Englsh wickets

[pilot fan]

look i live in england and i am telling all of you that there is no point in playing two spinners so early in the english season. The wickets do not turn untill the very last day and no teams is the last 5 years have gone into a test match in england in may with two spinners.

the wickets in england at that time of years are very green so the ball will swing a lot and the likes of mortaza and tapash will bowl well in them and i also think that nanzamal who is a swing bowler will profit in these conditions.

play 6 batsman(including omar)
1 keeper (pilot0
1 spinner (rafique)
3 seamers (tapash, mortaza and nanzamal)

that is the only way to play in the english early season

the selectors would be made to play two spinners jr will just have to wait his turn

[Navarene]

Totally agree with you..only that I would give a try with Rajib as a third seamer instead of Nazmul (not nanzamul) with Aftab as a back up pacer. Nazmul is the best fit for ODs.

[Ernest]

Originally posted by pilot fan
look i live in england and i am telling all of you that there is no point in playing two spinners so early in the english season.

Hi Pf,
I also live in England, you may be right about later summer being better for spin.
But English wickets have changed in nature these last few years,
Bangladesh have to play to their strengths, and I should think that will favour spin.
I think Flintoff is the no 1 all rounder in the world, and Englands best bowler at the moment, but he plays pace well.
So if I was a Bangladesh selector, I would be looking who has got him out, remember Sarwan in the West Indies?,ke shocked me, but not as much as Freddie, and he was only a part time Leggie.
Ern

[Sham]

I am with pilot fan on this as well. I have been saying for ages now that we should not play two spinners. Ernest, your argument would have worked if we had two spinners like Rafique, who bowls flat and quick and frustrates the batsman. He is not a strike bowler, even though he takes a lot of wickets. He gets batsmen out by cramping them for space and making them make mistakes. Much like Giles. However, Enamul is a different type of bowler. He flights the ball and relies on turn off the wicket to take wickets. He is more of a strike bowler, and on a dusty pitch in the subcontinent on the last day, I think he could bowl most sides out almost single-handedly. But I just don't see how his bowling will be useful here where he won't get any turn off the pitch! If we must take a second spinner, Razzak is a better option. But really, we need a third front-line seamer!

[Rubu]

Originally posted by Sham
If we must take a second spinner, Razzak is a better option. But really, we need a third front-line seamer!

oh man, whats up with u? you would rather go with razzak than rana?

have u ever used to be a farmer bro where rana ran his tructor before your crops were ripe?

[Sham]

Yeah man, that must be it! You are a genius, what can I say!

Did you even read the whole message and if so, which part did you not get? I have provided a basis for my argument which makes cricketing sense. If you don't agree, atleast come back with an equally strong cricketing argument and I'll accept it. But wait, you can't can you? Because you've probably never seen any of them play! What are the strengths and weaknesses of Enamul compared to Razzak compared to Rana? And how well are they suited to playing in English conditions in May? What are English conditions in May? Where is England? You have no idea do you?

In that case, stop making comments which are neither helpful, nor funny! Enamul is the best bowler in Bangladesh right now! But it doesn't make sense to put a bowler who relies almost entirely on turn on wickets which will afford him no turn whatsoever! As for Rana or Razzak, if you were picking one in a bowler's spot rather than in a batsman's spot, would you go with Razzak or Rana? Do you pick your bowlers based on their bowling ability or their batting ability? With you, one never knows!



Edited on, April 1, 2005, 9:23 PM GMT, by Sham.

[couger]

I have to side with pilotfan here. First, off course because of the nature of English wickets and second it might totally demoralize you enamul should he be hammered all over the place.

[Ernest]

Originally posted by Sham
Ernest, your argument would have worked if we had two spinners like Rafique.
!

I can see your point about 2 spinners in May, but if England have a weakness it is playing spin.
Trescothick is vunerable because he will attack, giving a spinner a chance.even Flintoff will have a dash.
Do Bangladesh have a third Seamer?, because England strong point is against seam.
Kallis has been made to look very ordinary against the West indian batsmen.

[chinaman]

Originally posted by Sham
Where is England? You have no idea do you?

I guess Agentsmith was refering to your known preferential non-preference to Rana. Besides, we all can play a little Farouque whether we ever actually watch a player live or not, right?

[Sham]

I know what Agentsmith was referring to. But Rana hadn't even entered the equation for me because lets face it, if we were picking bowlers for a Test match, he wouldn't really be considered would he? Can you imagine us going in with Taposh, Mashrafe, Rafique and Rana? Thats like going in with just three bowlers. While Rana remains a useful ODI bowler, he hasn't done anything with the ball in the longer version to be considered.

As for playing Faruq, play to your hearts content. Thats what we are here to do. And watching a player live can't be a necessity when most here haven't watched them at all! But my problem is, someone is ridiculing me simply because he doesn't like my conclusion! No counter arguments, no reasoning, no evidence to back up his claim, but that doesn't stop him. The reason I mentioned watching the players is because what good would it be for me to demand a reply of substance from someone who won't be able to provide one. What could he say? Oh, Rana took wickets in Dhaka against Zimbabwe in ODIs! I know that and it doesn't make him a Test bowler!


Edited on, April 1, 2005, 10:33 PM GMT, by Sham.

[chinaman]

hehehe Sham, I'm sure he was just paraphasing and didn't mean any harm.

[Navarene]

Because you've probably never seen any of them play!

Sham, I do honor your wise cricket knowledge and agree with your views about almost all of your cricket related comments. I really appreciate your argument about how desperately we need a genuine batsman for 6th slot in our batting line up.

But lately I have noticed that you have built up a belief within you that most of the members of BC might not have seen our cricketers playing but you (if I am not mistaken, you have also claimed the same fact in some of your previous posts about Rana). May I ask what makes you think this way? Does seeing a cricketer playing only necessarily mean that you have to be physically in the stadium to watch the player playing? If not, is watching a cricketer playing on TV has less value to justify his cricket ability?

In fact, I firmly believe that most of us, if not all, have seen our players playing, either be it by means of live telecast on TV or live video streaming or even some video footage. May be fans have some different interpretation of a player's technique and skill while watching them on TV, but then still they also deserve the right to come up with their own opinion about a perticular player. But to think and claim that only me but not the others have seen any of our cricketers playing, be it on or off the field, is an extensively outspreaded view which might lead a friendly debate about our cricket to death before it even grows.

[Rubu]

for your info sir, i've seen all 3 of them play live, in SEVERAL occations. me ain't any telented player and so many of the players' talents might went past my eyes. here is what i've seen and observed.

rana have not done anything with ball in longer version of the match, but guess what razzak has not played any test yet. now, i really dont have an eye to see the future and if thats what your source of argument, i really have to say, maap chai. never argue with some people.

i'm assuming that u were following WI tour even though you were not seen in bc forum. in that case do u remember that rana was the only spinner to cause trouble to WI player on their pacer friendly pitch? even rafique was less effective than him, look at the stats and read some comments at cc's forum at that time and u'll know it all. now, which pitch resembles more of england pitch, u make the call. is it the pitch in srilanka the only place razzak showed some promise or in WI. not to mention that he used to bowl at 12 digree angle when only 5 digree was allowed.

The reason I mentioned watching the players is because what good would it be for me to demand a reply of substance from someone who won't be able to provide one. What could he say? Oh, Enamul took wickets in Dhaka against Zimbabwe! I know that!

sorry failed to see your logic. from where you jumped to enamul remained me of ADD. did i ever mentioned enamul? where is he, or his taking wicket coming from?

i guess stats does not speak the truth, does it? still, for those who think it has the slightest meaning. rajjak has a batting average of 9.75 and bowling average of 30.57. whereas rana has 23.66 and 28.16 respectively.

still, when razzak comes up as enamul was written off, i wonder what else difference do they have? beside chucking i mean. in terms of bowing style rana maintain much better line and lenght and has learned the art of arm ball from rafique.

in terms of playing faruk: here is the deal. if razzak even goes into the 16 men squad, i'll leave banglacricket for ever. if he does not you'll have to. dare taking the challenge?

[Sham]

When I talk about watching the players play, I refer to watching them play on television, not from the stands. If it were the latter, then I haven't seen most of the current team play either!

If people have watched our players play, and provide differing opinions to mine, I am happy to debate them, as I have and continue to do. As a matter of fact, even if someone has not watched a player play, but provides cricket related argument nevertheless, I always make it a point to reply to either say, I agree or that I don't agree for whatever are the reason.

The times I do bring up watching players play (on television), and you are right, I have mentioned it on several occasions in the past, is when people insist on judging a player's ability and dissecting his game based on scores that are on display at CricInfo. That to me lacks credibility. If I were to now compare Wascoroni Polash to Gazi Alamgir, or Golam Rahman to Shaheen, I would be guilty of the same. How can I provide a credible analysis of their game when I have never seen them play? While a lot of people here might have caught a bit of live streaming here and there of our players, most of them have not seen any substantial cricket. Those who have make it quite clear that they have and you can tell by their analysis (regardless of whether it matches mine or not).

[Sham]

"in terms of playing faruk: here is the deal. if razzak even goes into the 16 men squad, i'll leave banglacricket for ever. if he does not you'll have to. dare taking the challenge? "

Razzak won't be in the 16 member squad. You obviously haven't read my front page article. I don't blame you, its crap! Enamul will travel to England along with Rafique and that leaves room for no more spinners. Rana will go as a batting all-rounder. If he makes the Test team in the top six, then fine. But he shouldn't make it in the bottom four! I still maintain that we need a third seamer. If not, out of Enamul, Rana and Razzak, I still think Razzak will be the most potent in England because he uses his body more and gets some turn off a quicker arm action. He might not have played Test cricket, but as a left-arm spinner for the longer game, it is my opinion that he is more potent than Rana. You don't have to agree.

I am glad you have watched them play and sorry that the only conclusion you could draw from doing that is that Razzak is a chucker. Actually, he is a pretty darned good bowler but will never make it into the test team because Enamul is better overall and odi team because Rana can bat!

[Rubu]

Originally posted by Sham
"in terms of playing faruk: here is the deal. if razzak even goes into the 16 men squad, i'll leave banglacricket for ever. if he does not you'll have to. dare taking the challenge? "

Razzak won't be in the 16 member squad. You obviously haven't read my front page article.

wait a sec, i'm confused now. if you know that he is not going to england, then why telling that he should be a better option than rana when he is not even available? not sure what you are trying to say. the way it started, u said that if we are to play 2 spinner it would be rafique and razzak rather than rafique and enamul. my question was why not rafique and rana? can u please explain that since i've not get that answer yet (unless u are thinking of playing all 3!!!!). i've seen only 3 odi with my eyes so far. all other are on tv. did watch rajjak play against inda and in srilanka and rana in WI, srilanka, dhaka and a few more occations, all on tv.

btw, i did read your article and frankly, it was a good read.

Edited on, April 1, 2005, 11:46 PM GMT, by AgentSmith.

[Sham]

Actually, I didnt say he would be a better option than Rana (although he would). My initial post on this issue that started all this is about Enamul and I had said that we should play a third seamer instead of Enamul. Then, just as an aside, I mentioned that if we did consider a second spinner, in my opinion Razzak would be the most effective given the conditions. That doesn't mean that I think he will be in the squad. I know he wont. You cant drop Enamul after the series he has had and take Razzak, and neither should you. Enamul will play Test cricket for a long time and will become the highest wicket taker for BD I think. Even towards late summer in England, Enamul would have been okay. Its just that in the early part, he will be ineffective. But for that, he shouldn't lose his spot in the squad!

As for your earlier question of which pitch resembles English pitches, the ones in SL or the ones in WI, I would say neither. I think SL and WI pitches resemble each other more than either resembling English pitches in May!

[Sham]

Okay, about Rana. I think his bowling lacks bite because he lacks variety. Now, you said he has picked up the arm ball, but what good is that on a pitch that takes very little spin anyway. Again, he is useful in one-dayers because he cramps batsmen up when they are trying to go for runs. But in Test cricket, you need to have the Rafique combination of cramping batsmen and mixing up your deliveries in order to get the batsmen to make mistakes.

There are two types of spinners. One type will actually bowl wicket taking deliveries. They will pitch one way outside leg stump and the ball will turn and hit off, or they will bowl the googly that will go through bat and pad! Warne, Murali, McGill, Kaneria, Enamul fall in that category. The other type will keep the batsmen under pressure by being accurate, while at the same time mixing things up, varying the pace, bowling from different points of the return crease, varying the length etc in order to get a mistake out of the batsman. Rana has half of that and not the other half. He can keep it tight, but he doesn't have the variety whereas Rafique can vary things up and still maintain his accuracy. The English batsmen will just play Rana with the spin and pick him off for a couple of singles every over. I don't see him taking wickets.

Edited on, April 2, 2005, 12:10 AM GMT, by Sham.

[cricket_pagla]

khaise... abar RANA ar RAZZAK niya mara-mari suru hoise/hoisilo..

[RazabQ]

Just had a thought. Gonna pull up Giles, Vettori & Tufnel's stats in England and then going to break it down by period withing English season (i.e. May to Mid June, June-Jul, Remainder). Can you all recommend any other SLAs I should look into?

All this back and forth between AS and SA has gotten me curious now

[oracle]

I would like to see Price in an analysis although i am not sure there is much to sift thru.

[Sham]

Good idea, but can I just make it a little more complicated for you?

Since, we haven't even decided about third seamer or second spinner, why don't you start with looking at which group has taken more wickets in England against England in the last say 5 summers. A lot of people have argued that England's weakness is against spin, so it would be good to see whether that hold true on their own soil (even though it definitely is true when they come to the sub-continent).

And while you do that, you can break the summers down into first 3 matches and next three match to see what difference there is.

Then, lets look at the spinners themselves, all spinners, and see how the percentage of wickets taken by spinners varies between first half of summer and second half of summer. This is really just a reverse of the previous one.

Then, lets narrow it down to SLAs and see how they have fared.

Where is Babubangla when you need him? He could give you a hand with all the number crunching!

Edited on, April 2, 2005, 8:24 AM GMT, by Sham.

[mafij]

Hi ! I think sellecting Razzak is not good option for Bng. Select another all rounder (may be a new player) Two spinners is good decisions, cricket has changed over the years. To stop or give more time to English man need spinners. So that to score run will take time and then may be >>>>>>>. Draw or even win for ban will be great.

[Rubayed]

No offense to all those people who r claiming that they live in UK and know about English wickets, i'm sure u do but in my humble opinion Dav Whatmore knows better since he has been a coach for Lancashire, so i'm quite certain he'll have his say on selection with other selectors, so leave it to them.

[Sham]

Its not like we really have a choice! I wish I did, wish I could go to Dav and say, you rest today chum, I'll pick the team for you ang give them a bit of coaching as well while I'm at it. But no, the best I can do is to come to the BanglaCricket forum and share ideas with others and that I am unlikely to stop doing. Sorry!