Scyld Berry's latest entry: Virgin cricketers face mission impossible

[Akib]

Well what this reporter said is true. As Andrew Miller said, the article was not toward BD team or players, but the administration. This is a true statement. We were thrust into the test stage too early. Of course now we have made progress. We know know what a win feels like. Now we are in for our first major challenge. Lets hope we do well.

[FaltuRidwanBhai]

i compare these kinds of articles to propaganda. and the best thing is to just read it and forget it right at that point.

[akabir77]

I have one Q. The article says none of our plyrs pld in county cricket or not good for that... My Q is what good has came out from COUNTY cricket as ENGLAND never won a world cup any kind and lossers of ashes to AUSSI like school girls...... SO i am glad that none of our players plyd there cause i heard that english plyr use to drop their bats and run when wasim and waker use to ball there... rubbish..

[RazabQ]

Let's not get carried away. After the Aussie domestic competition, County cricket is without a doubt the next highest level 1st class competition there is. I for one would have been ecstatic if one of our boys could get one of those kolpak slots.

[akabir77]

Originally posted by razabq
Let's not get carried away. After the Aussie domestic competition, County cricket is without a doubt the next highest level 1st class competition there is. I for one would have been ecstatic if one of our boys could get one of those kolpak slots.

bhai oita bolar to kono dorker chilo na... apni ki money koren eta ami janina... ami r ki ektu ek chokha bashing dichilam oder moto....

[chinaman]

Originally posted by Andrewwisden
If this offends, then you wait until some of the less informed commentators get stuck in this summer.

Scary, very scary

British media may finaly find a dream match - but I already grew a few gray hair. Serenity now, serenity now

[TheWatcher]

Originally posted by razabq
Let's not get carried away. After the Aussie domestic competition, County cricket is without a doubt the next highest level 1st class competition there is. I for one would have been ecstatic if one of our boys could get one of those kolpak slots.

To my understanding, kolpak players are not eligible to play for their national teams. So, it may turn out to be a disaster for Bangladesh.

Good news is , so far, only SA, Zim, and WI players are eligible for this deal.

http://www.ecb.co.uk/ecb/publication...ak-ruling.html

Edited on, May 1, 2005, 7:07 PM GMT, by TheWatcher.

[RazabQ]

oh right... heh heh .. thukku thukky .. ar akabir bhai, orokom ek torofa bashind dile amra ar bhalo manush roilam koi. Remember that famous quote from gandhi?

Reporter: What do you think of Western Civilizatin?
Gandhi: I think it would be a very good idea.

I may not be 100% accurate here, but you get the drift

[IanW]

The Hookes quote (SMH, 10 July 2003)

"Steve Waugh should send them in to bat, bowl them out before lunch, bat until tea and declare, then send them back in and roll them again before stumps," Hookes said. "It could be all over in a day.

"Bangladesh doesn't deserve to be in Test cricket and they shouldn't be given any favours out on the field. If the Australian team is being true to the Test cap their aim will be to go out there and annihilate Bangladesh."

The reality of the Second Test, sixteen days later

Bangladesh match it with best
By Alex Brown
July 26 2003, SMH


Goliath wasn't slain, though David landed several telling blows. Everest wasn't conquered, though the summit was visible. The Australian side wasn't beaten, though Bangladesh combined for arguably their finest day of Test cricket, batting with poise, patience and persistence on a lively Cairns wicket.

After surging to 1-155 in the 44th over, Bangladesh survived two mini-collapses over the final session-and-a-half to score their second-highest first-innings total 8-289 by the close of play.

"I think I can be forgiven for looking at that [performance] bar being raised a bit," said Bangladesh coach Dav Whatmore. "Now that there's a reasonable standard set against this sort of opposition, there'll be a higher expectation generally against other opposition."

Before the game, Whatmore had publicly challenged his top order to bat through an entire session. And at the same press conference, Australian captain Waugh called on the fledgling Test nation to get "stuck in".

Consider the challenge accepted, the call answered.

With opener Hannan Sarkar scoring a career-best 76 and Habibul Bashar, Sanwar Hossain and Khaled Mashud providing able support Bangladesh's much-maligned batsmen proved their worth against an Australian pace attack expected to thrive on a lively Bundaberg Rum Stadium wicket.

A week ago, Hannan was dismissed for a duck as Bangladesh crumbled for 97 in 42.2 overs. Yesterday the 20-year-old right-hander combined with Javed Omar for his nation's third-highest opening stand (47), then Bashar for Bangladesh's third-highest second-wicket partnership (108).

The result? A spirited contest before 5248 stunned supporters, most of whom expected an Australian fast-bowling onslaught, at Cairns' first Test.

"We played against India in our inaugural match, we scored 400 and that was our highest Test score," Hannan said. "After that I think this is the greatest innings so far for us in Test cricket."

After Waugh had won the toss, the plan was simple: unleash pacemen Glenn McGrath, Jason Gillespie and Brett Lee and wait for Bangladesh's top-order to crumble. Instead, while McGrath went wicketless, leg spinner Stuart MacGill proved Australia's most effective bowler, claiming 5-77 against an opposition providing the kind of resistance rarely seen in their 21 Tests.

"I think the Bangladeshis read from a different script than I did this morning," MacGill said. "The thing that was really impressive today about the Bangladeshis was that they were so patient. If we can talk about improvements, that's a fantastic improvement.

"I don't think at any stage we thought that this is going horribly wrong, but we did think that we're going to have to really work at this. Application-wise, you can probably draw parallels with the way that some of the English batsmen have really attempted to learn how to play spin bowling." Hannan and Javed began cautiously against McGrath and Gillespie, but with a 50-run partnership in sight, Javed (26) played a loose shot to a sharp, rising Lee delivery, bringing the dangerous Bashar to the crease.

While Hannan displayed superb touch, Bashar survived an early chance off Lee's bowling before scoring a patient 46. His innings, coupled with Hannan's half-century, produced Bangladesh's sixth 100-plus run partnership for any wicket, five of which have involved Bashar.

Bangladesh went to lunch coasting at 1-103, and Hannan resumed play with a thunderous square drive off Gillespie's first ball. Three deliveries later, Matt Hayden dropped a fast Hannan edge at third slip.

But shortly after the Hannan-Bashar partnership yielded its 100th run, MacGill accepted a sharp, diving return catch from Bashar, sending Bangladesh's premier batsman back to the pavilion four runs shy of his 50.

That dismissal triggered a sharp collapse Gillespie removing Mohammad Ashraful for a duck, and MacGill claiming the scalps of Alok Kapali and Hannan in 15 deliveries.

MacGill, who took 5-61 against Bangladesh last Sunday, trapped Hannan leg before for 76, then dismissed Alok for the third time in three innings.

Sanwar, however, stemmed the flow of wickets, combining for a 60-run stand with Mashud before chopping a MacGill delivery onto his stumps for 46. MacGill then claimed captain Khaled Mahmud lbw with his next delivery, and narrowly missed dismissing Tapash Baisya leg before with his hat-trick ball.

While Mashud fell to Gillespie for 44 just before stumps, Tapash was there on 20 not out.

[tanvir_nus]

Originally posted by Andrewwisden
I'm afraid I would hardly classify this as "bashing". I think it is a very fair article that wishes the players luck while slamming the administators for the circumstances of Bangladesh's elevation - which, I think even the most partisan fan would agree came too soon.

Remember that this article is directed at an English audience, and seeing as Bangladesh have never even toured in a first-class capacity, most of the Telegraph's readers will have no idea what has gone before in Bangladesh's Test history. Scyld is simply bringing them up to speed

If this offends, then you wait until some of the less informed commentators get stuck in this summer.

No offence to andrew here, but I would just like to mention a couple of things, first of all I do not think it is a fair article. Why? That will take a thousand points to explain. It was said that there was a conspiracy to grant the test status, and that the test status was given based on only one win against the pakistanis, who kinda lost to us accidentally and that there was no credit to the bangladeshis for winning (mind you not only the win against the scotties was not mentioned but also the ICC trophy win), is it fair to accept these baseless and prejudiced arguments of one guy about the conspiracy and test status. And what is the point of blaming the administrators in the first place? Do you think if the test status was offered to the kenyan team the kenyan board won't accept it? And what is about the comparison between the ATHLETIC kenyans and the PEOPLE of BD. Nice comparison don't ya think so! Kenyans are athletics ok, no problem I know they are...but just how do you compare two teams in the world of cricket and athletism of one with the population of the other?

Well, there is no such thing as an article that is directed towards one set of audience in this world anymore. You should know better than me obviously. And writing one sided arguments about one's weakness doesn't really portray fairness or goodwill which as a reporter is one of the first objectives in his/ her job.

Why don't you write something more constructive like why Bangladesh team failed? Instead of looking at the statistics to construct and the past. And if you are so saavy about the statistics why not look at India's or NewZealand's statistics. They aren't too impressive either.

No doubt we are weaker than the british team. Actually in the end, it's all about ego and pride. The english team obviously can't accept the Bangladeshi's as equals and opponents. Well mate, it's not your fault, because you always enjoy the memories of the past, this to us is a travesty and a conspiracy against you!!!!.....

[capslock]

Andrew, as Tanvir already mentioned, this article cannot be called fair while it is making charges such as there was a conspiracy to give Bangladesh Test status and that the Pakistan match was fixed. It's one thing for Berry to bring up cricketing statistics, which are objective, but where does he have the proof for the allegations of conspiracy and match fixing? As long as Berry includes those charges, this article cannot be called either fair or objective, it's an insulting and dangerous article, which will make even the hint of a struggle by England against Bangladesh embarrassing.

[mwrkhan]

I have to say Tanvir's attitude is disappointing, unfortunately it is an attitude that we sub-continentals, in particular, have not been able to shake off.

We look at everything through the prism of "superior, arrogant, snooty, blah, blah, blah ........ British, English .... whatever"..... Hello folks !?! ... in case we have all forgotten it has been nearly sixty years since the British last ruled over us. Have a grown up attitude towards things! Get rid of this childish "Gora Admi" attitude. Who has the complex here?

What is it that we are all expecting from the world's media? Amra dood-bhat bole maf kore debo? Whom do we have to impress? The occassional good word or pat on the back from the firingi press will make us jump with joy? That is what we live for? That is what we constantly expect?

We should be our own fiercest critics. We should be the ones who should be demanding the greatest improvements from our players. Let them speak ..... they only base their opinions upon what they see us do. And what have we done so far? Why does every missive about BD have to be tempered with the historical (and irrelevant) experience of India and NZ?

We are playing for ourselves just as England is playing for itself. Our defensiveness over our bad performances and pointed criticism directed at us should stop.

Edited on, May 2, 2005, 4:45 AM GMT, by mwrkhan.

[capslock]

Originally posted by mwrkhan
I have to say Tanvir's attitude is disappointing, unfortunately it is an attitude that we sub-continentals, in particular, have not been able to shake off.

We look at everything through the prism of "superior, arrogant, snooty, blah, blah, blah ........ British, English .... whatever"..... Hello folks !?! ... in case we have all forgotten it has been nearly sixty years since the British last ruled over us. Have a grown up attitude towards things! Get rid of this childish "Gora Admi" attitude. Who has the complex here?

What is it that we are all expecting from the world's media? Amra dood-bhat bole maf kore debo? Whom do we have to impress? The occassional good word or pat on the back from the firingi press will make us jump with joy? That is what we live for? That is what we constantly expect?

We should be our own fiercest critics. We should be the ones who should be demanding the greatest improvements from our players. Let them speak ..... they only base their opinions upon what they see us do. And what have we done so far? Why does every missive about BD have to be tempered with the historical (and irrelevant) experience of India and NZ?

We are playing for ourselves just as England is playing for themselves. Our defensiveness over our bad performances and pointed criticism directed at us should stop.

Read my post, respond to that thanks.

[mwrkhan]

Originally posted by capslock
Andrew, as Tanvir already mentioned, this article cannot be called fair while it is making charges such as there was a conspiracy to give Bangladesh Test status and that the Pakistan match was fixed. It's one thing for Berry to bring up cricketing statistics, which are objective, but where does he have the proof for the allegations of conspiracy and match fixing? As long as Berry includes those charges, this article cannot be called either fair or objective, it's an insulting and dangerous article, which will make even the hint of a struggle by England against Bangladesh embarrassing.

Berry is not the only one who thought the Pak BD match to be a little iffy, he simply stated his thoughts without directly saying that it was fixed. Also he insinuated a conspiracy based upon the voting pattern within the ICC - Aus, NZ and England on oneside, the rest on the other. Hardly news. We in BD were banking on this kind of voting pattern. In fact I remember the prevalent thought in BD being that one of the reasons we will be granted test status is because it will be good for the sub-continental cricket money spinning apparatus, not necessarily that we were up to standard.

My point is not about the quality of the article. In the end all articles, as opposed to reports, are someone's point of view. I have seen worse. My beef is the way some of us react hystericaly to foreign media reports and look to outlandish explanations for them.

[Sham]

I completely agree with mwrkhan. We just expect everyone to sugarcoat their words when it comes to us. We have a serious inferiority complex as a nation. Who is Scyld Berry? What the hell does it matter to us what he writes? He is in England, writing in an English newspaper for an English audience! Let him write whatever the hell he wishes to write. And Andrew is right, these are just the starters, the main course is yet to come, just wait till our guys land on these shores.

Also, as mwrkhan said, why should every article about us have to include a comparison with New Zealand and India? Okay, they took longer in years, New Zealand played more Tests before registering their first win, but they didn't lose as many or nearly as badly as we have over the last four years. Lets face it, apart from a few games here and there, our Test record is rubbish! Now, I know better than most people that there are lots of reasons for that and you can't blame it all on our team, but that doesn't take away the fact that we weren't ready for Test cricket when we started. For God's sake, we started playing 4 day games in domestic cricket after we got Test status, what a joke! Trust me, I am not complaining about getting Test status when we did, but the facts don't speak well for us, and its ridiculous to expect reporters to bring up NZ and India's experiences from the 50's to justify our inclusion. The only way to do that is by competing on the field as equals, and when we do that, they will consider us as such, not before!

As for the conspiracy argument, that has been bounced around before as well. I think the point is stupid, but again, till we can fully justify our inclusion in Test cricket, these arguments will be made over and over again. When we start giving top teams a run for their money (regularly), trust me, all this talk of conspiracies will stop. We can beat up on Berry, who I think is an idiot, or on Miller for calling it fair, but for the vast majority of people outside of Bangladesh, we don't belong at the highest level and winning against a weakened Zimbabwe haven't changed their minds about that. Let them write I say, the only fitting way for us to answer is by giving them bloody nose on the field.

Edited on, May 2, 2005, 4:37 AM GMT, by Sham.

[insideedge]

A neutral observer will find the article as well balanced. I do not think it should be considered as insulting or a propaganda( as some persons feel). He has based his observations on past records and that is still the best way of arriving at a judgement.

You cannot expect every reporter to sugarcoat his observations or be blindly optimistic like say Dukha. Articles meeting with full approval of this forum can only be written by members of this forum and they will not have an audience outside this forum.

[Mav]

Originally posted by Andrewwisden
I'm afraid I would hardly classify this as "bashing". I think it is a very fair article that wishes the players luck while slamming the administators for the circumstances of Bangladesh's elevation - which, I think even the most partisan fan would agree came too soon.

Remember that this article is directed at an English audience, and seeing as Bangladesh have never even toured in a first-class capacity, most of the Telegraph's readers will have no idea what has gone before in Bangladesh's Test history. Scyld is simply bringing them up to speed

If this offends, then you wait until some of the less informed commentators get stuck in this summer.

You are defending Scyld with the term "Target /directed Audience". But, you forgot the term "Agenda Setting". It is clear to any human mind that the specific points Scyld gathered to publish are just to portrayed Bangladesh Cricket as inferior as possible.

Yes, targeted towards telegraph Audience,. But is it an informative article or persuasive? It is suppose to be an informative one, as you mentioned most of the telegraph readers doesn`t know the history of Bangladesh Cricket.

But when you are to inform your audience, it is important to publish records (good or bad). But you have no right to say -

- they dont deserve / weekend clubbies
- how swiftly and unceremoniously the Bangladeshis were dumped
- Bangladesh's first Test at Lord's is liable to be the most embarrassing mis-match in the whole canon of English Test cricket
- the second Test at Chester-le-Street may go into the Sunday, that will probably only be because the game is scheduled to start on the Friday.
- One Test batsman, two Test bowlers. All you can say is good luck, mate

This is why this article is extreamly personal and highly biased. Scyld, whoever this guy is - he is a stupid and unqualified writer.


Edited on, May 2, 2005, 6:29 AM GMT, by Mav.

[Mav]

Originally posted by tanvir_nus

No offence to andrew here, but I would just like to mention a couple of things, first of all I do not think it is a fair article. Why? That will take a thousand points to explain. It was said that there was a conspiracy to grant the test status, and that the test status was given based on only one win against the pakistanis, who kinda lost to us accidentally and that there was no credit to the bangladeshis for winning (mind you not only the win against the scotties was not mentioned but also the ICC trophy win), is it fair to accept these baseless and prejudiced arguments of one guy about the conspiracy and test status. And what is the point of blaming the administrators in the first place? Do you think if the test status was offered to the kenyan team the kenyan board won't accept it? And what is about the comparison between the ATHLETIC kenyans and the PEOPLE of BD. Nice comparison don't ya think so! Kenyans are athletics ok, no problem I know they are...but just how do you compare two teams in the world of cricket and athletism of one with the population of the other?

Well, there is no such thing as an article that is directed towards one set of audience in this world anymore. You should know better than me obviously. And writing one sided arguments about one's weakness doesn't really portray fairness or goodwill which as a reporter is one of the first objectives in his/ her job.

Why don't you write something more constructive like why Bangladesh team failed? Instead of looking at the statistics to construct and the past. And if you are so saavy about the statistics why not look at India's or NewZealand's statistics. They aren't too impressive either.

No doubt we are weaker than the british team. Actually in the end, it's all about ego and pride. The english team obviously can't accept the Bangladeshi's as equals and opponents. Well mate, it's not your fault, because you always enjoy the memories of the past, this to us is a travesty and a conspiracy against you!!!!.....

Well said.

[Tintin]

For God's sake, we started playing 4 day games in domestic cricket after we got Test status, what a joke!

It is not the fault of the BCB. As per the current ICC rules only matches played between domestic teams in Full Member countries are deemed first class. Not even Kenya is exempted from this.

See : http://www.icc-cricket.com/rules/official_cricket.pdf

Not sure whether the rules were the same in 2000 though.

[Sham]

Yes I am aware of that and I was careful not to write First Class cricket. But just because they wouldn't be considered First Class matches shouldn't have stopped us from playing longer version games anyway. We knew in the late 90s that getting Test status was just a matter of time at that point, but we continued playing only one-day games in domestic cricket, nothing of longer duration! How were we supposed to be ready for 5-day games when none of our players had even played a 4-day or 3-day game before?

[Tintin]

Just nitpicking here. BCB did try a few things between the ICC win and the Test status.

Quoting Andrew Dunford in rsc :

From what I gather, steps have been taken to put a first-class structure in
place which provides players with useful preparation for Test cricket. It's
interesting to note when these steps were taken in comparison to Bangladesh
being granted Test status.

For the 1998/99 season, the 'elite' domestic competition (then called the
Premier Division Cricket League) was 'upgraded' to two-day fixtures. Having
already applied for Test status, the BCB decided that a one-innings match of
80 overs per team spread over two days was better preparation for the
rigours of Test cricket than the previous 50-over format. Evidently the
decision caused consternation because some players thought the 80-over
format would be harmful to their preparation for the 1999 World Cup.

In January 1999, the ICC announced that Bangladesh wouldn't be granted Test
status until a first-class competition was established. At the ICC meeting
in June, only five full members voted in favour of Bangladesh becoming a
Test nation (seven votes were required). I believe South Africa, England,
New Zealand and Australia voted against. In August of that year, a
first-class competiton, the National Cricket League, was established;
three-day matches, first innings of each side to be restricted to 100 overs.

The BCB also started making a concerted effort to persuade other Test
nations to tour Bangladesh. Test status was finally granted in June 2000,
at which time there had been one season of first-class cricket, and the
national side had played a handful (I think nine) first-class matches
against sides from other nations.

(The 1999/00 matches were not fc and he corrected it in a later post)

Anyway, most of the points that Berry raises have been discussed a dozen time here. Berry does twist things around and quote irrelevant facts as if they are major issues. Regarding the first line of the article - how is that a big issue ? The first Indian team that went to England had one player who had played in England - and he had played just one match five years before that tour while he was a student in England. The first Pakistan team too had just one player. Does that automatically make these teams better ? As a matter of fact, India and Pakistan did better than some of the 'experienced' teams like WI and NZ.

As for conspiracy of Dalmiya and co, quoting Dunford again :

To be pedantic for a moment, my understanding is that the mantle of
president of the ICC is handed over at the Annual Meeting. Thus for the
2000 AM, Dalmiya attended as outgoing president and Malcolm Gray as incoming
president. The vote which confirmed Bangladesh's Test status was taken on
the final day of that meeting.

As you say, it matters not a jot. Bangladesh's application was supported
*unanimously* by the head honchos of the boards of the other nine
Test-playing countries at the Annual Meeting in June 2000.

Edited on, May 2, 2005, 3:48 PM GMT, by Tintin.

[Beamer]

Western cricket journos are too much guilty of bantering about our entry to test cricket. Five years have past since then. What possible good can come out when the issue is irreversable. Granted it was an unceremonious entry and hastily fast tracked, but dwelling on it, in about every article related to Bangladesh is sort of like the WMD issue with Iraq. Instead, these writers should focus on how to improve our cricket so we can be a stable and flourishing member of this exclusive test playing community. Just like preaching democracry and liberty is touted as the reason now since the WMD fixation of Blair fell flat. And people more or less has excepted this outcome since going back to the past is not possible. Sorry for going offtopic a bit but its a simmilar analogy. We have made a lot of progress since 2000 because of the test status. They should except this reality and move on. I am eagely waiting for the ICC head quarters to move to Dubai as in Asia lies the power center of cricket. That is the reality as well and they should be prepared for it.

[al Furqaan]

the truth is that bangladesh were given test status too early, and we didn't earn it nor were we ready for it.

now berry says that a test which begins on friday might end before sunday. this is pure nonsense. bangladesh will in al likely hood play to the 4th day in both tests. even at the worst, a test inside 3 days is as improbable as bangladesh winning the test series.

he mentions masri and rafiq as our main bowlers, and in that he is correct. however our other quick bowlers may surprise.

as for batsmen he mentions bashar, no doubt a man who will probably lead us in runs scored this tour. but he seems to never have heard of ashraful. add in the addition of nafis, rajin, and aftab, and it is likely you will see a 300+ score from these kids.

the article isn't as scathing as things we have heard from some other large, neighboring nation's media (i'm not naming any names :P). but i can't really fault the writer for anything other than what i have already mentioned.

[Spitfire_x86]

Originally posted by Sham
Yes I am aware of that and I was careful not to write First Class cricket. But just because they wouldn't be considered First Class matches shouldn't have stopped us from playing longer version games anyway. We knew in the late 90s that getting Test status was just a matter of time at that point, but we continued playing only one-day games in domestic cricket, nothing of longer duration! How were we supposed to be ready for 5-day games when none of our players had even played a 4-day or 3-day game before?

AFAIK, sometime in between 1997 ICC Trophy win and gaining test status, we had one full season premier league with all 2 day/2 innings/80 over per innings match.

[Spitfire_x86]

Originally posted by al Furqaan
the article isn't as scathing as things we have heard from some other large, neighboring nation's media (i'm not naming any names :P). but i can't really fault the writer for anything other than what i have already mentioned.

Cricinfo bashings were much better, this man couldn't resist himself from infecting the article with his personal biased opinions.