*Official* Bangladesh in England

[Goughy]

True but he has only had one full season of that and improved as it went on.How good he is/could end up being is unknown and does he have the mentality to succeed at the highest level,we won't know till he plays there.

Im not a fan of that attitude. Frankly, give me a crack then as you dont know until you try. The skill is in evaluating talent and not desperately throwing **** against the wall and hoping some sticks.

 

[Prince EWS]

Im not a fan of that attitude. Frankly, give me a crack then as you dont know until you try. The skill is in evaluating talent and not desperately throwing **** against the wall and hoping some sticks.

Yep completely AWTA. What I tried (with much less clarity) to say before.

 

[FBU]

Nah, I don't really care how many pretty boundaries he hit. His team lost, heavily. And they always lose. And Tamim is by far their best player (21 or not). Talent isn't just about playing attacking shots you know, at least in test cricket. Its also about survival and temperament.

Look, I'm not blaming a 21 year old for playing like a 21 year old, but I disagree with the people who say 'Oh, he should obviously keep playing like that all the time. Run a ball 50s and 100s put the opponent on the back foot.' Well they don't, because as soon as tamim gets out, bangladesh seem to physically wilt. Tamim sets the tone, and the other batsman try to follow it, except they aren't good enough.

Like I say, I wouldn't blame him, but I'd definitely encourage him to change his outlook. He needs to adapt to situations eventually.

in the match

v Anderson (4 overs)
11 dot balls 10 singles 2 threes and 1 boundary.

v Finn (4.3 overs)
14 dot balls 8 singles 1 two and 4 boundaries

v Bresnan (12.4 overs)
49 dot balls 8 singles 4 twos 15 boundaries

v Swann (5.3 overs)
22 dot balls 6 singles 2 twos 3 boundaries and two sixes

I think it was all those swishes and misses that looked as if he was being irresponsible but he did spend 22 overs playing normally. Looks as if he preferred facing Bresnan and Swann and let his partner face the other two.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Im not a fan of that attitude. Frankly, give me a crack then as you dont know until you try. The skill is in evaluating talent and not desperately throwing **** against the wall and hoping some sticks.

Well they have obviously identified him as a talent as he has been dragged around the world to sit on his arse for most of the last 6 months as part of squads.The point i am making is that we should throw him in instead of going back to Sidebottom who won't get 10 wickets in all 5 ashes tests should he be lucky enough to play.Shahzad might do an awful lot better but until we see him at a higher level nobody knows.

 

[FBU]

Well they have obviously identified him as a talent as he has been dragged around the world to sit on his arse for most of the last 6 months as part of squads.The point i am making is that we should throw him in instead of going back to Sidebottom who won't get 10 wickets in all 5 ashes tests should he be lucky enough to play.Shahzad might do an awful lot better but until we see him at a higher level nobody knows.

If Bresnan was in the squad because he can bat then Shahzad should be his replacement as he has a first class batting average of 32.90.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Am I the only one who's hoping Finn will move ahead of Anderson in the pecking order for the Ashes? In my eyes he's already a better option.

The thought of Jimmy Anonymous 'leading' our attack over there just doesn't fill me with hope. He's a good 4th seamer because he's situational (ball swinging), not a guy who can lead the bowling consistently. I don't think you could have a 9-10-11 of Anderson-Onions-Finn and England would simply need 5 bowlers. For me it would be Swann, Broad, Onions, Finn plus one other over in Australia. I just don't see Anderson padding out his series figures over there with cloud cover 5-fers.

 

[akilana]

I think it would be foolish for Tamim to try to save the match given the support(or lack of it) by his team mates. It would be better to give the team some momentum so the others could cash in. A bit like Sehwag's innings of 80s against England while chasing 380s. If Sachin and co didn't win the match after Sehwag gone, we wouldn't be talking about how Sehwag should have batted more patiently. It's the way he plays. He gave his side some momentum and Sachin and co guided Indian to victory. If Bangaladesh had better players, then there is merit arguing that he should have batted more overs but even then I would argue that he should be playing the way he knows because the way he batted the momentum shifted to Bangaladesh. Had Sachin, Dravid and Laxman followed him and added another 150, we would be talking about what a great innings Tamim played, he gave the side the momentum, MOM etc.

 

[wpdavid]

If Bresnan was in the squad because he can bat then Shahzad should be his replacement as he has a first class batting average of 32.90.

Once Broad's back, the batting of our 3rd seamer should be irrelavant as he's coming in at 10 or 11 afaics. I know Broad isn't playing on Friday, but if we need runs from our bowlers against the Bang attack then we might as well give up and go home.

 

[Uppercut]

Am I the only one who's hoping Finn will move ahead of Anderson in the pecking order for the Ashes? In my eyes he's already a better option.

The thought of Jimmy Anonymous 'leading' our attack over there just doesn't fill me with hope. He's a good 4th seamer because he's situational (ball swinging), not a guy who can lead the bowling consistently. I don't think you could have a 9-10-11 of Anderson-Onions-Finn and England would simply need 5 bowlers. For me it would be Swann, Broad, Onions, Finn plus one other over in Australia. I just don't see Anderson padding out his series figures over there with cloud cover 5-fers.

Hmm. I'm definitely leaning towards a four-man attack at the moment. Swann is England's best bowler, and this is true even on flat pitches, so with a five-man attack you'll just be rotating four specialist bowlers from one end a significant amount of the time.

A lot can change between now and the Ashes, though.

 

[Pothas]

Yeah firmly against the 5 man attack myself, weakens the batting considerably and I don't think the beneift of the extra bowler even comes close to outweighing that.

 

[FBU]

Once Broad's back, the batting of our 3rd seamer should be irrelavant as he's coming in at 10 or 11 afaics. I know Broad isn't playing on Friday, but if we need runs from our bowlers against the Bang attack then we might as well give up and go home.

you would think so.

Taking out Strauss and Trott -

Cook 7
Pietersen 18
Bell 17
Morgan 44
Prior 16
Bresnan 25
Swann 22
Anderson 13
Finn 3*
Extras 31

 

[Jungle Jumbo]

you would think so.

Taking out Strauss and Trott -

Cook 7
Pietersen 18
Bell 17
Morgan 44
Prior 16
Bresnan 25
Swann 22
Anderson 13
Finn 3*
Extras 31

That's a bit reductionist though, it's not like any of them bar Cook walked in at a point where England were in a weak position, and Cook himself got a rough decision.

 

[Uppercut]

you would think so.

Taking out Strauss and Trott -

Cook 7
Pietersen 18
Bell 17
Morgan 44
Prior 16
Bresnan 25
Swann 22
Anderson 13
Finn 3*
Extras 31

Haha I hope your tongue is quite firmly in your cheek here.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Sid or Shahzad then? Colours to the mast.

Honestly haven't seen much of the latter, so whistling in the dark to some extent. Not sure I like the idea of test caps being chucked around like confetti tho and I can't recall anyone pushing his cart before he suddenly appeared in our touring squad.

If he's fit I'm leaning towards Sidearse myself.

 

[King Pietersen]

Sidearse'll probably do a better job, but I think Flower rates Shahzad, so I reckon he'll get a go. I'd be interested to see how he bowls with the red ball, haven't really seen too much of him. The Old Trafford deck could suit his extra pace too, so I think they'll give him a shot. His extra batting makes him a more like-for-like replacement for Bresnan also.

 

[Jungle Jumbo]

Bangladesh considering playing Razzak for one of the seamers, not really sure how I feel about that.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Bangladesh considering playing Razzak for one of the seamers, not really sure how I feel about that.

If I were feeling charitable I'd say it was a pragmatic call; if I were feeling less well disposed I'd say it smacks of funk. OT supposedly the quickest track in England just now. As average as the Bangla seamers are I'd say the selectors have to back them.

 

[Pothas]

Plus the fact of course that Razzak is somewhat less than good.

One of Englands favourite things is to pick a replacemen who then goes in ahead of those already in the squad so would expect that to happen,

 

[Jarquis]

Has taken spin as well over the years though. Would be more worried about facing Razzaq on a turning, bouncing deck then some of the "pace" we saw in the first Test.

 

[Pothas]

Would rather face Razzak than Mahmudullah though and the latter normally gets underbowled when Razzak is in this side.