Quote:
|
Originally Posted by AsifTheManRahman
If we aim for the top of the Empire State Building, maybe we'll at least get to the top of the jar. But I wasn't even implying that we would have won with a more positive frame of mind, I was just hoping the top order would have displayed a bit more positivity instead of going into a shell. A lot of things could have happened as a result - we could have lost three wickets, or Brendan could have spread the field out. But we could have crossed that bridge when we got there instead of making assumptions from the beginning. Ten overs of stroke play wouldn't and shouldn't have cost us the game, as we have the batting depth to pull off a draw on a dormant surface.
Anyways, it's not a huge deal, we still dominated and finished in style. But we need to start winning Tests, or we'll be #13 soon. Actually, without decent fast bowlers and batsmen who crap their pants at the very sight of a fast-medium (not medium-fast like Rubel) bowler, we probably already are.
|
I share the same view...at least the openers could give a try...
Both the openers looked like
and seemed confused about their task.
Our team management share the same ^^^ brain as well.
The situation in the 1st test in Chittagong was very different than most of the other matches. The pitch was a dead one - not much was there for the bowlers - we all know that.
The excuse about the pitch was slow and ball was getting low bounce, thus the openers could NOT score! Then, how come Mominul and Shak played those shots??
The match strategy could have really simple - The openers should go for a win. If loses wickets early, change the strategy and go for the draw - simple, NOT rocket science.