Well, apparentely he had been scoring some runs in the "National League" and thats why they picked him.crickmate said:Ya, Josh, I agree with you. But when you claim yourself an allrounder, you have to be strong either at batting or bowling. While I agree Alok Kapali is a very talented player, but he should be given some time to become more mature. Let him get some big score in local matches and with Bangladesh A team. Then take him back.
But it doesn't work that way, the more wickets you have remaining the more runs you will get on average.Prince EWS said:If all the bowlers had bowled 10 overs, 0/40, Bangladesh would have won comfortably, so Alok's bowling cant be condemned.
Not if the bowling is good at the death.Scaly piscine said:But it doesn't work that way, the more wickets you have remaining the more runs you will get on average.
Not true - did Afridi destroy some good bowling the other night?Prince EWS said:Not if the bowling is good at the death.
No, he destroyed some ordinary bowling.marc71178 said:Not true - did Afridi destroy some good bowling the other night?
Full balls are ordinary now?Prince EWS said:No, he destroyed some ordinary bowling.
Yes, they're not very good. But we knew that already, and I don't see how that takes away from their test series victory. You have to start somewhere, and frequently that will mean beating an ordinary side.JASON said:The fact that this weak Zim side can compete equally with Bangladesh , is A really telling indication of where Bangla are in ODIs.
In fact Zim could quite possibly have levelled the away Test series had they played a touch better.
That's a pretty loose definition of all-rounder, and one that would run to most International players.Chubb said:Half of all Zimbabwean players are allrounders these days, Rogers, Ewing, Utseya, Hondo (A first-class hundred or 80-odd, can't remember which), Ervine, Blignaut, Keith Dabengwa, Andre Hoffman, Gregg Haakonsen, Matt Townshend, Taibu, Gav Rennie, Grant Flower, Streak, Tawanda Mupariwa, Elton Chigumbura, Stu Matsikenyeri, Hamilton Masakadza ... the list is practically endless.
I think it's born out of the fact most of them learn cricket at school, and schoolboy performance is unpredictable, and also they tend to have the very best, most naturally talented cricketers do a lot for the side.
yeah i don't think any other test playing countries have less than 4 million people - oops should i make that 4 million and one now lolChubb said:Yeah I know what you mean. Zimbabwe and NZ are quite small nations in terms of population, whereas India and the rest don't seem to produce too many allrounders, especially not compared to New Zealand. No one makes better use of resources than NZ- are you the least populated test nation? (I really should say "we" now, I filled out my citizenship application this morning.)
LOL.Josh said:Damn inconsistant Bangladesh!!