournaments are decided by fine margins. You need reliability, not uncertainty. You need proven performers, not players still searching for their first meaningful impact.
Pakistan has lost tournaments before because of selection confusion. There is no reason to repeat the same mistake.
This is about standards, not names
This is not an attack on Usman Khan. It is a defence of standards set by current administration. Either Pakistan cricket chooses to be a performance-based system, or it accepts that selection will continue to be a source of controversy, confusion and failure. At the moment, unfortunately, the message being sent is not a serious one.
The data mentioned in the article is extracted from sports website espncricinfo.
15-member squad for T20 World Cup
Salman Ali Agha (captain), Abrar Ahmed, Babar Azam, Faheem Ashraf, Fakhar Zaman, Khawaja Mohammad Nafay (wk), Mohammad Nawaz, Mohammad Salman Mirza, Naseem Shah, Sahibzada Farhan (wk), Saim Ayub, Shaheen Shah Afridi, Shadab Khan, Usman Khan (wk) and Usman Tariq.
