NasserFan207
International Vice-Captain
Rankin ALWAYS does this.
Why do we continue bowling him at the death?
Why do we continue bowling him at the death?
Why not? There has been talk (of which I don't agree with ftr) that BD have improved a lot and they are playing at home with strong support against a minnow side.I wouldn't call it an upset.
My thoughts too, even though Razzak's gone now. I have absolutely no idea how wll Ireland play spin: my guess is that Joyce will be absolutely vital to their chances.This could well be a crucial partnership. 200 is competitive, 180 isn't.
200 should be more than enoughNah.. the Irish would get owned by the left arm spin but still should be a good game.
Because no-one else can do it either, I'd be guessing. Would've picked Cusack over White for exactly this reason.Rankin ALWAYS does this.
Why do we continue bowling him at the death?
Joyce, Portefield and N Obrien can play spin, the rest are basically useless.My thoughts too, even though Razzak's gone now. I have absolutely no idea how wll Ireland play spin: my guess is that Joyce will be absolutely vital to their chances.
White's not bad against the spinners.Joyce, Portefield and N Obrien can play spin, the rest are basically useless.
Botha or K'Obrien would easily be better.Because no-one else can do it either, I'd be guessing. Would've picked Cusack over White for exactly this reason.
Probably in this situation, yeah. When teams are looking to go big in the last couple of overs though (ie. a normal death bowling situation) I'd disagree though. Should just pick Cusack and not show him the ball until the 40th over.Botha or K'Obrien would easily be better.
Different pitch, and Bangladesh batted a lot better against India. I've actually seen Ireland bowl a lot better than this before; most of the bowlers were actually pretty disappointing IMO.In a way this bowling effort from the Irish does show up the Indian bowling attack.
I agree with your post in general. I guess it depends on how stringent you are with your definition of 'upset'. In my opinion, there has to be a massive gulf between the sides for an underdog win to be termed an upset. I wouldn't call England beating South Africa an upset, for instance. Fair enough if someone wants to classify every underdog win as an upset; not something I would do, however.Nah, it's definitely an upset if Ireland win this. Not a huge one, but definitely an upset in these conditions. There's not much between the teams but Bangladesh are definitely a little bit better and that difference is quite exaggerated at home.
It'd be akin to England beating South Africa, say.
Yeah I've no idea either mate. Noone said anything on air though.Does anyone know why no runs were given on when Razzak was given out but then reviewed it and was changed to not out, I'm sure theball went for a boundary. Seems a tad unfair if no runs are given off a wrong decision.
Well the best thing for cricket would be if Bangladesh maintained the standards they set against New Zealand but Ireland lifted and managed to top that.So cut about this, I basically always want Ireland to do well unless it's against England. However, for Bangladesh's sake as a team still trying to establish themselves I can't help but feel that losing here would be 2 steps back from what they achieved in New Zealand. They really ought to be beating teams like Ireland if they want to start being taken seriously.
A win for cricket is all I ask. Whatever that is.
Yeah, by "this" I meant the fact Bangladesh had been skittled for 200+**** all.Well the best thing for cricket would be if Bangladesh maintained the standards they set against New Zealand but Ireland lifted and managed to top that.
It hasn't really been like that at all though so far, sadly. Some really **** cricket from both teams. Dockrell was superb but everyone else (from both sides) has been 'inconsistent' at best.
Would've been gun if it was because Ireland bowled and fielded awesomely.Yeah, by "this" I meant the fact Bangladesh had been skittled for 200+**** all.