Do Bangladesh still deserve their minnows tag?

[Zinzan]

Figured my following post from the NZ/Bangers thread should be a thread of it's own...

Following that series, I'm reflecting on that pre-series debate about whether Bangers should still deserve the minnows tag or not.

There's no doubt they've improved from previous tours here & they were competitive in periods of games, but the fact they then invariably lost their bundle in all 7 out of 7 games in the tour & were white-washed in every form, even the white-ball forms where I really thought pre-series they might sneak 1 match, it's hard to push their case.

Add to that the fact NZ were fairly scratchy throughout and were a long way away from playing anywhere near their best cricket themselves, it's hard to remove that tag for mine. That is kind of what you would expect from a minnow side touring, that they would have some moments of competitiveness in some games, but still get whitewashed in the end.

I suppose it does depend of one's definition of what a minnow is so will vary from person to person, but I'm kind of on the fence with Bangers currently. If they are still to be considered a minnow, they're probably a little unlucky and certainly are a minnow on the improve, but by the same token they would be lucky to have the minnow tag taken away.


The question is.... Do Bangers still deserve their minnow tag, or are you like me still on the fence?

 

[indiaholic]

They have moved from everyday minnows to coin toss minnows. From certainty to having a probability distribution.

 

[Burgey]

Yeah imo, even though they aren't as bad as they once were.

 

[Zinzan]

They have moved from everyday minnows to coin toss minnows. From certainty to having a probability distribution.

Nice way to sum it up this.

 

[Zinzan]

Yeah imo, even though they aren't as bad as they once were.

Yeah, I'm probably leaning this way, but can''t quite get my ass off the fence, so will give them the benefit of the doubt.

 

[Athlai]

Minnows = teams that don't even belong to play this level of the game. No hopers who get thrashed at home and away that are pretty much worthless when looking at how your teams players play against them. Like Zimbabwe now, the Irish, the Afghanis, or the Dutch. Teams that really can't even feasibly compete on any level in the hardest form of the game with an actual Test team.

Bangladesh have not been this in years, they've been quality at home for a while and have some decent players and a first class system that's beginning to actually bring fresh talent into the team that deserves to be playing at Test level.

Are they still one of the worst Test playing teams? Yes. But they're already arguably no longer 9th and their victory against England has shown they're going to be difficult to beat at home for the majority of Test teams. It's been pretty clear for a while now that Bangladesh deserve to be playing Test cricket, more or less always seems like that the greater part of CW just takes no interest unless they're playing against certain teams.

 

[Zinzan]

See I think being classed as 'minnows' and deserving Test status are slightly different things.

I actually happen to think the Test cricket NZ played between about 1991 & 1996 (with the exceptions of the win over Aus in '93, and a test win but series lost in SA in '94) was basically of minnow status. Didn't mean we didn't deserve Test status, but we were easy beats. That was the period SL managed to beat us in a Test series at home in 1995 (still my low point watching) & we drew 0-0 in a 3 test series at home vs Zimbabwe. Depressing times.

NZ was also a Test minnow from their entry in 1930, pretty much until the 1970s. Didn't mean we didn't win the odd test here and there & were generally be competitive at home , but we were clearly the minnows of Test cricket until SL came along in the early 80s.

 

[Athlai]

Yes no doubt New Zealand and Sri Lanka were minnows themselves for decades.

 

[S.Kennedy]

They are improving.

 

[SteveNZ]

Yeah, they're still a minnow. An improved minnow but a minnow. I think their mental fortitude, or complete lack thereof, leaves them stuck in that category - albeit at the peering over the top end. Certainly have enough guys with skills to be sneaking out of it, but this tour again showed they're not prepared to fight for victories outside their ideal conditions. They came up against a very, very average NZ side and were beaten badly in all three forms. And it wasn't like you could say they were Kiwi green seamers either.

 

[Burgey]

They are improving.

So is my teenage son's skincare regime, but he still gets spots.

 

[Athlai]

Yeah, they're still a minnow. An improved minnow but a minnow. I think their mental fortitude, or complete lack thereof, leaves them stuck in that category - albeit at the peering over the top end. Certainly have enough guys with skills to be sneaking out of it, but this tour again showed they're not prepared to fight for victories outside their ideal conditions. They came up against a very, very average NZ side and were beaten badly in all three forms. And it wasn't like you could say they were Kiwi green seamers either.

Are Pakistan minnows? We beat them comfortably while playing some very average cricket. We'd likely do the same to Sri Lanka. We'd probably be favourite to beat India at home too.

 

[Zinzan]

Are Pakistan minnows? We beat them comfortably while playing some very average cricket. We'd likely do the same to Sri Lanka. We'd probably be favourite to beat India at home too.

The difference is Pakistan have won before & have a history of NOT being a minnow, they had a bad series here, had slightly tougher pitches than Bangers overall I'd say & I think NZ played better against them.

But even so, had Pakistan come here with Banger's history of losing and came trying to prove they'd made great strides in recent times, then sure, after that tour, they wouldn't have done much for their case either, by losing every game on tour.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Absolutely. Still a long way off IMO

 

[vcs]

A Sri Lanka-Bangladesh home and away series would be pretty competitive right now, IMO.

 

[Shri]

Still minnows but they are getting smart finally. They should have taken their chances by preparing raging turners at home from the beginning to build some confidence. Better late than never but I dislike the team.

 

[SeamUp]

A Sri Lanka-Bangladesh home and away series would be pretty competitive right now, IMO.

I would say both have quite a few players with potential and an up-side than Pakistan right now ?

 

[SteveNZ]

Are Pakistan minnows? We beat them comfortably while playing some very average cricket. We'd likely do the same to Sri Lanka. We'd probably be favourite to beat India at home too.

I know you're being facetious when you ask if Pakistan are minnows less than 12 months after they were world No.1. Not at all the same.

What's Bangladesh's highest world ranking, it's 8 right? So yeah, they're still a minnow. Won two Tests away v West Indies 8 years ago, and one solitary one v England. Don't see how that launches you out of the minnow zone. And their slightly more impressive ODI/T20 record doesn't recover it.

 

[Bahnz]

If Bangladesh are minnows then I would say that both Sri Lanka and Pakistan are minnows too.

 

[Shri]

If the 2007 WC had had the KO stage after the group stage, it would have done wonders for Bangladeshi cricket.