Bangladesh: Improving?

[pup11]

Bangladesh defeated Sri lanka comprehensively in the league match and just marginally lost the final. In their last ODI series at home against New Zealand, Bangladesh won the first ODI but went on to lose the series 2-1. So in the last 5 ODI home matches against the Top 8 teams, Bangladesh have won 2 of them which gives them a 40% win ratio which isn't bad at all.Within a couple of years Bangladesh can match sides like New Zealand, Sri lanka, England, West Indies in ODIs.

Even if that happens, which i doubt, then that might only happen when Bangers play these teams in their own backyard, but i just can't see them doing well away from home, and i think the fact that Bangers are looking more competitive nowadays has got more to do with other teams getting direr rather than Bangers improving.

 

[DaRick]

They are getting into these so-called winning positions, but as soon as a partnership begins to form or a couple of wickets fall, an element of 'here we go again' creeps in. They do not have experiences of winning Test matches, they having nothing in terms of prior situations where they have won games, to call on. It is this total lack of knowing how to win that is harming their progression.

I agree fully with this. We saw it happen to Australia throughout the Test series (who threw away positions of obvious advantage one too many times).

As for Bangladesh, they are certainly improving, at least in the bowling department. At times, their bowling attack looks capable of taking 20 wickets in a Test match and turning would-be no contests into humdingers - that's certainly a start. However, their batting remains as pathetically fragile as ever, meaning that their bowlers generally have little of worth to bowl at.

Once the Bangladeshi batting improves, they will become a competitive (if not great) Test and ODI team. I don't know what you'd need to achieve this, though. Talent has never been the problem (witness Shariar Nafees); infrastructure (given Bangladesh's unfortunate economic and geographical positions) is.

 

[_Ed_]

Within a couple of years Bangladesh can match sides like New Zealand, Sri lanka, England, West Indies in ODIs.

I don't understand why NZ is constantly grouped in the lower half of ODI teams. Tests, sure, but we're actually pretty good in ODIs.

 

[Uppercut]

I don't understand why NZ is constantly grouped in the lower half of ODI teams. Tests, sure, but we're actually pretty good in ODIs.

Annoys me no end. NZ are a top-quality ODI side.

 

[Evermind]

Yeah. Among the top 8 teams, just about any team is capable of beating any other depending on which side of the bed the players wake up on that particular day.

SL also don't deserve to be in the bottom rung: they slaughtered India in Asia cup.

 

[James90]

The team isn't improving. A few players are stepping up though.

They improved dramatically after their ODI win against India on the day of the tsunami, right to the 2007 WC. There's no way they'd have lost to Zimbabwe a year ago, though.

 

[tooextracool]

Thing is, I don't think Sri Lanka have ever had a good team on paper. They are statistically a good team even if their players don't statistically compare well with the rest of the world. They've never had an ODI batsman averaging over 40 (let alone 35) and besides Murali and possibly Vaas, their bowling has always been substandard. Yet they were a good ODI unit because they somehow managed to make ends meet. I don't know why, but compare the star power of India with Sri Lanka - yet the two teams have an almost identical ODI record in recent years.

I always imagined SL to be a bit like New Zealand when it came to ODIs. They don't have that great of a team on paper, i.e. their batting averages tend to be low, bowling averages high, with a handful of exceptions. But somehow they still manage to be a decent ODI unit. Unlike India and Pakistan who have (or had) the stars to be world beaters but somehow didn't manage it.

To be honest, I dont think Sri Lanka have ever had a particularly great team. Even when they won the 96 world cup, they did it with an ordinary team that was custom made for the conditions and played above themselves. If the 96 world cup was held in Australia or England, they would have struggled to make the semis. They are limited to the conditions and with the likes of Vaas and Murali in their side, on slower wickets, they became a force because it suited their batsmen and their bowlers to the pill ala 2007 world cup. However, I dont particularly rate the current side, because its even worse than the sides of yesteryear. Good luck to them, and good luck to Mendis because at the moment it seems like hes going to be more valuable to his side than Murali ever was.

 

[tooextracool]

Prasad>>>>Broad in terms of potential tbh.

I have to say I havent seen much of Prasad so I cant really comment on that. From what I saw of him in the test series against India I thought him to be extremely mediocre, and it would take a really convincing argument that someone with an average of 39 @ 5.78 while playing against the likes of Bangladesh and Zimbabwe has more potential than someone who has taken wickets across the globe. Lets not forget that Prasad is older too, so its not like he has that card to hold up against Broad either.

 

[Uppercut]

I have to say I havent seen much of Prasad so I cant really comment on that. From what I saw of him in the test series against India I thought him to be extremely mediocre, and it would take a really convincing argument that someone with an average of 39 @ 5.78 while playing against the likes of Bangladesh and Zimbabwe has more potential than someone who has taken wickets across the globe. Lets not forget that Prasad is older too, so its not like he has that card to hold up against Broad either.

Was referring to tests. Broad is an excellent ODI bowler but carries no threat in tests (where he has an absolutely rotten record). Prasad has a lot of raw pace to work with, although fair call on his age, i didn't realise he was 25. Still, an attack of Prasad-Murali-Mendis-Malinga isn't exactly weak.

 

[tooextracool]

Was referring to tests. Broad is an excellent ODI bowler but carries no threat in tests (where he has an absolutely rotten record). Prasad has a lot of raw pace to work with, although fair call on his age, i didn't realise he was 25. Still, an attack of Prasad-Murali-Mendis-Malinga isn't exactly weak.

Were you impressed from what you saw off him against India or bangladesh?

 

[krkode]

Broad strikes me as someone like Irfan Pathan. May not be all that solid of a test bowler but given enough chances I'm sure he'll work his average into the mid-30s. On the other hand he will be a valuable asset in ODIs if he keeps up the batting prowess he showed against South Africa.

 

[tooextracool]

Broad strikes me as someone like Irfan Pathan. May not be all that solid of a test bowler but given enough chances I'm sure he'll work his average into the mid-30s. On the other hand he will be a valuable asset in ODIs if he keeps up the batting prowess he showed against South Africa.

I think Broad has a lot of potential with the ball alone, but hes been picked way too early in tests. For someone his age, he has a fairly good action that isnt going to make him injury prone, and he is able to land the ball fairly consistently in good areas at a decent pace. I realize that he still has a lot to do in terms of variety and doing different things with the ball, but hes less than 23 and hes impressed almost everyone whos captained him with his composure and his thinking ability. Give him a few years, and bar injury he'll be one of the best bowlers going around.

 

[Uppercut]

Were you impressed from what you saw off him against India or bangladesh?

I only saw a few overs of him against Bangladesh. He looked pretty good, but his pace was down from when i saw him against India, where he was proper fast-and-erratic (but not as erratic as his figures would suggest). Got really good batsmen out too, with good balls- the actual wickets were moreso bowling quality rather than batsman error IIRC.

 

[Furball]

SL also don't deserve to be in the bottom rung: they slaughtered India in Asia cup.

Yes they do, Sri Lanka's ODI batting is currently worse than hopeless.