The collection holds 273 photographs, 16 pages or documents and 7 events connected to this person. Dated 2016 to 2026 (276 items); 20 with no date. This is what has been collected and read so far, not every photograph ever taken.
273 items match; showing 181–240.
A face in this photograph looked like the person's in a similarity search (basis: search similarity, grade: candidate; similarity score 68.5, which is not a probability). Compared with the person’s face as named in a caption in “boarding handbook 2026 27”. It is a suggestion, not an identification.
Basis: search similarity, grade: candidate, similarity score 68.5 (a score, not a probability).
A face in this photograph looked like the person's in a similarity search (basis: search similarity, grade: candidate; similarity score 78.2, which is not a probability). Compared with the person’s face as named in a caption in “boarding handbook 2026 27”. It is a suggestion, not an identification.
Basis: search similarity, grade: candidate, similarity score 78.2 (a score, not a probability).
A face in this photograph looked like the person's in a similarity search (basis: search similarity, grade: candidate; similarity score 75.3, which is not a probability). Compared with the person’s face as named in a caption in “boarding handbook 2026 27”. It is a suggestion, not an identification.
Basis: search similarity, grade: candidate, similarity score 75.3 (a score, not a probability).
The page “Aitchison College Staff Stuns ACOBA Eleven” mentions the person: “…rge | 02 Wickets Ammar Azam | 21 runs | Ghulam Abbas | 01 Wicket Muhammad Ahmad | 22 runs | Rashid Maqbool | 01 Wicket Sharjeel Niazi | 21* runs | Amin Ather | 01 Wicket Iqbal Haider | 01 Wicket Waqar Saleem | 01 Wicket Result: AC Staff won by 53 runs Man of Series: Mr. Umer Zaman Khan Aitchison College Staff Won The Three Match Series 2-1” Nothing there says that this photograph shows them.
The page “Aitchison College Staff Stuns ACOBA Eleven” mentions the person: “…rge | 02 Wickets Ammar Azam | 21 runs | Ghulam Abbas | 01 Wicket Muhammad Ahmad | 22 runs | Rashid Maqbool | 01 Wicket Sharjeel Niazi | 21* runs | Amin Ather | 01 Wicket Iqbal Haider | 01 Wicket Waqar Saleem | 01 Wicket Result: AC Staff won by 53 runs Man of Series: Mr. Umer Zaman Khan Aitchison College Staff Won The Three Match Series 2-1” Nothing there says that this photograph shows them.
The page “Aitchison College Staff Stuns ACOBA Eleven” mentions the person: “…rge | 02 Wickets Ammar Azam | 21 runs | Ghulam Abbas | 01 Wicket Muhammad Ahmad | 22 runs | Rashid Maqbool | 01 Wicket Sharjeel Niazi | 21* runs | Amin Ather | 01 Wicket Iqbal Haider | 01 Wicket Waqar Saleem | 01 Wicket Result: AC Staff won by 53 runs Man of Series: Mr. Umer Zaman Khan Aitchison College Staff Won The Three Match Series 2-1” Nothing there says that this photograph shows them.
The page “Aitchison College Staff Stuns ACOBA Eleven” mentions the person: “…rge | 02 Wickets Ammar Azam | 21 runs | Ghulam Abbas | 01 Wicket Muhammad Ahmad | 22 runs | Rashid Maqbool | 01 Wicket Sharjeel Niazi | 21* runs | Amin Ather | 01 Wicket Iqbal Haider | 01 Wicket Waqar Saleem | 01 Wicket Result: AC Staff won by 53 runs Man of Series: Mr. Umer Zaman Khan Aitchison College Staff Won The Three Match Series 2-1” Nothing there says that this photograph shows them.
The page “Aitchison College Staff Stuns ACOBA Eleven” mentions the person: “…rge | 02 Wickets Ammar Azam | 21 runs | Ghulam Abbas | 01 Wicket Muhammad Ahmad | 22 runs | Rashid Maqbool | 01 Wicket Sharjeel Niazi | 21* runs | Amin Ather | 01 Wicket Iqbal Haider | 01 Wicket Waqar Saleem | 01 Wicket Result: AC Staff won by 53 runs Man of Series: Mr. Umer Zaman Khan Aitchison College Staff Won The Three Match Series 2-1” Nothing there says that this photograph shows them.
The page “Aitchison College Staff Stuns ACOBA Eleven” mentions the person: “…rge | 02 Wickets Ammar Azam | 21 runs | Ghulam Abbas | 01 Wicket Muhammad Ahmad | 22 runs | Rashid Maqbool | 01 Wicket Sharjeel Niazi | 21* runs | Amin Ather | 01 Wicket Iqbal Haider | 01 Wicket Waqar Saleem | 01 Wicket Result: AC Staff won by 53 runs Man of Series: Mr. Umer Zaman Khan Aitchison College Staff Won The Three Match Series 2-1” Nothing there says that this photograph shows them.
The page “Aitchison College Staff Stuns ACOBA Eleven” mentions the person: “…rge | 02 Wickets Ammar Azam | 21 runs | Ghulam Abbas | 01 Wicket Muhammad Ahmad | 22 runs | Rashid Maqbool | 01 Wicket Sharjeel Niazi | 21* runs | Amin Ather | 01 Wicket Iqbal Haider | 01 Wicket Waqar Saleem | 01 Wicket Result: AC Staff won by 53 runs Man of Series: Mr. Umer Zaman Khan Aitchison College Staff Won The Three Match Series 2-1” Nothing there says that this photograph shows them.
The page “Aitchison College Staff Stuns ACOBA Eleven” mentions the person: “…rge | 02 Wickets Ammar Azam | 21 runs | Ghulam Abbas | 01 Wicket Muhammad Ahmad | 22 runs | Rashid Maqbool | 01 Wicket Sharjeel Niazi | 21* runs | Amin Ather | 01 Wicket Iqbal Haider | 01 Wicket Waqar Saleem | 01 Wicket Result: AC Staff won by 53 runs Man of Series: Mr. Umer Zaman Khan Aitchison College Staff Won The Three Match Series 2-1” Nothing there says that this photograph shows them.
The page “Aitchison College Staff Stuns ACOBA Eleven” mentions the person: “…rge | 02 Wickets Ammar Azam | 21 runs | Ghulam Abbas | 01 Wicket Muhammad Ahmad | 22 runs | Rashid Maqbool | 01 Wicket Sharjeel Niazi | 21* runs | Amin Ather | 01 Wicket Iqbal Haider | 01 Wicket Waqar Saleem | 01 Wicket Result: AC Staff won by 53 runs Man of Series: Mr. Umer Zaman Khan Aitchison College Staff Won The Three Match Series 2-1” Nothing there says that this photograph shows them.
The page “Aitchison College Staff Stuns ACOBA Eleven” mentions the person: “…rge | 02 Wickets Ammar Azam | 21 runs | Ghulam Abbas | 01 Wicket Muhammad Ahmad | 22 runs | Rashid Maqbool | 01 Wicket Sharjeel Niazi | 21* runs | Amin Ather | 01 Wicket Iqbal Haider | 01 Wicket Waqar Saleem | 01 Wicket Result: AC Staff won by 53 runs Man of Series: Mr. Umer Zaman Khan Aitchison College Staff Won The Three Match Series 2-1” Nothing there says that this photograph shows them.
The page “Aitchison College Staff Stuns ACOBA Eleven” mentions the person: “…rge | 02 Wickets Ammar Azam | 21 runs | Ghulam Abbas | 01 Wicket Muhammad Ahmad | 22 runs | Rashid Maqbool | 01 Wicket Sharjeel Niazi | 21* runs | Amin Ather | 01 Wicket Iqbal Haider | 01 Wicket Waqar Saleem | 01 Wicket Result: AC Staff won by 53 runs Man of Series: Mr. Umer Zaman Khan Aitchison College Staff Won The Three Match Series 2-1” Nothing there says that this photograph shows them.
The page “Aitchison College Staff Stuns ACOBA Eleven” mentions the person: “…rge | 02 Wickets Ammar Azam | 21 runs | Ghulam Abbas | 01 Wicket Muhammad Ahmad | 22 runs | Rashid Maqbool | 01 Wicket Sharjeel Niazi | 21* runs | Amin Ather | 01 Wicket Iqbal Haider | 01 Wicket Waqar Saleem | 01 Wicket Result: AC Staff won by 53 runs Man of Series: Mr. Umer Zaman Khan Aitchison College Staff Won The Three Match Series 2-1” Nothing there says that this photograph shows them.
A caption in “boarding handbook 2026 27”, page 8 names the person: “Standing Left to Right: Umair Gulzar (Assistant HM K&N), Jamal Malhi (Assistant HM Kelly), Muhammad Yaqoob (Assistant HM LJ), Muhammad Ali (Assistant HM Godley), Saleem Akhtar (Assistant HM Shirazi) Sitting Left to Right: Syed Shahmeer Raza”
A face in this photograph looked like the person's in a similarity search (basis: search similarity, grade: candidate; similarity score 59.7, which is not a probability). Compared with the person’s face as named in a caption in “boarding handbook 2026 27”. It is a suggestion, not an identification.
Basis: search similarity, grade: candidate, similarity score 59.7 (a score, not a probability).
A face in this photograph looked like the person's in a similarity search (basis: search similarity, grade: candidate; similarity score 70.6, which is not a probability). Compared with the person’s face as named in a caption in “boarding handbook 2026 27”. It is a suggestion, not an identification.
Basis: search similarity, grade: candidate, similarity score 70.6 (a score, not a probability).
A face in this photograph looked like the person's in a similarity search (basis: search similarity, grade: candidate; similarity score 67.0, which is not a probability). Compared with the person’s face as named in a caption in “boarding handbook 2026 27”. It is a suggestion, not an identification.
Basis: search similarity, grade: candidate, similarity score 67 (a score, not a probability).
A face in this photograph looked like the person's in a similarity search (basis: search similarity, grade: candidate; similarity score 71.7, which is not a probability). Compared with the person’s face as named in a caption in “boarding handbook 2026 27”. It is a suggestion, not an identification.
Basis: search similarity, grade: candidate, similarity score 71.7 (a score, not a probability).
A face in this photograph looked like the person's in a similarity search (basis: search similarity, grade: candidate; similarity score 67.3, which is not a probability). Compared with the person’s face as named in a caption in “boarding handbook 2026 27”. It is a suggestion, not an identification.
Basis: search similarity, grade: candidate, similarity score 67.3 (a score, not a probability).
A face in this photograph looked like the person's in a similarity search (basis: search similarity, grade: candidate; similarity score 68.8, which is not a probability). Compared with the person’s face as named in a caption in “boarding handbook 2026 27”. It is a suggestion, not an identification.
Basis: search similarity, grade: candidate, similarity score 68.8 (a score, not a probability).
A face in this photograph looked like the person's in a similarity search (basis: search similarity, grade: candidate; similarity score 69.7, which is not a probability). Compared with the person’s face as named in a caption in “boarding handbook 2026 27”. It is a suggestion, not an identification.
Basis: search similarity, grade: candidate, similarity score 69.7 (a score, not a probability).
A face in this photograph looked like the person's in a similarity search (basis: search similarity, grade: candidate; similarity score 61.4, which is not a probability). Compared with the person’s face as named in a caption in “boarding handbook 2026 27”. It is a suggestion, not an identification.
Basis: search similarity, grade: candidate, similarity score 61.4 (a score, not a probability).
A face in this photograph looked like the person's in a similarity search (basis: search similarity, grade: candidate; similarity score 56.7, which is not a probability). Compared with the person’s face as named in a caption in “boarding handbook 2026 27”. It is a suggestion, not an identification.
Basis: search similarity, grade: candidate, similarity score 56.7 (a score, not a probability).
A face in this photograph looked like the person's in a similarity search (basis: search similarity, grade: candidate; similarity score 68.6, which is not a probability). Compared with the person’s face as named in a caption in “boarding handbook 2026 27”. It is a suggestion, not an identification.
Basis: search similarity, grade: candidate, similarity score 68.6 (a score, not a probability).
A face in this photograph looked like the person's in a similarity search (basis: search similarity, grade: candidate; similarity score 60.9, which is not a probability). Compared with the person’s face as named in a caption in “boarding handbook 2026 27”. It is a suggestion, not an identification.
Basis: search similarity, grade: candidate, similarity score 60.9 (a score, not a probability).
A face in this photograph looked like the person's in a similarity search (basis: search similarity, grade: candidate; similarity score 70.5, which is not a probability). Compared with the person’s face as named in a caption in “boarding handbook 2026 27”. It is a suggestion, not an identification.
Basis: search similarity, grade: candidate, similarity score 70.5 (a score, not a probability).
A face in this photograph looked like the person's in a similarity search (basis: search similarity, grade: candidate; similarity score 70.5, which is not a probability). Compared with the person’s face as named in a caption in “boarding handbook 2026 27”. It is a suggestion, not an identification.
Basis: search similarity, grade: candidate, similarity score 70.5 (a score, not a probability).
A face in this photograph looked like the person's in a similarity search (basis: search similarity, grade: candidate; similarity score 65.5, which is not a probability). Compared with the person’s face as named in a caption in “boarding handbook 2026 27”. It is a suggestion, not an identification.
Basis: search similarity, grade: candidate, similarity score 65.5 (a score, not a probability).
A face in this photograph looked like the person's in a similarity search (basis: search similarity, grade: candidate; similarity score 70.2, which is not a probability). Compared with the person’s face as named in a caption in “boarding handbook 2026 27”. It is a suggestion, not an identification.
Basis: search similarity, grade: candidate, similarity score 70.2 (a score, not a probability).
A face in this photograph looked like the person's in a similarity search (basis: search similarity, grade: candidate; similarity score 64.7, which is not a probability). Compared with the person’s face as named in a caption in “boarding handbook 2026 27”. It is a suggestion, not an identification.
Basis: search similarity, grade: candidate, similarity score 64.7 (a score, not a probability).
A face in this photograph looked like the person's in a similarity search (basis: search similarity, grade: candidate; similarity score 67.8, which is not a probability). Compared with the person’s face as named in a caption in “boarding handbook 2026 27”. It is a suggestion, not an identification.
Basis: search similarity, grade: candidate, similarity score 67.8 (a score, not a probability).
A face in this photograph looked like the person's in a similarity search (basis: search similarity, grade: candidate; similarity score 64.5, which is not a probability). Compared with the person’s face as named in a caption in “boarding handbook 2026 27”. It is a suggestion, not an identification.
Basis: search similarity, grade: candidate, similarity score 64.5 (a score, not a probability).
A face in this photograph looked like the person's in a similarity search (basis: search similarity, grade: candidate; similarity score 70.6, which is not a probability). Compared with the person’s face as named in a caption in “boarding handbook 2026 27”. It is a suggestion, not an identification.
Basis: search similarity, grade: candidate, similarity score 70.6 (a score, not a probability).
A face in this photograph looked like the person's in a similarity search (basis: search similarity, grade: candidate; similarity score 58.0, which is not a probability). Compared with the person’s face as named in a caption in “boarding handbook 2026 27”. It is a suggestion, not an identification.
Basis: search similarity, grade: candidate, similarity score 58 (a score, not a probability).
A face in this photograph looked like the person's in a similarity search (basis: search similarity, grade: candidate; similarity score 69.8, which is not a probability). Compared with the person’s face as named in a caption in “boarding handbook 2026 27”. It is a suggestion, not an identification.
Basis: search similarity, grade: candidate, similarity score 69.8 (a score, not a probability).
A face in this photograph looked like the person's in a similarity search (basis: search similarity, grade: candidate; similarity score 67.4, which is not a probability). Compared with the person’s face as named in a caption in “boarding handbook 2026 27”. It is a suggestion, not an identification.
Basis: search similarity, grade: candidate, similarity score 67.4 (a score, not a probability).
A face in this photograph looked like the person's in a similarity search (basis: search similarity, grade: candidate; similarity score 70.7, which is not a probability). Compared with the person’s face as named in a caption in “boarding handbook 2026 27”. It is a suggestion, not an identification.
Basis: search similarity, grade: candidate, similarity score 70.7 (a score, not a probability).
A face in this photograph looked like the person's in a similarity search (basis: search similarity, grade: candidate; similarity score 67.6, which is not a probability). Compared with the person’s face as named in a caption in “boarding handbook 2026 27”. It is a suggestion, not an identification.
Basis: search similarity, grade: candidate, similarity score 67.6 (a score, not a probability).
A face in this photograph looked like the person's in a similarity search (basis: search similarity, grade: candidate; similarity score 64.7, which is not a probability). Compared with the person’s face as named in a caption in “boarding handbook 2026 27”. It is a suggestion, not an identification.
Basis: search similarity, grade: candidate, similarity score 64.7 (a score, not a probability).
A face in this photograph looked like the person's in a similarity search (basis: search similarity, grade: candidate; similarity score 56.2, which is not a probability). Compared with the person’s face as named in a caption in “boarding handbook 2026 27”. It is a suggestion, not an identification.
Basis: search similarity, grade: candidate, similarity score 56.2 (a score, not a probability).
A face in this photograph looked like the person's in a similarity search (basis: search similarity, grade: candidate; similarity score 67.9, which is not a probability). Compared with the person’s face as named in a caption in “boarding handbook 2026 27”. It is a suggestion, not an identification.
Basis: search similarity, grade: candidate, similarity score 67.9 (a score, not a probability).
A face in this photograph looked like the person's in a similarity search (basis: search similarity, grade: candidate; similarity score 73.3, which is not a probability). Compared with the person’s face as named in a caption in “boarding handbook 2026 27”. It is a suggestion, not an identification.
Basis: search similarity, grade: candidate, similarity score 73.3 (a score, not a probability).
A face in this photograph looked like the person's in a similarity search (basis: search similarity, grade: candidate; similarity score 74.7, which is not a probability). Compared with the person’s face as named in a caption in “boarding handbook 2026 27”. It is a suggestion, not an identification.
Basis: search similarity, grade: candidate, similarity score 74.7 (a score, not a probability).
A face in this photograph looked like the person's in a similarity search (basis: search similarity, grade: candidate; similarity score 69.2, which is not a probability). Compared with the person’s face as named in a caption in “boarding handbook 2026 27”. It is a suggestion, not an identification.
Basis: search similarity, grade: candidate, similarity score 69.2 (a score, not a probability).
A face in this photograph looked like the person's in a similarity search (basis: search similarity, grade: candidate; similarity score 72.6, which is not a probability). Compared with the person’s face as named in a caption in “boarding handbook 2026 27”. It is a suggestion, not an identification.
Basis: search similarity, grade: candidate, similarity score 72.6 (a score, not a probability).
A face in this photograph looked like the person's in a similarity search (basis: search similarity, grade: candidate; similarity score 78.5, which is not a probability). Compared with the person’s face as named in a caption in “boarding handbook 2026 27”. It is a suggestion, not an identification.
Basis: search similarity, grade: candidate, similarity score 78.5 (a score, not a probability).
A face in this photograph looked like the person's in a similarity search (basis: search similarity, grade: candidate; similarity score 73.9, which is not a probability). Compared with the person’s face as named in a caption in “boarding handbook 2026 27”. It is a suggestion, not an identification.
Basis: search similarity, grade: candidate, similarity score 73.9 (a score, not a probability).
A face in this photograph looked like the person's in a similarity search (basis: search similarity, grade: candidate; similarity score 66.5, which is not a probability). Compared with the person’s face as named in a caption in “boarding handbook 2026 27”. It is a suggestion, not an identification.
Basis: search similarity, grade: candidate, similarity score 66.5 (a score, not a probability).
A face in this photograph looked like the person's in a similarity search (basis: search similarity, grade: candidate; similarity score 60.1, which is not a probability). Compared with the person’s face as named in a caption in “boarding handbook 2026 27”. It is a suggestion, not an identification.
Basis: search similarity, grade: candidate, similarity score 60.1 (a score, not a probability).
A face in this photograph looked like the person's in a similarity search (basis: search similarity, grade: candidate; similarity score 59.9, which is not a probability). Compared with the person’s face as named in a caption in “boarding handbook 2026 27”. It is a suggestion, not an identification.
Basis: search similarity, grade: candidate, similarity score 59.9 (a score, not a probability).
A face in this photograph looked like the person's in a similarity search (basis: search similarity, grade: candidate; similarity score 61.2, which is not a probability). Compared with the person’s face as named in a caption in “boarding handbook 2026 27”. It is a suggestion, not an identification.
Basis: search similarity, grade: candidate, similarity score 61.2 (a score, not a probability).
A face in this photograph looked like the person's in a similarity search (basis: search similarity, grade: candidate; similarity score 66.7, which is not a probability). Compared with the person’s face as named in a caption in “boarding handbook 2026 27”. It is a suggestion, not an identification.
Basis: search similarity, grade: candidate, similarity score 66.7 (a score, not a probability).
A face in this photograph looked like the person's in a similarity search (basis: search similarity, grade: candidate; similarity score 59.4, which is not a probability). Compared with the person’s face as named in a caption in “boarding handbook 2026 27”. It is a suggestion, not an identification.
Basis: search similarity, grade: candidate, similarity score 59.4 (a score, not a probability).
A face in this photograph looked like the person's in a similarity search (basis: search similarity, grade: candidate; similarity score 64.5, which is not a probability). Compared with the person’s face as named in a caption in “boarding handbook 2026 27”. It is a suggestion, not an identification.
Basis: search similarity, grade: candidate, similarity score 64.5 (a score, not a probability).
A face in this photograph looked like the person's in a similarity search (basis: search similarity, grade: candidate; similarity score 64.7, which is not a probability). Compared with the person’s face as named in a caption in “boarding handbook 2026 27”. It is a suggestion, not an identification.
Basis: search similarity, grade: candidate, similarity score 64.7 (a score, not a probability).
A face in this photograph looked like the person's in a similarity search (basis: search similarity, grade: candidate; similarity score 72.3, which is not a probability). Compared with the person’s face as named in a caption in “boarding handbook 2026 27”. It is a suggestion, not an identification.
Basis: search similarity, grade: candidate, similarity score 72.3 (a score, not a probability).
A face in this photograph looked like the person's in a similarity search (basis: search similarity, grade: candidate; similarity score 70.4, which is not a probability). Compared with the person’s face as named in a caption in “boarding handbook 2026 27”. It is a suggestion, not an identification.
Basis: search similarity, grade: candidate, similarity score 70.4 (a score, not a probability).
A face in this photograph looked like the person's in a similarity search (basis: search similarity, grade: candidate; similarity score 68.3, which is not a probability). Compared with the person’s face as named in a caption in “boarding handbook 2026 27”. It is a suggestion, not an identification.
Basis: search similarity, grade: candidate, similarity score 68.3 (a score, not a probability).