This boils me: Is he dumb or is he really that dumb?

Tigers_eye · #1 February 14, 2017, 01:59 PM

"If we could have restricted them to 550 at least, they would have had to bat another session which means we would have batted three sessions instead of four in the second innings,"
#hair pull.

Are you an International Cricketer? You are commenting these to the media? wow!!! Resign immediately and stop commenting on Cricket.

SportingBD · #2 February 14, 2017, 02:03 PM

Its our dumb kid again?

Tigers_eye · #3 February 14, 2017, 02:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SportingBD
Its our dumb kid again?

My bad. I gave him more credit than he deserved. All this time I thought he was a shrewd tactician who could do simple math.

horizon · #4 February 14, 2017, 02:11 PM

Musfiq?

Tigers_eye · #5 February 14, 2017, 02:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by horizon
Musfiq?

Who else?

paindu · #6 February 14, 2017, 09:22 PM

What's wrong with what he said ?

Night_wolf · #7 February 14, 2017, 09:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tigers_eye

"If we could have restricted them to 550 at least, they would have had to bat another session which means we would have batted three sessions instead of four in the second innings,"
#hair pull.

Are you an International Cricketer? You are commenting these to the media? wow!!! Resign immediately and stop commenting on Cricket.

I think he meant restrict them for 550 in the same amount of overs they played to get 687.

otherwise his post doesn't make any sense!

MHRAM · #8 February 14, 2017, 09:54 PM

I think what he meant was that if bowled well, then they would have had to struggle to get their runs. They scored at 4 RPO, that means that they got a lot of runs and got them quickly. If we took wickes then they would have scored less quickly.

That also indicates that India would have had to play an extra session in the 2nd innings just to get a sizeable lead

If its not what I said earlier, then yeah he is dumb

zman · #9 February 14, 2017, 09:56 PM

The link isn't working. I'm willing to put up with all the Spicy Con logic as long as they take his gloves away

Roey Haque · #10 February 14, 2017, 11:06 PM

Dwarf is really a piece of work.

RazabQ · #11 February 15, 2017, 02:01 AM

MHRAM has a perfectly plausible explanation - which is what I took his comments to mean as well. Calm down folks.

godzilla · #12 February 15, 2017, 02:16 AM

I think you guys are taking his comment out of context. From what I understood, he is talking about India scoring too fast and our bowlers unable to restrict them. Since india declared at 650 ish, it would have taken india another sesson to score that extra 100 runs to declare if we were able to restrict the runrate a bit. Hence, the 3 session on the final day. We had to play about 150 overs to survive the last innings.

If India had played another extra session before the declare happened in their first innings and assuming both our first and india's second innings stayed the same, that means that we would have had to bat 50 over-ish less in the final session. Since we played 100 overs, it would have been a draw. PERFECT EXPLANATION FOR YOU RIGHT HERE.

P.S I rounded up the numbers for the sake of an explanation :P

Sylheti_Beta · #13 February 15, 2017, 02:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MHRAM
I think what he meant was that if bowled well, then they would have had to struggle to get their runs. They scored at 4 RPO, that means that they got a lot of runs and got them quickly. If we took wickes then they would have scored less quickly.

That also indicates that India would have had to play an extra session in the 2nd innings just to get a sizeable lead

If its not what I said earlier, then yeah he is dumb

Plausible

NoName · #14 February 15, 2017, 02:38 AM

..or he just misspoke. Making a mountain out of a mole-hill.

Tigers_eye · #15 February 15, 2017, 03:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by paindu
What's wrong with what he said ?

Dada,
If your team had batted one session less in the first innings and then had to bat two sessions in the second innings in stead of one, then how many sessions did we had to bat in second innings? 3 or 4? Do you need to be rocket scientist?

patriot · #16 February 15, 2017, 03:20 AM

Not the smartest of threads is it.

Mushy said nothing wrong and is certainly not that dumb.

Tigers_eye · #17 February 15, 2017, 03:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Night_wolf
I think he meant restrict them for 550 in the same amount of overs they played to get 687...

How can a sane person make this argument? 687/6 to 550/10 in the same amount of overs? Check 130 runs and get the remaining wickets as well? Was Murali and Warne in our lineup? Or was it Marshall and Holding? Or did we travel back to the 60s?

Even die hard fans would not say that to opponent fans, let alone the captain of the team talking to the media.

tiger1000 · #18 February 15, 2017, 05:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MHRAM
I think what he meant was that if bowled well, then they would have had to struggle to get their runs. They scored at 4 RPO, that means that they got a lot of runs and got them quickly. If we took wickes then they would have scored less quickly.

That also indicates that India would have had to play an extra session in the 2nd innings just to get a sizeable lead

If its not what I said earlier, then yeah he is dumb

I think it's that, people need to give the guy some slack with some of these things, he clearly has lot of pressure on him

tiger1000 · #19 February 15, 2017, 05:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tigers_eye
How can a sane person make this argument? 687/6 to 550/10 in the same amount of overs? Check 130 runs and get the remaining wickets as well? Was Murali and Warne in our lineup? Or was it Marshall and Holding? Or did we travel back to the 60s?

Even die hard fans would not say that to opponent fans, let alone the captain of the team talking to the media.

If we took our chances we could have had them for 550

mufi_02 · #20 February 15, 2017, 09:38 AM

TE bhai eto easily boiled hoye gele hobe? ei boyoshe eto tension niben nah...

paindu · #21 February 15, 2017, 09:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tigers_eye
Dada,
If your team had batted one session less in the first innings and then had to bat two sessions in the second innings in stead of one, then how many sessions did we had to bat in second innings? 3 or 4? Do you need to be rocket scientist?

Yes. It isn't rocket science. If India has lesser lead they might have to bat longer to set big total. Bangladesh would therefore have one less session to bat through.

Yankees · #22 February 15, 2017, 09:57 AM

I really think our boys should just speak in Bengali when talking to the press. Often they can't express themselves in English and end up using the wrong words. Like the whole "shame to lose to Zim" comment.

Roy_1 · #23 February 15, 2017, 10:19 AM

Typical knee jerk reaction, Just because Mushy said it, people had to jump into conclusion without even comprehending, he may not be the smartest guy around but what he said makes perfect sense and nothing dumb about it.

cricman · #24 February 15, 2017, 11:48 AM

If it wasn't a for a missed stumping might have restricted them to 550

al Furqaan · #25 February 15, 2017, 03:08 PM

Well at least Mushy is smart enough to realize 34 is less than 40. Until yesterday, I didnt believe it was possible to have that degree of cognitive shortcoming and still survive ex utero without an umbilical cord.