• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

*Official* Bangladesh in England

Uppercut

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
popepouri said:
I agree with this. Given that he can't bat to a situation, he should be the one at 8.



and i agree with this.
Click to expand...
Sack Siddons? Hell no! He's done a great job. The quality of fielding is entirely unrecognisable from that of a couple of years ago. I honestly think Bangladesh are improving. They're not at the stage where they can even think about facing the English attack in overcast conditions, and I agree with Scaly that they should never have had to. But they're much better than they were. I don't think people are appreciating just how big a job making Bangladesh not terrible was. They were just so much direr in the first place than many were willing to admit.
 
Sir Alex

Sir Alex

Banned
Uppercut said:
Sack Siddons? Hell no! He's done a great job. The quality of fielding is entirely unrecognisable from that of a couple of years ago. I honestly think Bangladesh are improving. They're not at the stage where they can even think about facing the English attack in overcast conditions, and I agree with Scaly that they should never have had to. But they're much better than they were. I don't think people are appreciating just how big a job making Bangladesh not terrible was. They were just so much direr in the first place than many were willing to admit.
Click to expand...
Really begs the question apart from Tamim and Shakib, who have largely come up because of their inherent talent than any specialised coaching from Siddons imho, where has Bangladesh improved apart from their fielding in the last few years?

They still tend to ride on some individual performances but have largely come up woefully short. As someone said above, there is no such thing as "less mediocre". Bangladesh still is an opposition almost all full strength teams would be looking with anticipation of an easy and cheap way to better their records. Siddons has to have something to show tangible in his record as a coach to rightfully retain his place.
 
Uppercut

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Sir Alex said:
Bangladesh still is an opposition almost all full strength teams would be looking with anticipation of an easy and cheap way to better their records.
Click to expand...
This is exactly what I'm talking about. If you think Siddons- or any coach- was capable of changing this in the course of two years then you seriously underestimated how bad Bangladesh were. Or you think we live in a cheesy American sports movie.

Fact is, this was always going to be an absolutely massive task, and massive tasks take a long time. The improvement in fielding makes a massive difference, especially for sides with weak attacks that don't generally make that many chances. Two years ago England would have made 600/x dec in the first innings here, but now they're scraping over 400. Shaving a couple of hundred runs off your opponent's first innings score is a huge improvement on their last visit to England when they took about three wickets in total. It sounds wrong-headed to speak positives of a team that's so bad, but they're considerably better than they were.
 
GIMH

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
Sir Alex said:
2 of them against Bangaldesh, 1 at home against WI.
Click to expand...
Can only beat what's put in front of you. That five also includes a win against Australia and a draw in South Africa. let's brush them under the table shall we?

Jog on
 
Briony

Briony

International Debutant
Sir Alex said:
Would've easily been 1-3 loss in SA. But I see your point :)
Click to expand...
Yes interesting, the heroics of Collingwood and the injury to Steyn which basically took him out for the first two tests probably meant England got away with a draw. And the injury to de Wet on the last day in Cape Town didn't help either. Still England would have taken a draw before the series. It's hard to read much into performances against Bangladesh.
 
Langeveldt

Langeveldt

Soutie
flibbertyjibber said:
Finn is no McGrath but then again nor are Bollinger,Siddle and the rest of the Aussie bowlers.Two evenly matched sides with England now unbeaten in 5 series.
Click to expand...

He doesn't move the ball in the air though, and until he does that I'd fancy my mother to bat a day against him.. In my day we had the likes of Bedser and "Fiery" Fred Trueman, and let me tell you, those men could bowl
 
Langeveldt

Langeveldt

Soutie
Manee said:
Bangladesh suck.
Click to expand...
This

I am starved of real cricket. I was looking forward to listening to the cricket from England for a day.. When finally the real cricket arrives, a bunch of muppets get off the plane.. When do some real opposition arrive?
 
Top_Cat

Top_Cat

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Uppercut said:
This is exactly what I'm talking about. If you think Siddons- or any coach- was capable of changing this in the course of two years then you seriously underestimated how bad Bangladesh were. Or you think we live in a cheesy American sports movie.

Fact is, this was always going to be an absolutely massive task, and massive tasks take a long time. The improvement in fielding makes a massive difference, especially for sides with weak attacks that don't generally make that many chances. Two years ago England would have made 600/x dec in the first innings here, but now they're scraping over 400. Shaving a couple of hundred runs off your opponent's first innings score is a huge improvement on their last visit to England when they took about three wickets in total. It sounds wrong-headed to speak positives of a team that's so bad, but they're considerably better than they were.
Click to expand...
Couldn't agree more. The Siddons baggers can get ****ed, the man is a legend and could probably still out-field half the blokes around. Bangladesh have improved by huge amounts in the past two years and it's no coincidence. So what if they're still easybeats? It's pretty clear that they're harder to beat than they were.

Siddons has an aura and that's from being part of many, many winning teams himself. Even SA made a Shield final and won the thing the following year when he was captain. SA stole him from Vic for precisely that reason; he's a natural leader, was a gun batter and comparable to Mark Waugh in the field. Put simply he's a winner and teams like Bangladesh will reap the benefits of having a bloke like that around soon enough provided they support him.
 
Last edited:
flibbertyjibber

flibbertyjibber

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Siddons may have done some good things but he still hasn't got a clue about sorting out a decent batting order.Mahmudullah at 8,what is that all about?
 
Hurricane

Hurricane

Hall of Fame Member
Uppercut said:
This is exactly what I'm talking about. If you think Siddons- or any coach- was capable of changing this in the course of two years then you seriously underestimated how bad Bangladesh were. Or you think we live in a cheesy American sports movie.

Fact is, this was always going to be an absolutely massive task, and massive tasks take a long time. The improvement in fielding makes a massive difference, especially for sides with weak attacks that don't generally make that many chances. Two years ago England would have made 600/x dec in the first innings here, but now they're scraping over 400. Shaving a couple of hundred runs off your opponent's first innings score is a huge improvement on their last visit to England when they took about three wickets in total. It sounds wrong-headed to speak positives of a team that's so bad, but they're considerably better than they were.
Click to expand...
Yeah I like this post.

Bangers fielding has improved out of sight. They were laughable just a couple of years ago now I see them being on par with most international teams. If they had someone like Mortaza back they would look even better as a unit.

I used to be an advocate for Bangers having test status being taken away from them. But I have changed my tune.
 
Sir Alex

Sir Alex

Banned
Uppercut said:
This is exactly what I'm talking about. If you think Siddons- or any coach- was capable of changing this in the course of two years then you seriously underestimated how bad Bangladesh were. Or you think we live in a cheesy American sports movie.

Fact is, this was always going to be an absolutely massive task, and massive tasks take a long time. The improvement in fielding makes a massive difference, especially for sides with weak attacks that don't generally make that many chances. Two years ago England would have made 600/x dec in the first innings here, but now they're scraping over 400. Shaving a couple of hundred runs off your opponent's first innings score is a huge improvement on their last visit to England when they took about three wickets in total. It sounds wrong-headed to speak positives of a team that's so bad, but they're considerably better than they were.
Click to expand...
And yet manage to lose in 3 days? Says more about the pitch than actual state of Bang right? In this tour, they LOST 4 games and drew just the one, including 3 games which were finished within 3 days.

I can't see the "progress" Siddons has made in that respect tbh.
 
Uppercut

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
You're yet again forgetting how dire Bangladesh used to be. Have a look at how they did last time they toured England. For comparison's sake it might also be interesting to check out how the West Indies did in last year's two-match test series.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top