The aforementioned Indian bowlers are fairly crap but the Bangladesh quicks have done nothing of any note, ever. Shaiful is more famous for the England batting cameo and owning McCullum, outside that, the guy leaks runs (career ER over 6) while Rubel is the same though less of a wicket taker. Both players have time on their side though and possibly more potential. Munaf will probably be bowling at 100kph time he is 30.At the risk of being a jinx or sounding a touch arrogant...I think Shaiful and Rubel are a better pace bowling pair than any 2 of Nehra/Munaf/Sreesanth.
Rubel went up to 87.7 MPH today. That's faster than any Indian quick this WC.
Shafiul has a pretty awesome SR, but his economy really is incredibly bad.The aforementioned Indian bowlers are fairly crap but the Bangladesh quicks have done nothing of any note, ever. Shaiful is more famous for the England batting cameo and owning McCullum, outside that, the guy leaks runs (career ER over 6) while Rubel is the same though less of a wicket taker. Both players have time on their side though and possibly more potential. Munaf will probably be bowling at 100kph time he is 30.
Really poor form from babyface. Rahim doesn't say boo to a goose and usually bottles it under pressure for Bangladesh on countless occasions yet gives it all the big man against a lesser cricketing nation. Fortunate Kervezee didn't whack him.Lol Rahim
Probably phrased it a bit wrong, but meant it as in they have more talent/potential than Nehra/Munaf/Sreesanth. Rubel's bowled quite decently this WC but his stats don't reflect it, and Shaiful has been quite impressive from his debut against England. And a pace trio of a fit Mortaza, Rubel and Shaiful will probably keep runs down better/take more wickets than a trio of Nehra/Munaf/Sreesanth.The aforementioned Indian bowlers are fairly crap but the Bangladesh quicks have done nothing of any note, ever. Shaiful is more famous for the England batting cameo and owning McCullum, outside that, the guy leaks runs (career ER over 6) while Rubel is the same though less of a wicket taker. Both players have time on their side though and possibly more potential. Munaf will probably be bowling at 100kph time he is 30.
Jonathon Trott may disagree with you on Shafiul not having done anything of any note.The aforementioned Indian bowlers are fairly crap but the Bangladesh quicks have done nothing of any note, ever. Shaiful is more famous for the England batting cameo and owning McCullum, outside that, the guy leaks runs (career ER over 6) while Rubel is the same though less of a wicket taker. Both players have time on their side though and possibly more potential. Munaf will probably be bowling at 100kph time he is 30.
I was very quiet last game as he actually recorded decent figures against a test playing nation but is fair game again.Was about to cue you deriding Razzak actually. Bit too late.
I liked Mahbubul Alam. What happened to him? He was capable of swinging it both ways and was fairly quick.Jonathon Trott may disagree with you on Shafiul not having done anything of any note.
I think it's easy to forget but they are both only around 20 years old and are asked to lead the attack. Mortaza is always injured and Shahadat Hossain even more inconsistent than themselves, so it's not been easy for them at the start of their careers without an experienced teammate to guide them, but they definitely have potential and have improved tremendously under Ian Pont. I think this two will be bowling for Bangladesh for many years.
Meanwhile Razzak ripping through the Dutch batsmen