Pakistan cricket star Babar Azam has shared his thoughts on the contrasting coaching approaches of Ottis Gibson and Mike Hesson, both of whom he has worked with during his career. In a recent podcast interview, Babar Azam credited Gibson with giving him the freedom to play his natural game, without imposing a rigid batting strategy. According to Babar, Gibson’s unstructured approach instilled confidence in him, allowing him to trust his instincts in high-pressure situations. He noted that players often receive conflicting opinions, but it’s how they absorb and apply them that matters. In contrast, Babar Azam described Hesson’s coaching style as more structured, with a clear expectation for players to perform in specific roles. Under Hesson, Babar was asked to bat in different positions, including number four, which required a mental adjustment. He acknowledged that adapting to new roles takes time and that players cannot be expected to deliver instantly. Babar’s comments come as Peshawar Zalmi prepare for the PSL 11 final against Hyderabad Kingsmen, a match that will mark Zalmi’s fifth appearance in the title decider. Hyderabad, on the other hand, will be competing in their inaugural PSL final.
Related posts:
PSL 11 History Unfolds as Young Pakistani Pacer Achieves T20 Hat-Trick
Islamabad United Secure Second Spot in PSL 11 Standings with Thrilling Win Over Multan Sul...
PSL Star's National Team Omission Sparks Candid Response
Lahore Qalandars' Title Defense Crumbles Against Quetta Gladiators in PSL 11
David Warner Fires Back at Indian Fan Telling Him to Ditch PSL for IPL
Naseem Shah's PSL 11 Campaign Cut Short Due to Injury
Skardu.pk is one of the leading authentic news and information platform focusing on adventure tourism, regional and world affairs.
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team
- Editorial Team