Shakib Al Hasan vs The Great All Rounders

[akilana]

@JediBrah Not talking about England in England though. I agree him facing England in their conditions would be a bigger challenge. But Shakib didn't get runs against England at home, and that's being used against him too. Can't have it both ways.

Runs against herath in SL > runs against England at home.

Given that England's strength is their pace attack and them being one of the best touring team in the world, runs against them are equally valuable. If Shakib had scored more runs and led them to win over England, it would have been a bigger deal than beating SL

 

[TheJediBrah]

@JediBrah Not talking about England in England though. I agree him facing England in their conditions would be a bigger challenge. But Shakib didn't get runs against England at home, and that's being used against him too. Can't have it both ways.

Runs against herath in SL > runs against England at home.

Ah I see, misread your post. I'd agree with you in that case.

From what I see it's all just a bit of guess work at this stage. He hasn't done much wrong and if someone wants to rate him as one of the greats then I wouldn't have a problem with it. Likewise if someone insists that they don't rate him because of his lack of exposure then that's fine too. Neither opinion is objectively right or wrong for mine.

 

[honestbharani]

I still maintain he is in that Tier 2.5 for me. And with more consistency and hopefully more games, he should end his career as a Tier 2 allrounder.

 

[Zinzan]

I just find the argument that "Shakib is tier 4/6/12/743 because he hasn't played enough against Aus/SA/India" to be so perverse. People say it like it's so obvious or so easy to judge when it is pure guesswork.

Here's the good news; we'll very soon find out since barring injury he will face both those sides in their backyard in the not too distance future, hence why I'm reserving my judgement before comparing him to players who consistently faced the tops sides of their eras.

 

[Zinzan]

Yeah pretty much exactly what I was saying if I'm understanding correctly?

Yeah I was agreeing with you. I don't only reply to disagree....

 

[vcs]

I checked at those couple of 5-fers in SA way back in '08 someone had mentioned, and both times SA scored 400+ and won by and innings. Those type of 5-fers don't carry quite so much water for me.

Plenty of Murali's 5-wicket hauls can be discounted by the same logic. Or Kumble's efforts in Australia in '03-'04, or Jadeja's first innings performance in the last match..

 

[Zinzan]

Plenty of Murali's 5-wicket hauls can be discounted by the same logic. Or Kumble's efforts in Australia in '03-'04, or Jadeja's first innings performance in the last match..

That is correct, many a bowler has taken what was effectively a meaningless 5-fer, when their side was so far behind it didn't even matter and the winning team was playing high-risk cricket for quick runs before a declaration etc. It's not exclusive to Shakib, I only mentioned it since someone had talked up those expensive 5-fers as a big point in his favour.

 

[cnerd123]

I mean as long as yo are logically consistent applying that disclaimer to a bowler's five wicket hauls IDM, but then you're going to have to give big props to 3/40 kinda spells that wreck the heart of a batting lineup but don't show up in any easily available statistics.

 

[vcs]

So now we can add "Wanker 5-ers" along side "Wanker Runs" in the CW lexicon

 

[Zinzan]

I mean as long as yo are logically consistent applying that disclaimer to a bowler's five wicket hauls IDM, but then you're going to have to give big props to 3/40 kinda spells that wreck the heart of a batting lineup but don't show up in any easily available statistics.

Again, I didn't go out of my way to pick on Shakib's returns against SA until someone talked them up, and upon reflection I discovered they were pretty meaningless given SA scored 400+ in both innings and won both Tests by innings margins. VCS is quite correct about that being the case with others and I'd pick on those too is someone mentioned a time Murali got 5-180 when the opposition scored 400+ & his side lost by an innings.

 

[cnerd123]

Again, I didn't go out of my way to pick on Shakib's returns against SA until someone talked them up, and upon reflection I discovered they were pretty meaningless given SA scored 400+ in both innings and won both Tests by innings margins. VCS is quite correct about that being the case with others and I'd pick on those too is someone mentioned a time Murali got 5-180 when the opposition scored 400+ & his side lost by an innings.

what does this have to do with my post

 

[Zinzan]

what does this have to do with my post

That I wouldn't go out of my way to look for either those 3-40 spells or 5-150 unless someone presented it to me.

 

[cnerd123]

That I wouldn't go out of my way to look for either those 3-40 spells or 5-150 unless someone presented it to me.

I didn't ask you to?

Do you place high value on 3-40 spells based on your logic tho

 

[Zinzan]

I didn't ask you to?

Do you place high value on 3-40 spells based on your logic tho

Sure do, especially when it's the cream of the batting and it's instrumental in dismissing the opposition cheaply. Who wouldn't value those spells?

In fact that's been Wagner to a tee in the last 2-3 years.

 

[honestbharani]

The no good bowlers around logic is nonsense really. It usually means the opposition batsmen end up being extra careful against you and with no pressure from the other end, you are ending up earning all of your wickets, which need not be the case when a bowler is part of a good bowling group. So basically its selective BS and not something I would set my stall on. A 5/150 on a track like Ranchi on days 1 and 2 is worth far mroe than a 3/40 on a raging turner, for instance.

 

[Zinzan]

A 5/150 on a track like Ranchi on days 1 and 2 is worth far mroe than a 3/40 on a raging turner, for instance.

Well that's another argument altogether if you're suddenly giving scenarios when one instance was a road and the other a turner. 5/150 in the context we were discussing wasn't valuable at all.

 

[honestbharani]

Which context though? Shakb would have bowled a lot on roads any which way you look at it. Or at best, conditions least suited to his style if you are talking about his RSA performances.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Plenty of Murali's 5-wicket hauls can be discounted by the same logic. Or Kumble's efforts in Australia in '03-'04, or Jadeja's first innings performance in the last match..

Yes, I don't see the problem

 

[OverratedSanity]

I don't claim to have watched the tests where Shakib got those 5fers in SA, but a cursory glance at the scorecard shows that:

- in one of the tests, Shakib took 6/99. This included a spell where he took the wickets of Kallis, Amla and de Villiers in the space of 4 overs to reduce SA to 134/5. At this point, SA still trailed Bangladesh's first innings by 120. This is the complete opposite of a useless spell.

2nd Test: South Africa v Bangladesh at Centurion, Nov 26-28, 2008 | Cricket | ESPN Cricinfo

- The other one had him take 5-130 in the first innings. SA were 352-3 and eventually ended up 441 allout, with Shakib basically single handedly responsible for SA losing 7 wickets for 85.

1st Test: South Africa v Bangladesh at Bloemfontein, Nov 19-22, 2008 | Cricket | ESPN Cricinfo

That Bangladesh are a **** team and could only get like 150 in their innings that followed doesn't render his spell useless from a performance standpoint. It wasn't a spell in the second innings where the opposition are going for declaration runs. It's in the first innings when the match is still alive. If he'd got all his wickets after SA were 500+, I'd agree but here he clearly kept the game alive when SA could easily have stomped their way to 600.

Again, I didn't watch the matches and I don't have any idea how well Shakib actually bowled but even a brief look at the scorecard makes it clear his two 5fers weren't anywhere close to being written off as "useless". You wanted context, there it is.

 

[vcs]

Yes, I don't see the problem

Sure you don't.

Same holds for some of Warne's efforts in the 2005 Ashes FTR