Team composition

[chinaman]

So, how do we improve? If we care to go through all the posts made since the caribbean tour, we'll find many invaluable suggestions encompassing from extra batting coach to psychologist.

Bangla Mostan made an startling observation in his recent article (Has the patience finally run out of Dave?) that even though we somehow manage to show decent performance in test matches and ODI series, it is the limited over tournaments that we fail consistently time and again.

Bottom line, however, remains the same, to make serious improvements in batting and bowling and to make more effective use of the line-up.

If we take a closer look at the batting line-up, we'll see a batsman short more often than not. Gullu, Ash, Nafees, Rajin & Aftab formed the core in the CT and the practice matches leading to it. Weaker individual performance warrants even longer line-up.

The way other top nations form the attack, it is readily apparent that most if not all of them consistently bank on three specialist pacers. Whereas we deploy only a maximum of two, shuffling between Tapash, Tareq and Nazmul.

So, we are not only a batsman short but also missing a paceman too.

Many teams also employ one or two part time bowlers from the top order. While our bowlers regularly give away tons of runs, not using such part timers would be a definite waste in our quest for consistent respectable showing. Let's put aside the winning for a while.

Six batsmen, three pacemen and a keeper should be the norm for us as it has been for others as well. The last spot goes either to an allrounder or to a specialist spinner depending on situational demands.

Some might argue that Rana is the sixth batsman. I seriously doubt such notion as he is replaced so often with the so-called allrounders. I guess the think tank considers Rana along with Musfiq and Mahmud to be the so-called allrounders, or multi-skilled for that matter.

An extra batsman may be able to offer a little more resistance while three pacemen and a spinner will form the main attack getting help from the part timers. A keeper is always expected to be good at batting. We may end up giving away few more runs because of the part timers, but we may score a few more runs from the sixth batsman as well.

[Beamer]

chinaman
I couldn't agree more. While the rest of the world plays with six to seven specialist batsmen, we continue with five specialist batsmen and two so called " all-rounders". I have a problem with his muti skill approach. An all rounder can only come into the side if his pedigree is unquestionable and who delivers the goods. Symonds, Cairns, Flintoff, Pollock who could be termed as such all rounders and are regular playing members of their respective squads. India, Sri Lanka don't have anyone of that stature and they go with the specialist line of six/seven batsmen. We have a combination of two players playing under the " all rounder" banner from a pool of three consisting of Rana, Mushfiq and Mahmud. To me, they are patch work players and generaly speaking, none can be termed as genuine all rounders. I won't dare compare them to the above mentioned but they are not even in the class of Athar Ali, our best all rounder of all time, and a geniune one no less.

As far as the combination of the team, yes, we must employ six specialist batsman first and foremost. Because the situation demands as such and to do away with these non-descript all rounders will bode well for the future. The value of no.5 and no.6 in one days games can't be mentioned enough. You need players at that position who can hit and have high strike rates. Ideally they get only 10-15 overs to play. So, its imperative that he rotates and accelerates. I think, Ash and Alok ( when in form ) make up the best no.5 and no6 for us because they are good runners and are capable of higher strike rates. They also have better range of shots among other BD batsmen. If Ash stays on as an opener, which I don't mind, then I would like Aftab at no.5. He is no sanwar or faisal. I really think this guy is a genuine batsman and he should be afforded all the chances. Alok is a natural no.6. One thing for certain though, that we need six, at least six specialist batsman in the line-up.

It is also equally important that one or two specialst batsmen develop their bowling skills. Rajin should pratice on his offspinners regularly. We don't have any off spinner. Look how Jayasurya, Lehman, Gayle, tendulkar are used in one dayers these days. Shoaib Malik is another person. It will give us the luxury of picking four specialist bowlers ( whatever combination of pace and spin that the pitch may require ). Its crazy and funny when you think that at no.6 we have Mushfiq or Rana, one of the most vital spots. This is a big problem and sooner we work to address that, the better we be in terms of batting.

When it comes to bowling, Yes, we must have four specialist bowlers. Currently we are employing three ( rafiq, taposh, nazmul ). I would like Masri as the fourth bowler when he comes back. Now, Razzak, I believe will unseat Rafique in near future ( wait for another chacha type whining from rafiq ). I any case, regardless of who plays, we must ensure that four specialist are emplyoed along with six batsman and offcourse the lone wkt keeper spot at no.7. I am thinking about a future idea of a specialist wkt-batsman who will bat at the top or open ( ex : Gilchrist, sangakkara, dravid )in the context of Bangladesh. That will free up a spot for an extra batsman or a bowler. Thats five years down the line once Pilot is gone and it involves either Dhiman or Mushfiq rahim, both fiery batsmen!! But thats for the future.

[oracle]

Forgot at what spot Tushar, (who incidentally was a decent ODI batsman IMHO), used to come in, but talking about fiery batsmen if Dhiman or Aftab can carry the baton and improve the strike rate we will have a better team than previous line ups.

Another thing about Rajin and his offspinners: Is'nt Alok's or Ashraful's part time leggies more valuable for the team and if so should'nt Rajin be concentrating on his batting. It is his batting which has contributed to our middle order vulnerability.

I just don't want this guy to wonder off and tweek his bowling while the whole team is burning. So priority is to get his batting (he shows a lot of promise in this area) shaped up. Then he should shape up his captaincy skills and lastly if time permits his bowling.

[Beamer]

Agree oracle. I was just giving an example of a top order batsman using his hands as a bowler for the sake of fielding a specialist oriented side. I mentioned Rajin. Ash and Alok also fall in that category and not specificaly Rajin, who like you said, has other things to worry about like his batting at the moment. So, no arguement..

[rafiq]

I think instead of posting on this board the ideas should be emailed to dav whatmore. It doesn't matter what our ideas are, we are not selecting the team. I would love to ask dav whatmore why he has kept the 2 so-so allrounders instead of selecting a proper batman or bowler in that slot. It may be that the selection process is a royal cluster, with interference from the BCB, sports minister, prime minister, leader of the opposition and all their respective children and grandchildren. otherwise it is hard for me to understand how professional selectors and cricket coaches don't already know and understand the team composition suggestions we fans come up with 24/7. I have never seen this much cumulative debate on who should play where for one sports team than what we have discussed on this board for the last 3+ years!

just as frustrated as you....

[Cricket46]

I agree, we may be 1 batsman short in our final XI’s but the fact remains that the first 3, 4 or 5 batsmen are consistently failing, with very few exceptions. Almost always, when we made a decent score it was primarily because of the later order batsmen. One really needs to sit down with each one of the front line batsman and find out what exactly is that person’s problem vis-à-vis batting. I am not pointing any particular batsman. Is it a lack of ability or just pressure or something more technical? Make use of past players – Raquibul, Lipu, Nannu, Bulbul, whoever. Talk to them in Bangla. I mean it. Talk to them like an older brother or father would do. It might just help to get some local help. If they have skills why are they not performing?

Since this has been going on and on there has to be some explanations. We have defended our team by stating lack of experience, lack of practice matches, too many practice matches, young captain, old player and the list goes on - but the end result is the same. Then we say OK we have potential and it will show in the near future. These won’t sell any more. We – when I say we, I mean the relevant experts - have to find an answer to our dismal batting over and over again and show some results. I wish I had the answer, but I don’t. So many people here have made passionate posts regarding our team. We want our team to perform, even a lot of us have said just fight if you can’t win. We have not seen that fight, at least I have not.

All my cricketing judgement have failed when it comes to our team. I used to think that longer the version of the game, the more was the difference between two teams visible, if there was a true difference. In a shorter version, there is some scope of reducing this gap - at least sometimes. If anything, our test performance have improved somewhat. So the talk of taking us away from the test group is even funnier. I am digressing here. That is because I am, like other fans, extremely sad. My saner side says that this pattern of losses will continue longer, while my fanatic side thinks we will beat the next team that we play.

[feisal]

It is really amazing that at the moment our test performance is better than the one dayers.. may be it can be attributed to the fact that we have some "Good" and "ok" performer in test.

Bashar, Rafique and Mashud (at 7) all are good, and there is a bunch of "OKs. But in one day I cant see even an ok.. Ashraful may be just about OK but he is just too inconsistent... and delivers few and far between.

we canNOT bat properly in first 15 overs (say indians are the best at that)

we also canNOT bat properly at the middle overs (say aussies are the best there)..

last 10/15?? (pakistan are best in that, overall aussies are good if not the best in all three stages). We never have enough wickets to do so.. We got some runs against pakistan in pakistan, but only on one occasions we batted first. In zimba. by virtue of our only ok player (ashraful 50 in 30 balls) , we scored well in last 10...

obviously, when we do not have any decent accelerator(s) logger who can maintain at least 80/90 percent strike rate, how will we utilize the slog overs?

at least in domestic league Faisal looked to be a person who could do that. He hit one amazing si of harbajan's first over in Asia in otherwise forgettable performance.

statistically our strikerate and average is also remarkably poor... position to position, except ashraful, no one is competent enough to hold their position... masud/rana/mushfique at number six, with due respect, is a joke.. look around and see who occupy that postion in other teams.. may be aftab and nafis both should play as they can hit boundaries.. Rajin, with his nudging and pushing will never be able to make justice of number 4 or 5, but he can improve and looks like he has the mental frame to catch up... but to be honest with Bashar coming back Rajin's position in onedayers should be in microscope.. But probably they will go ahead and drop Aftab (what a shame that will be) to accomodate Rajin.

what to say about the basic requirement of having six batsman??? may be Whatmore reckons what Mostafa Mamun wrote yesterday in Prothom Alo.. "Batsman ra name matra batsman, run ora korte pare na" So let us take multi skilled players and play them where likes of Yuvraj, Lehmann plays..

[coolheels]

We are mistaken in thinking that our patchwork players are the problem. Our problem is the so called specialist batsmen. They are specialist not in run making, but in collapsing in a heap. I wonder how we can forget this fact only one day after suffering another humiliating top order collapse.

Our no.6 & 7 players may be no great shakes, but what about our top order. In what way can we call them top order batsmen when their average and strike rate is no better than that of bits and pieces players of other teams. Our problem is lack of quality batsmen who can hold their fort and score some runs. Endless discussion on batting lines up at the beginning of each match and endless discussion on the merits of a modified batting line up is of no avail as we have seen over a long period of time.

BD players do not learn from their past experience and continue to commit the same mistake. It seems to me that we the BD fans are just the same. We do not learn from our past experience with the BD teams performance and continue to discuss the same old things which have been discussed ad nauseum in the past without any outcome.Maybe we have got a team that we deserve.

[Imtiaz]

Originally posted by chinaman


If we take a closer look at the batting line-up, we'll see a batsman short more often than not.

So, we are not only a batsman short but also missing a paceman too.

Six batsmen, three pacemen and a keeper should be the norm for us as it has been for others as well. The last spot goes either to an allrounder or to a specialist spinner depending on situational demands.

Some might argue that Rana is the sixth batsman. I seriously doubt such notion as he is replaced so often with the so-called allrounders. I guess the think tank considers Rana along with Musfiq and Mahmud to be the so-called allrounders, or multi-skilled for that matter.

An extra batsman may be able to offer a little more resistance while three pacemen and a spinner will form the main attack getting help from the part timers. A keeper is always expected to be good at batting. We may end up giving away few more runs because of the part timers, but we may score a few more runs from the sixth batsman as well.

Bangladesh

ODI Career Batting Averages
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on all matches up to and including
ODI # 2175: Bangladesh v West Indies at Southampton, ICC Champions Trophy, 15/09/2004

Name Mat I NO Runs HS Ave SR 100 50 Ct St

Aftab Ahmed 2 2 0 21 21 10.50 36.84 - - --
Alok Kapali 42 41 2 797 89* 20.43 65.81 - 4 16 -
Faisal Hossain 4 4 0 35 17 8.75 42.68 - - 2 -
Habibul Bashar 53 53 0 936 74 17.66 57.07 - 8 10 -
Hannan Sarkar 20 20 0 383 61 19.15 53.71 - 3 8 -
Javed Omar 32 32 3 703 85* 24.24 49.96 - 6 6 -
Khaled Mahmud 64 61 3 823 50 14.18 67.45 - 1 13 -
Khaled Mashud 82 76 14 1112 54* 17.93 50.82 - 4 59 16
Manjural Islam Rana 11 11 3 214 63 26.75 51.81 - 1 1 -
Mehrab Hossain 18 18 0 449 101 24.94 58.84 1 2 6 -
Mohammad Ashraful 37 37 2 564 66 16.11 64.09 - 4 4 -
Mohammad Rafique 65 61 11 668 77 13.36 72.45 - 1 15 -
Mushfiqur Rahman 25 23 2 331 49 15.76 51.71 - - 5 -
Nafis Iqbal 4 4 0 55 40 13.75 50.00 - - - -
Rajin Saleh 21 21 0 457 71 21.76 52.58 - 3 3 -
Shahriar Hossain 20 19 0 362 95 19.05 53.07 - 2 5 -
Tushar Imran 24 23 0 403 65 17.52 64.37 - 2 3 -
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinaman, with due respect, calling for 6/7 specialist batsmen with current resources is a bit of wishful thinking. The reason we play at least two "multi-skilled" players is due to desperate need rather than choice.

With the exception of Javed Omar no one currently commands an average of 20 or more. Before, anyone says Rajin and Kapali, I would humbly ask them to compute the last 10 innings' average. I doubt if it would be above 10.00. Rana's average is exagerrated by playing too few matches and playing "not outs" against Zimbabwe. After another 5 matches his too would also go below 20. I am not sure what happened with Mehrab ? I could not follow Bangladesh cricket in those days.

The reason they are called batsmen is because they occupy batting positions. Compare the averages of Ashraful, Bashar, Mushfiq, Mahmud and Mashud respectively.

16.11, 17.66, 15.76, 14.18, 17.93. Are they in statistical terms significantly different ?

Frankly, I do believe that Tapash, if he was sent earlier would also have a similar average. His batting technique is no worse than many of the so-called batsmen. I believe , also, that Tareq Aziz's defence is probably better than most of our batsmen !

Given our lowly position, our bowling in ODI's [ test matches are different = we cannot bowl sides out ] is not that bad.

However, as some have suggested calling Rajin, Ashraful and Kapali bowlers is a bad joke ! They turn their arm, that's about it. Kapali is slightly better that the other two.In 10 overs they will go, on average, for 70 runs - that's 20 more than our fifth bowler currently concedes.

Until 3 genuine batsmen arrive [ i.e. average of at least 30 ], consistent scores of above 220 will not be possible. Therefore, even any small chance of a win will not exist until then. In the meantime, "multi-skilled" players have to be included to shore up both batting and bowling. I accept this is a sign of weakness but this selection policy is deployed because we are weak. Note England used to be full of "bits'n pieces" players until recently. Ronnie Irani types. As the team improved genuine batsmen and bowlers filled up the places. And one all-rounder !

I note Dav's very astute use of the phrase. He did not call them [ or Mushfiq, in particular ] "all rounder" ! He has a reason.

Edited on, September 17, 2004, 6:30 AM GMT, by Imtiaz.

[chinaman]

"Until 3 genuine batsmen arrive"

Uhh.. when that will be?

Anyway, you are probably right in that those so-called multi-skilled players were included out of desperation. Then again, how do you explain Rana's exclusion? Or even that of Mahmud's in the first match?

No matter how you try to define a batsman, or a specialist one for that matter, the bottom line is that our top order batsmen are the best available to us. While others (bowlers & multi-skilled) have only one or two fifties in a life time, these top order at least has the potential to score a fifty any given day. Untill given out, we can expect long innings from Faisal, from Aftab, from Rajin and so forth. They failed more often, but they keep the hope alive. When Tapash is batting, we know any ball could be the last.

"They turn their arm, that's about it." Could be true. They might concede more runs but as I mentioned earlier, the sixth batsmen might score few more runs too. And who doesn't like to see a little more run on the scorecard?

At times the opposition partnership becomes too settled to break apart. Conventional wisdom calls for a change of attack. Rajin or Ash might get handy in these situation. When was the last time we used the services of six bowlers in a single match?

People make mistakes when they are desperate. Lets admit our batting short comings and try to minimize it realistically instead of trying to win by shufling and gambling.

[fwullah]

Athar Ali, our best all rounder of all time,

Ummm, Atahar Ali - an all-rounder? The last thing that I remember about his bowling is that he gives away over 6 runs an over all his ODI career. Without disrespecting, I would say that he was used as a multi-skilled player in our ICC Associate days (along with Akram Khan's medium pace etc.) and he was a genuine specialist opening batsman by the time he retired, or rather was forced to retire from International cricket.

[fwullah]

I have a VERY BIG QUESTION to ask - this problem of our batting - has this started just recently, or is this the problem of ours since the day we started playing International cricket - say, in the '80s? I would say the answer is yes, our problem with the batting started since the days we started playing cricket.

But this was not evident to us always as we had some experienced and relatively reliable batsman at number 4, 5 & 6 (Bulbul, Akram, Nannu/Durjoy) and sometimes players like Durjoy, Moni could cheap in at number 7 position.

As a result, we could see totals of 200 to 220 (be it only 25 out of our 95 ODIs).

So, instead of trying to find the correct opening pair, I strongly believe that we should have started getting 3 established batsman at number 4, 5 & 6 in ODIs.

I believe this way because we had opening problems even during our ICC trophy tournaments. Players like Raquibul Hassan, Gazi Ashraful Hossain Lipu (who used to play at 3) - they could never handle the first few overs of a One Day match without going out cheaply. Only a few batsman could score runs at the opening position and they were always too much praised, which ultimately resulted in their downfall (example: Jahangir Alam the wicket keeper had a century once and [only] because of his century, he was selected for a tournament later on).

If we have a strong middle order line up, then doesn't matter what our openers do, we won't at least have to see us losing 5 wickets in the first 10 overs of a One Day match.

This is what should have been our approach, yet instead, we're trying to get the best opening pair at first, and then looking at finding middle order players, which is a more difficult thing to do.

I have been baffled and did not strongly suggest this earlier believing in Whatmore Magic and believing in Dav too much, once we got the win against Zimbabwe (after 5 long years) wasn't our middle order line up a very good one? Instead of having players at 4, 5 & 6, we had players in 3, 4 & 5 (Sumon, Rajin & Ashraful). So at that time, even if Sumon or Rajin failed to perform, Ashraful could come in and may be get us to a respectable total.

But then in the very next series, Foisal was tried at 5, and to be honest wasn't given too much opportunity as those were rain-interrupted matches. Then in the next tournament in Asia Cup, Ashraful was forced to open believing suddenly that we have a good enough middle order, but then with no mental support of having a good batsman coming in after Rajin, coupled with Sumon and Rajin's temporary out of form, we couldn't see a strong middle order. Then now in this ICC Champions Trophy, a completely new batsman, Aftab is tried at the number 5 position.

Anyway, just think - under Whatmore's tenure, Jayasuriya and Kaluwitharana was opened when there were some very strong middle order batsman left to play after them, so even if Jayasuriya or Kaluwitharana had failed, Avishka Gunawardena, Aravinda De Silva and Arjuna Ranatunga would come in. Earlier reports say that Jayasuriya and Kaluwitharana had the mental strength that if they were to get out cheaply, then there would be enough players coming in - who could score fifties and hundreds.

But does our opening pair have that mental strength? If they go out, who would come in and score some fifties? In short, there is nobody who would come to the rescue and get the team to a total of 200 to 220 if the opening pair of Javed Omar - Mohammad Ashraful fails to perform in many occassions than not.

[fwullah]

I think my above post is not making any sense, just read that 'we have to establish our middle order batting first, then we can go for trying to find an opening pair'.

[chinaman]

Jhul to dekhlam, mangsho koi?

[reyme]

Motivation for the following prescription:

It seems we are running out of time to keep our test status and even one day status. Our team continues it lackluster performance and it seems they are simply not capable of a win or even ready to face elite cricket teams. Not only we cant win, we cant even compete. Bangladesh cricket team is becoming a laughing stock in the eyes of International Cricket World (Source Prothom Alo reporter, who had to leave the press box as foreign media continued to make fun of our team and players, in front of our journalists.) Not only we cant compete against elite teams, rest of the world is catching up fast. USA had a strong showing, Scotland/Canada already beat, Kenya beats regularly and more whipping is on the way. If things continues this way, there will tier system soon, and we might be relegated to a third tier within the next 4 years or so.

Problem:

#1: Cannot find a winning combination? Not sure who should play at what position? We tried so many experiments with players, nothing works.

#2: Domestic league is not properly formed? National players cannot play in the domestic league so it is less attractive and we don't have a place for them to try out, try to do some experiment?

#3: Talent pool is so thin. Hard to find a replacement?

#4: Our players are not so professional and less motivated in the field?

#5: Team is very young, less experienced. So how to get more experience?

#6: Morale is too low, after continuous loss, players forgot to win?

#7: Players are over played and tired, thus less motivated?

#8: How many batsmen/bowlers should we play in the team?

#9: Too much politics at BCB, player selection? Politics in the team?

#10: BCB don't have money for running a test team, give them proper facilities?



Solution:

There is a saying: Do one thing and do it right. A very good example is Team India. They have a solid lineup and everybody is assigned a position, and for and every position they have backups. If the starter fails or gets injured, he is replaced by his substitute. Its not like they go through order shuffle or rotations in every game.

To improve this is what I think needs to be done.

#1/2/3

We must have a solid domestic league cricket with 12-16 teams at least for 3 months, during which all the players, including the national players will participate. No international cricket participation at that time. The league will be both one dayer's and 3/4 dayers. This is the root, it must be prioritized. BCB needs to work this out with ICC for its own sake.

At the end of the league, we will select 44 players with 4 players for each position. We will form 4 teams out of them, let them play against each other, and then find the winning combination out of them. So our talent pool is not so thin, we have at least 4 players for each position. And we will do all the experiments right here, and we know who belongs at which position.

#4/5: In the domestic League Pitch will be of various conditions, so that no matter were we play the players are used to it. Must allow 3/4 foreign players in each team, so our players gets exposure of playing fast bowling and ruthless batting.

It will not provide less chances for the local players, rather it will give them more exposure and experience. That's how we improved during the early nineties and that's the way to go. It will be more competitive and good players will earn more. If BCB still wants more local players, they can increase number of teams or make more leagues.

Thus players will earn their experience and professionalism in the hard fought local but international league in all pitch conditions! Once this league is complete there will be more leagues to follow which will keep all the players except the national ones busy throughout the year and will make their living. How about some indoor cricket?

#6: Players will be exposed to nail biters in the domestic league, and see some of the seasoned international players leading the team by example. They will learn how to win the matches in the tough conditions. And they will see, it is indeed possible to win!

#7: Now that we have found the team and we have backups, BCB must make sure players are not overplayed and tired. Use the substitutes more often, and prepare calendar such a way so that key players are ready for the big games.

#8: Ideally there will be 6 batsmen, 3 pacers, 1 WK and 1 spinner. There must be 2 part time bowlers among 6 batsmen.

#9: This is not an ideal world. Politics is there and will be there not only in BCB, but in PCB, and others, and even in ICC. We just need to deal with it. It does help if we have good leaders.

#10: BCB must bring professionalism in cricket as much as possible. They will see how TV rights and sponsorship bring so much in this sports world. Make the leagues more attractive, bring in foreign players, show some if not all games on TV. If you build they will come. During the corporate league when we had many foreign players, we did not see lack of spectators. and that's how it works. Bring attractions, crowd will just follow. And soon the crowd will be followed by local media. And there you go, corporate business will simply follow to earn more business, they just want to see the money they are investing for sponsorship is returning their moneys worth or not. Trust me money will never be a problem. Its a a proven system in the USA, UK, Canada and in other countries and it will work for us too.

[feisal]

Originally posted by fwullah

Ummm, Atahar Ali - an all-rounder? The last thing that I remember about his bowling is that he gives away over 6 runs an over all his ODI career. Without disrespecting, I would say that he was used as a multi-skilled player in our ICC Associate days (along with Akram Khan's medium pace etc.) and he was a genuine specialist opening batsman by the time he retired, or rather was forced to retire from International cricket.

*** nope, can't agree with the first sentence. in those days we only used to play with associates (I am talking about 84 to 93). and He always used to have his quota fulfilled. comparing his bowling with Akram khan's bowling is something on which one should not waste his or her words.

any any case, we should concentrate more on the future..

[Beamer]

You are right feisal. It doesn't warrant a response. Athar Ali is still the best all-rounder we have ever had. There is no arguement there unless offcourse someone decides to argue for the sake of arguement. Athar Ali opened the batting and bowled regularly, not a part timer such as Akram Khan. Athar definitely was not a mutil-skiller( like shujon ). he would have opened batting for us as a specialist batsman even if he didn't bowl. His one day average is one of all time high among the BD batsmen ( near 30 ). ...

[Tehsin]

Athar was a regular bowler in the team. It's kind of surprising to see his bowling being compared to Akram khan. The big man was hardly a bowler, he was only used for comic relief (well, not really but you know what I mean).

[feisal]

mr Imtiaz, I can relate to your insights. you might be right, under the circumstances, there is not much difference between specialist batsman and tid-bits players. And may be Whatmore is aware of that...


another thing is woth exploring, is it only the Temparament or ability is also a factor. You must have observed our alarming incpability in hitting boundaries.. Ashraful just cannot stay there long, I have mixed feelings about Javed Omar, he is always aslow coach, knd of player wu do not want to have in one ayers, but, on the other side, he cannot even bat out over 50 overs. so to have him in the line up should not harm.

Did u ask about Meherab hossain? more of a disciplinary case, he had stroke and good timing, but mone hoy na ar parbe....

to me another player remain an enigma.. Rana. He opened in that fateful third one dayers (in Zim) and managed 65 or so, and then in the very next series he was dscribed as someone who just does not have the technique to open!!! but the fact remain that our openers hardly score fifties.. what i mean is it is not clear what is actual ability is.. I heard about Sunny Gavaskar's comment that "he looks like getting out in every delivery.."

coming back to the basic point: do we have single OK (let alone good) ODI batsman (against good bowling, not scotland/ireland/USA)?

as far as ability (ONLY) is concerned: Ashraful, Kapali and may be Nafis can be the closest... But the first two lack consistency..

so, we have to have patience..there is still a long way to go...


*** can anyone send us the article by Chris Martin Jenkins where he advocated demotion for both Bangladesh and Zimbabwe?

[sunniath]

I regret for not seeing Nannu, Bulbul, and Akram in the side.This was a definite blunder that we have to live with.I don't think they will ever make a comeback because of the humiliation they had to suffer.Now we have to start buildinga team with what we have.I would like to see Ash in the middle-order and Biddut in the opeping spot with Gullu.Nafis at 3, and Ash, Sumon, Rajin will take charge of the middle order.After a disasterous tour we may ask for their heads. But these are the only players we have. Admit it. I am not in favor in bringing any new players as they will struggle the same way as our existing players.We should stick with them and raise their standard.They are still young and fairly new in the international arena.Our bowling will become better when Masri and Sharif will return to the side.
Lets give the players a better domestic league rather than planning to get rid of them.

[babon]

Edited on, September 19, 2004, 6:10 PM GMT, by chinaman.
Reason: Please do not quote a large post. Just quote the necessary sentences only. Thank you. This post contains the quote only, did you forgot to write your opinion?

[Zephaniah]

Originally posted by reyme

#8: Ideally there will be 6 batsmen, 3 pacers, 1 WK and 1 spinner. There must be 2 part time bowlers among 6 batsmen.

6 batsmen minimum. Just run through team composition of Pakistan, India, England, SriLanka, Australia, West Indies in CT. All of them have atleast 7 genuine batsmen playing ( some bowls too). Shahid Afridi batted at no.8 position in India vs Pak match. NZ's case is little different. They are packed with capable all-rounders.

[chinaman]

Dear reyme

I sent a private U2U message to you. Please check the u2u from the upper right hand corner of any forum page. You have to be logged in and may need to refresh the page to see the u2u. Please post here if you have difficulties accessing u2u. Thank you.

[Haradhon]

Where the performance should be improved
The current problem with our team is not just performance but a sharp drop in performance. We accept the fact that our players may not have the techniques, abilities and experiences like the players of other test nations, but there are no reasons why they cannot have the will to put up a fight for a clase game, and an honorable defeat. And I mean, 5 out of 6 batters in the top order fail, and 3 out 5 are out for reasons that are unexplainable. So inserting old dogs like Tushar Imran, Sanwar, Bulbul, or Nannu is not a bad proposition.
It seems that we lose the psychological aspect of a game in every match. When one of the openers, or the 1-down goes out, the next in line just cannot hang on to the wicket for 2 overs. It has to do with the techniques, I think, our coaches need to help them in application, as such which techniques they should apply when the top order has an early crack.
The other observation is that the bottom order performs knowing that they do not have to win the game, but score relatively more runs that the top order. So idea of placing Pilot in the top order would not work.
What we need is a someone of Pilot's psyche in the top order, who can keep his cool when needed.