*Official* Bangladesh in England

[Jarquis]

3rd position 2005-2009 17 33 1 1006 92 31.43
4th position 2005-2009 11 17 2 630 162* 42.00
5th position 2004-2010 12 15 2 791 199 60.84
6th position 2006-2010 18 26 5 1091 140 51.95

You'd think the selectors would realise Bell at three doesn't work. Has 0 centuries in 33 innings there and a respectable 10 in 58 batting 4-6.

 

[pskov]

3rd position 2005-2009 17 33 1 1006 92 31.43
4th position 2005-2009 11 17 2 630 162* 42.00
5th position 2004-2010 12 15 2 791 199 60.84
6th position 2006-2010 18 26 5 1091 140 51.95

You'd think the selectors would realise Bell at three doesn't work. Has 0 centuries in 33 innings there and a respectable 10 in 58 batting 4-6.

Yep, his stats at 5 or 6 are excellent. Even excluding Bangladesh he averages 50.65 with 7 hundreds in 26 tests in those two positions. He shouldn't be picked at 3 again for the foreseeable future.

 

[Goughy]

Maybe but i wouldn't take either ahead of Strauss or Cook.

Without thinking long and hard about it, Im inclined to agree with you

 

[TumTum]

I was watching extended highlights of the 1st day when I made that post. The pitch had a bit of grass on it, but that had no impact on Hughes' innings, as it wasn't the pitch that led to his downfall. It was an inability to play the short ball, and flashing wildly outside the off-stump against a swinging ball bowled at over 85mph. He wasn't undone by a ball moved inches off the seam after hitting the deck.

I mentioned nothing about the 'bowling attack', but more the bowler that had Hughes in so much trouble, Sami.

Again that's the way Hughes plays and scores his runs, where did it say you have to be a conservative batsmen to be considered great?

You managed to contradict yourself there. So swing doesn't give any advantage to the bowler?

So just because Hughes gets out to Sami (who that day picked up 3 top order wickets) does that instantly make him a **** player? Didn't Tendulkar get out to White in a Test?

 

[Jarquis]

Arguing against the straw man, all KP is saying is on that day Hughes looked awful against a mediocre, at best, Test bowler and what you said about the pitch and Asif is irrelevant bull****.

 

[TumTum]

Arguing against the straw man, all KP is saying is on that day Hughes looked awful against a mediocre, at best, Test bowler and what you said about the pitch and Asif is irrelevant bull****.

He didn't look mediocre, he got dropped sure, but that ball was right in his slot and he attacked it, it was nothing like his dismissals in the Ashes.

 

[Prince EWS]

Without thinking long and hard about it, Im inclined to agree with you

Hmm, I definitely think Katich is better than Cook. Whether you'd 'take' Katich over Cook given their ages and potential improvement is a different question though, I suppose.

 

[King Pietersen]

Again that's the way Hughes plays and scores his runs, where did it say you have to be a conservative batsmen to be considered great?

You managed to contradict yourself there. So swing doesn't give any advantage to the bowler?

So just because Hughes gets out to Sami (who that day picked up 3 top order wickets) does that instantly make him a **** player? Didn't Tendulkar get out to White in a Test?

How's that a contradiction? I said the pitch wasn't assisting the bowling, swing doesn't come from the pitch.

I never said he was a **** player either. I like Phil Hughes. All I was doing was replying to your post suggesting he was unlucky to get a 0 on a very green pitch; when in actual fact the pitch had nothing to do with his dismissal and it was just a damn awful, scratchy innings. No need to get so damn defensive.

Not sure how you can claim he didn't look mediocre in that innings either, he was all over the place. I think he's got a lot of natural ability and talent, but that was a terrible innings. I know love is blind and all, but surely even you can admit that was a dire innings? He was all over the shop against Sami. Looked uncomfortable against anything back of a length and near his body, failed to put away the 1 bad ball he did get which resulted in a dropped catch and then flashed at a wide one outside off to get himself out. Was a horrible innings, calling it mediocre is being kind.

 

[Furball]

Tum Tum, if you want to talk about Phil Hughes, please take it to an appropriate thread.

This thread is about the England v Bangladesh series.

 

[GIMH]

Then you are a rather silly man.

Bit harsh. Strauss the best out of the four for mine, not a lot between the rest

 

[Black_Warrior]

In an attempt to be true to the title of the topic, Bangladesh in England,

I hope Shakib recovers soon from his illness to be fit in time for the first test. I would like to see how he bowls on English conditions. Also interested to see Mahmudullah, Rahim and Tamim bat.

 

[Pothas]

Bit harsh. Strauss the best out of the four for mine, not a lot between the rest

This should probably be in the ashes thread but:

I think Katich is better than Strauss, not by a huge amount but his record is very impressive since he got back into the side.

I like Cook and he is a good player but has had real problems against Australia, this will be a massive test for him.

If Watson plays like he has been since he got back in the test side then I rekon he is the best of the lot, was dominating atacks in Australia like none of the others do, even if he has an inability to score centuries.

As a combination this winter I think it is far more likely that Australia will be going in at 120-0 at lunch than England.

 

[Woodster]

Will be interested to see how Bangladesh go in English conditions. I expect it to be very comfortable for England. In Bangladesh the home side showed decent battling qualities yet they were aided by flat, docile pitches that offered very little to England's attack, and as a result Bangladesh were able to scrap with the bat. I see it differently over here as I think they will struggle to overcome the movement, and bounce in our pitches, unless the groundsman have received instructions to ensure the Tests last as long as possible!

 

[Athlai]

Yeah can't really see anyone besides Tamim, Shakib, Rahim and Mahmudallah putting up any resistance at all in England. Would like to see Jahrul get in the runs though.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

I like the look of Naeem Islam but it is a waste of time having him coming in at 8.He had one of the best techniques in the side and was prepared to get his head down more than some of the others.It will be interesting to see how they as a team cope with totally different conditions in England.

Can't see them getting 10 wickets in any innings unless we have about 4 or 5 run outs as the bowling Shakib apart just isn't good enough.

 

[King Pietersen]

They lost against what was in essence an Essex 2nd XI, before losing to the Lions, both inside 3 days. I'd be very disappointed if they managed to avoid defeat in both Tests. The ODi series could be more competitive, but I see us hammering them in the Tests, unless the weather turns.

 

[Black_Warrior]

Will be interested to see how Bangladesh go in English conditions. I expect it to be very comfortable for England. In Bangladesh the home side showed decent battling qualities yet they were aided by flat, docile pitches that offered very little to England's attack, and as a result Bangladesh were able to scrap with the bat. I see it differently over here as I think they will struggle to overcome the movement, and bounce in our pitches, unless the groundsman have received instructions to ensure the Tests last as long as possible!

While I agree with you in principle, I dont agree with the wording.
Bangladesh did better at home as their home conditions (flat pitches, unhelpful for English seam bowling).
Similarly, English bowlers will bowl better this time at home helped by home conditions (helpful pitches, ball moving around).
Its equal in my eyes. Just like batting is easier on flat pitches, bowling is also easier on juicy pitches.

 

[Shoggz]

Well, I'm quite excited today, as tomorrow, weather permitting, will be my first taste of live international cricket, which considering in now in my mid 40s is probably some achievement for a denizen of this forum!

Have been to Lord's before and have seen any number of domestic matches but I've never got to see England play.

So, I'll be doing an 'anti-raindance' tonight so I do get to see them tomorrow!

 

[BoyBrumby]

Fair play, fella. Hope it keeps fine for you.

Be interesting to see how Finn and Morgan go. Although if the latter bats #6 there's a small chance his services won't be required.

 

[Woodster]

While I agree with you in principle, I dont agree with the wording.
Bangladesh did better at home as their home conditions (flat pitches, unhelpful for English seam bowling).
Similarly, English bowlers will bowl better this time at home helped by home conditions (helpful pitches, ball moving around).
Its equal in my eyes. Just like batting is easier on flat pitches, bowling is also easier on juicy pitches.

Yes I understand what you are saying and how my post came across, however, what I meant was essentially that there are few attacks in the world that would sweep aside the opposition on such lifeless tracks, pitches that do not make entertaining and captivating cricket, imo. Also, the fact that England do not have bowlers that can still run through a side when conditions are unhelpful, ie a mystery spinner or a genuine paceman.

I don't blame Bangladesh for preparing such tracks, but there does need to be better balance in the pitches to ensure a good contest, those pitches are just too heavily in favour of batsmen. Good batsmen will still score runs in bowler friendly English conditions.