Will Bangladesh ever be good?

[Anil]

They've only had 5 years to develop, and far less time between games to practise what they've learned.

but the matches themselves are the best practice....aren't they? rather than practising in the nets for 10 months and playing for two months...? and that was the whole purpose of these matches, so that they would develop faster.....

marc, you and a few others used the argument earlier that not enough countries were playing against bang, not all of them were fielding their best teams and because of that their development will be slower....now you are contradicting yourself by arguing from the opposite end...that because they are playing more matches, they are developing slower......

so according to your new theory, if bang had been playing say 2 tests per year for 10 years and had been "practising" for the rest of the time, their record would've been much better....

 

[Sanz]

you mean playing more number of games in less time actually led to a more pathetic record rather than the side itself being pathetic all the while...??? and for the above mentioned international sides who got far less quality exposure in their first five years, it worked to their advantage....??? how do you figure that? i mean what is the logic behind that statement?

Logic is that it takes time and not (no of tests played in one year )for any cricket nation to come up with a group of talented performers required to win a test series. It took India, Pakistan, NZ, SL, Zim more than 20 years and it the English, Aussies, WI and Saffies were not patient in the 30s or 40s and had attitude like yours we would still be waiting for Test Status like Kenya.

Look at the Bangladeshi team of today, they already have talents like Md. Ashraful, Enamul Haque Jr., with time they are definately going to do better. Here is one simple logic, let's see if you can understand and answer it correctly :-

Team A plays 50 tests in one year, Team B plays 50 tests in 25 years, Do you expect Team A to be at the same level as Team B after 50 tests ??

 

[Sanz]

...and your point???

Exactly opposite of the point you were trying to make.

 

[Anil]

Logic is that it takes time and not (no of tests played in one year )for any cricket nation to come up with a group of talented performers required to win a test series. It took India, Pakistan, NZ, SL, Zim more than 20 years and it the English, Aussies, WI and Saffies were not patient in the 30s or 40s and had attitude like yours we would still be waiting for Test Status like Kenya.

Look at the Bangladeshi team of today, they already have talents like Md. Ashraful, Enamul Haque Jr., with time they are definately going to do better. Here is one simple logic, let's see if you can understand and answer it correctly :-

Team A plays 50 tests in one year, Team B plays 50 tests in 25 years, Do you expect Team A to be at the same level as Team B after 50 tests ??

first of all your example is too extreme, no team plays 50 tests a year, the average is more like 10-15, maybe less i'm not sure....secondly, it depends on the team, its infrastructure, its potential, its hunger to succeed at international level and its ability to raise its level of play, assuming all these underlying conditions remain the same for teams a and b, and assuming that a plays 10 tests a year for 5 years, at the end of 5 years, a would have played 50 tests to b's 10 and a would have developed much, much more than b at the same stage....just from sheer hard-won experience...i also feel that team b's position after 25 long years with 50 tests would be inferior to that of a after 50 tests...

and what else is the purpose of making bang play so many tests against quality opposition?

 

[Sanz]

once again, your point???

If winning the series is the criteria of improvement, then BD have already done that, that too 15 years quicker than India.

 

[Anil]

Exactly opposite of the point you were trying to make.

but it doesn't prove anything at all unfortunately...

 

[Anil]

If winning the series is the criteria of improvement, then BD have already done that, that too 15 years quicker than India.

again the time is not 1/5th as relevant as you are making it out to be...it's exposure, experience that counts for much, much more if the talent and will to win is there....

 

[Sanz]

first of all your example is too extreme, no team plays 50 tests a year, the average is more like 10-15, maybe less i'm not sure....secondly, it depends on the team, its infrastructure, its potential, its hunger to succeed at international level and its ability to raise its level of play, assuming all these underlying conditions remain the same for teams a and b, and assuming that a plays 10 tests a year for 5 years, at the end of 5 years, a would have played 50 tests to b's 10 and a would have developed much, much more than b at the same stage....just from sheer hard-won experience...

Ever heard the terms 'Talent Pool and evolution of talent' ? Are you saying that the talent evolution is same in 5 years and 20 years especially in a cricket mad country like Bangladesh. Potential isn't sold in the market, it has to be found, nurtured over and over again, BD is on right track and in 5 years they have found some really good cricketers. I saw BD play in 2000 and saw them against India in 2004/05 and the difference between the two BD teams is huge.

And may be my example was bit extreme, but the point remains that 5 years you see only one genreration of talent, in 20-25 years you see at least 3 to 4 genration, generation those have grown up watching international cricket and have the talent and desire to succeed internationally.

and what else is the purpose of making bang play so many tests against quality opposition?

Ever heard of ICC's 10 year plan. That is the only purpose, ICC has no other purpose. If you are a mediocre talent, you will remain mediocre no matter how many times you play with Australia. It's only with time and with the arrival of real talents mediocre players will be flushed out

 

[Sanz]

but it doesn't prove anything at all unfortunately...

It proves much to those who are willing to open their eyes, read andare willing to understand simple logic.

 

[Anil]

It proves much to those who are willing to open their eyes, read andare willing to understand simple logic.

well...let's see, your "logic" hasn't worked in real life so far, so let's wait for the 10 years and see what happens since we are stuck with bang no matter what....

 

[Sanz]

again the time is not 1/5th as relevant as you are making it out to be...it's exposure, experience that counts for much, much more if the talent and will to win is there....

Time is very relevant. It's like asking a newborn to run and compete in a marathan with a 20 year old in 5 years of training and time. Will to win is there, Talent is coming up pretty well and it's just a matter of time.

 

[Anil]

And may be my example was bit extreme, but the point remains that 5 years you see only one genreration of talent, in 20-25 years you see at least 3 to 4 genration, generation those have grown up watching international cricket and have the talent and desire to succeed internationally.

let's wait for the 2nd generation of talent to come through for bang....and we'll see whether maximum time or maximum exposure is the way to go...and also whether any of these matter when the available talent is absolutely mediocre...

 

[Sanz]

well...let's see, your "logic" hasn't worked in real life so far, so let's wait for the 10 years and see what happens since we are stuck with bang no matter what....

Yeah, Let's wait for 10 years. That's what I am saying. If in next 10-15 years BD aren't able to compete with rest of the nations, then hell yes. Take their test status back.

 

[Anil]

Time is very relevant. It's like asking a newborn to run and compete in a marathan with a 20 year old in 5 years of training and time. Will to win is there, Talent is coming up pretty well and it's just a matter of time.

we'll see...won't we?

 

[marc71178]

so according to your new theory, if bang had been playing say 2 tests per year for 10 years and had been "practising" for the rest of the time, their record would've been much better....

Over 10-20 years they can develop new players and inprove the infrastructure for more than over 5 years.

 

[marc71178]

Team A plays 50 tests in one year, Team B plays 50 tests in 25 years, Do you expect Team A to be at the same level as Team B after 50 tests ??

One thing I do expect is Team A would be knackered, especially when you throw in a few silly ODI triangulars and Twenty20 bashes

 

[crickmate]

Some of the recent series of Bangladesh shows how statistics does not always tell you the truth. If you cannot see the improvement, compare this with their pre 2003 performances.

Bangladesh in Pakistan: As the commentator Sanjay Manjrekar said after the presentation ceremony that this series does not reflect what the result says. Bangladesh dominated most of the sessions of the test series. Only experience let them down. In one match they almost won. Thanks to the heroic innings by Inzy which saved Pakistan.

Bangladesh in West Indies: One of the test match was close enough to praise. And all of the ODI were very close. Only Brian Lara was the difference between Bangladesh and West Indies team in ODI.

India in Bangladesh: Nothing much to say about the test series, except Ahsraful's unbeaten 150. Which showed that he has the capablity to blow any good bowler of the world in his day. In 3 ODI, Bangladesh own 1 and another one was also pretty close.

Zimbabwe in Bangladesh: Bangladesh won the test and ODI series.

Bangladesh in England: In unfamiliar English condition it took some time to get themselves adjusted. The scoreboard shows they improved in each innigs, specially in Batting during the test series. They managed to get their highest score agains England in the last innigs. Aftab, Pailot, Javed Omer was promising. In ODI they managed to beat Australia convincingly. And they did that in style. One of the best run chasing in ODI history. In another match they gave Australia very tough time.


As we can see, they are giving more and more tough time to the opponents than they used to. This is only due to test status, now they are not afraid to play against any team, even Australia. Give them some time, they will make Richard eat earth and his computer.

 

[Beleg]

Bangladesh dominated most of the sessions of the test series

They dominated many/most? of the sessions of the Multan test not the whole series.

 

[Anil]

Over 10-20 years they can develop new players and inprove the infrastructure for more than over 5 years.

i sure hope so...but i am not betting too much on any significant improvements at least for the next 5 years or so...

 

[marc71178]

I beg to differ - I think they've now got a fairly settle bunch of players (and most of them are early 20s or younger) - they could form a decent side in the next few years.