PDA

View Full Version : Job description:


Tigers_eye
April 28, 2006, 09:09 AM
Batting only:

Opener 1: The anchor:
See the shine of the ball make sure you don't get out. occationally you get runs. (10 overs atleast)
Opener 2: The play maker:
See the shine of the ball excellerate the run rate as he seems fit. (unlimited overs)
1st down: The Cream:
If one of the opener gets out early play his role. Rotate strike get the runs ticking. (unlimited overs)
2nd down: The Man:
You are the man. Need I say more. can adopt to any situation. (unlimited overs)
3rd down: The second man:
You are the second man with lots of responsibility. Can't give your wicket away as a gift. Keep the runs ticking rotate strike. (unlimited overs)
4th down: Dhamaka starter:
Put it on the 4th gear, lets go.
5th Down: Dhamaka continuer:
make sure the tail is not exposed too early. help the partner get the most of the strikes. (Must stay till 48 overs in ODI)
6th Down: Occational Slogger:
Have no mercy. Play the balls according to its merit.
7th down: Slogger #2:
Have no mercy.
8th Down: Slogger #3:
Same as above.
9th down: Slogger #4:
Same as above.

Could our boys really fit to the job description? If you disagree with the job description explain why? Next, find out who failed to do his job? That way players can correct their mistake next time around.

SS
April 28, 2006, 09:16 AM
none of them they are all in the category call "Loosers"/ "Culprits"...u forgot to put that in ur job description.
The way they played was total suiceders. They are unique and yesterday they all played the same way. So all are same category, same boat

Tigers_eye
April 28, 2006, 09:26 AM
Rather than just concentrating on one game concentrate on the entire ODI series. Even go back to the Kenyan and SL series if you want. Last night game was one off.

Baundule
April 28, 2006, 10:07 AM
Cats, actually your idea is too perfect to be true. More importantly, you are talking only about an ideal situation when everything goes according to the 'initial' plan. In fact, the players, from the opener to the number 11, should be able to play according to the situation. The plan itself should be adapted accordingly. FOr example, if you are chasing a 300+ total, dont ask the openers to see off the shine of the new ball. They need to dominate the bowlers from the word go!

My observation is, the BD players and the think tank failed to adapt themselves to the demand of the situation. A perfect example of Australia's doing so is the innings of Hussey and Brett Lee in the first ODI. They all can hit the ball hard. But they preferred to just stay because that was the demand to win the match.

An example of NOT doing so are the innings of Golla, Bashar and Mashud in the second ODI. Until 30, Golla scored almost run-a-ball. Then he decided to cease his scoring. With good touch, one should just continue. I dont blame Bashar and Mashud if they were thinking for a respectable defeat after the initial collapse; but if they thought of winning the match, then their strategy is certainly wrong. Building a partnership is nice; but letting the RRR creeping up to 10 is nonsense.

Another bad instance is BD batting in the 2nd innings of the 2nd test. Most of us may be happy that we scored 300+ runs. But that was not the demand of the situation. Since BD had no chance of winning that match, when they went out to bat, they all should have forgot about runs and should have blocked everything with dead bat. No one really showed this attitude.

Tigers_eye
April 28, 2006, 10:25 AM
Great point Baundule. The batsmen should adapt according to the situation no doubt; however, this is a job description and job descriptions are for the perfect situation. The point was to find out who are the players doing their job at best and who are not performing as they are required. In a business, if one can not fulfill their job requirement they get fired/reassigned to a different department. Do we need to do this for our cricket team? May be bring Ash in the 6th down?

For chasing 300 runs. I would take 100 in 25 overs without losing any wickets or 200 in 40 overs with 2 wickets down any day of the week. I wouldn't mind if the RRR becomes 10 at that time.

sadi
April 28, 2006, 10:45 AM
1. Rajin
2. Shahriar Nafees
3. ?
4. Bashar
5. ?
6. Ash
7. Masud
8. Rafique
9. Mashrafee
10. Razzak
11. Shahadat

I put that lineup according to your condition... however the two important position number 3 and 5 is missing...... aftab will probably bat at number 3 and alok at number 5 eventhough they don't really go with the job description... :)

Tigers_eye
April 28, 2006, 10:50 AM
:)
how about
Rajin
SN
NI
Bashar
Aftab
Ash
Mashud
..

shimraj
April 28, 2006, 12:25 PM
:)
how about
Rajin
SN
NI
Bashar
Aftab
Ash
Mashud
..

I think Ash could do better as a tail ender, if he can make it to the team :D

James90
April 28, 2006, 07:25 PM
Seeing the shine off the ball and then getting out is most definitely not the anchor. The anchor is someone who can come in after a collapse and steady the ship, bat with the tail or keep scoring runs and occupying one end while wickets are falling around him. Like a Mike Hussey or Khaled Mashud.

Hatebreed
April 29, 2006, 12:03 PM
I already disagreed playing Rajin as an ODI opener, despite whatever he did against a mediocre Zimbabwe or Kenya. He's a good test batsmen, where he should be an opener, but I fail to see why should bat at #1 in ODI. He's too slow, he can't rotate the strike and this adds pressure on himself and his partner.

After seeing his performance in this series, I have to say Javed Omar is no worse. IMO he is still a credible opener and he should play in this position until Nafis Iqbal is given a chance. Rajin should probably come 2 down as Bashar seems quite good at his current position.. I don't know how much it matters against upcoming tour of Zimbabwe but we desperately need a solid batting order before the champions trophy and then WC.

Spitfire_x86
April 29, 2006, 12:54 PM
After seeing his performance in this series, I have to say Javed Omar is no worse. IMO he is still a credible opener and he should play in this position until Nafis Iqbal is given a chance. Rajin should probably come 2 down as Bashar seems quite good at his current position.. I don't know how much it matters against upcoming tour of Zimbabwe but we desperately need a solid batting order before the champions trophy and then WC.
If Rajin is a problem then why go back to someone who is in your opinion "no worse"? Why not give Nafees Iqbal a chance right now? He got runs against Srilanka A.

Ashraful can be tried at opening again since he hasn't been getting runs for a while at #4. We can set him loose to score runs quickly and hold another end with SN.

If Rajin can't settle himself as ODI opener, then unfortunately there's no room for him in the ODI squad. In past he failed to perform for a long time in the middle order.

Duck
April 29, 2006, 12:57 PM
By rotating the players along the batting order and creating a musical chair competition...our selectors just destroyed the rythm of a winning combination that we have made during SL and Ken series. Playing against Aus at any level is hard...I have no doubt. But ruining what you have in your hand by confusing all the players about their role by taking in and out of the team frequently is nothing but hypocracy of selection.

Hatebreed
April 29, 2006, 01:17 PM
If Rajin is a problem then why go back to someone who is in your opinion "no worse"? Why not give Nafees Iqbal a chance right now? He got runs against Srilanka A.

Ashraful can be tried at opening again since he hasn't been getting runs for a while at #4. We can set him loose to score runs quickly and hold another end with SN.

If Rajin can't settle himself as ODI opener, then unfortunately there's no room for him in the ODI squad. In past he failed to perform for a long time in the middle order.

By 'no worse' I meant if not better, at least JO is not any worse than Rajin in the ODI position.

I'm not the selector, I can't go with Nafis Iqbal if he's given a chance. Read my post again.

As for JO, I still think he's a more credible ODI opener than Rajin. JO got 1 chance in this series (1 down but whatever), he did better than Rajin.

In the end, it's not about JO's inclusion or Rajin's comparison with JO. It's the position Rajin is playing at which isn't allowing him to play his best against a tough opponent.