View Single Post
  #40  
Old July 10, 2009, 12:08 PM
Sohel's Avatar
Sohel Sohel is offline
Cricket Savant
 
Join Date: April 18, 2007
Location: Dhaka
Favorite Player: Nazimuddin
Posts: 35,464

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beamer
Sohel

For Z, no.3 is not a new position in tests. They have been playing him there for a while now, to which I say, is a futile decision. You want the most important position in the line-up to be filled by someone who can 'try' it out and correct his shortcomings? I think that is a ridiculous idea. Temperament is important there ( as it is with every position ), but you must have a player there who is one of your technically most solvent, who can counter attack, has a much better range, equally capable on both front and back foot etc. If you ask me to name three of our potential no.3's, Z will not even feature in the top five. I would rather have first : Aftab, second : Ash, third : SN ( if we really like the three opener theory ). I like Imrul way better than Z, and it looks like he has the other opener slot for himself.

Like your optimism though. Can't fault you on that.
I'm getting really frustrated with Z's issues, having been a witness to them for about 3 years now. He uses too much bottom hand, takes his eye off skidding deliveries, and commits his front foot way too early, often finding himself in no man's land with a wide array of dire consequences to follow. If he can manage to restrain himself from doing that, he's not a bad back foot player.

Just horrible technique nowadays. Time to bench his @$$ is near. Sadly, I don't think his alternatives will do much better. Ash thinks he'll be in the runs at number 5. Clearly doesn't like the idea of playing at 3 ...
__________________
"And do not curse those who call on other than GOD, lest they blaspheme and curse GOD, out of ignorance. We have adorned the works of every group in their eyes. Ultimately, they return to their Lord, then He informs them of everything they had done." (Qur'an 6:108)

Last edited by Sohel; July 10, 2009 at 11:13 PM..
Reply With Quote