PDA

View Full Version : Who would you pick for 2nd Test: Razzak or Enamul


Navarene
January 6, 2008, 03:03 AM
Who would you pick from the two for 2nd Test?

Is there any cricket pundit out in BC who can enlighten me as to why Abdur Razzak should be labelled only as an ODI specialist? What did our super duper Test specialist Enamul Jr do except for constantly tossing the ball down the leg stump with an offside field placement? He never seemed like taking wickets (neither he did in the last Test he played in the home series against India) with his toothless negetive bowling approach.

Whereas Razzak is a genuine wicket taking bowler. He has the gut to bowl with variation (flipper and arm ball) even at the cost of runs. I find no reason why Razzak shouldn't be picked over Enamul "the toothless" for the 2nd Test against the Kiwi.

djnaved
January 6, 2008, 03:26 AM
etokkhone ekjon thik manush paoa gelo..:) rajjak has to be in 2nd test match..enough with enam.. no doubt

Orion
January 6, 2008, 03:51 AM
I would stick with Enamul.....he impressed me although he didn't pick up a wicket...against India...he tinkered with his bowling style and was useless but now he is back to his old self and style which generates much better control and turn...Razzak is a perfect ODI and 20-20 bowler but I don't think he has the variation or class needed in test cricket.

djnaved
January 6, 2008, 04:08 AM
Ibut now he is back to his old self and style which generates much better control and turn....

i think you didn't see the 1st test match against NZ..except some deliveries..the rest of the deleveries were far outside the legstamp.. without turn.. keepr mushy encouraged him a lot to pick up some wickets.. that didn't happen

Shaan
January 6, 2008, 04:36 AM
My favorite is Razzak for ODI but test big no, he is not the item for test yet. Enum is doinng just fine bad luck no wicket. But for Razzak he will give more runs on test cause he doesn't turn much the ball than Enam, also he has less variation.

mahbubH
January 6, 2008, 04:47 AM
Simple. Enamul is far far better than Razzak for test cricket.

fuzzy
January 6, 2008, 07:30 AM
enamul is better test match bowler.

Nafi
January 6, 2008, 07:51 AM
Enamul should be given another chance, I want Razzak to improve his game before getting him back into the test fold.

Sohel
January 6, 2008, 07:59 AM
Enam looked impressive on a slow and low wicket without cracks or roughs and offering nothing. He created a lot of pressure on NZ batsmen who never looked comfortable dealing with his deliveries as a whole. His aggression and "scripting" was superb and those flight and pace variations looked to pick up wickets. He was unlucky not to get any.

Substituting XYZ for ABC is not the way to go, especially for us. That said, Razzak, IMHO the world's best limited overs SLA, will have his chances soon enough. He bowled longish spells better than he used to in the NCL.

BanCricFan
January 6, 2008, 08:45 AM
Enamul Haque Jnr.

Moshin
January 6, 2008, 08:47 AM
I didnt like the way Enamul was bowling in the test, he didnt even pick up a wicket in the test, made me so frustrated watchin him play, even Ashraful picked up more wickets than him, and he's part time, its time to try out Razzak I think...yeah.

Rubu
January 6, 2008, 10:29 AM
I need a neither. I would (I know not possible) pick rafique instead of both.

however, since rafique is not there, I would pick Shakib instead of both. Shakib may lack a bit less in spin than razzaq or enamul, but in those pitches that is very less of a difference. but his batting can come handy, which we badly need.

also, we need rajin instead of Ha Ba, which will give us some more spinning option.

Miraz
January 6, 2008, 10:35 AM
I need a neither. I would (I know not possible) pick rafique instead of both.

however, since rafique is not there, I would pick Shakib instead of both. Shakib may lack a bit less in spin than razzaq or enamul, but in those pitches that is very less of a difference. but his batting can come handy, which we badly need.

I am with you. I don't think Sakib can do much worse than Enamul. Enamul lacked almost everything in the first Test. He is a good Test bowler in the sub-continent conditions.

Russell2k7
January 6, 2008, 11:56 AM
Enam was pretty much useless and Shakib's batting would be pretty much useless too. I'd pick Rafa as well but he isnt there so Razzak. It's not like there wasnt anything for the spin, afterall, Vettori did rip through our lineup yet again.

Shaan
January 6, 2008, 12:06 PM
I am with you. I don't think Sakib can do much worse than Enamul. Enamul lacked almost everything in the first Test. He is a good Test bowler in the sub-continent conditions.
Couldn't agree with you Miraz bai Sakib is not specialized spinner, Enam was bit unlucky, but he did bowl well, turning, spinning and variations were there. If it was Rafique than I definately go with Rafique than Enam. Sakib is kind of lets say part time like Shebag, jayasuriya or yubraj.

Imtiaz
January 6, 2008, 12:06 PM
Who would you pick from the two for 2nd Test?

Is there any cricket pundit out in BC who can enlighten me as to why Abdur Razzak should be labelled only as an ODI specialist? What did our super duper Test specialist Enamul Jr do except for constantly tossing the ball down the leg stump with an offside field placement? He never seemed like taking wickets (neither he did in the last Test he played in the home series against India) with his toothless negetive bowling approach.

Whereas Razzak is a genuine wicket taking bowler. He has the gut to bowl with variation (flipper and arm ball) even at the cost of runs. I find no reason why Razzak shouldn't be picked over Enamul "the toothless" for the 2nd Test against the Kiwi.

I voted for Enam. But I agree with you regarding "labels". Razzak is a good bowler and no one reaches 12th in the rankings unless he has something in him. I would not oppose too much if he is indeed selected. Certainly, against SA.

Miraz
January 6, 2008, 12:17 PM
Couldn't agree with you Miraz bai Sakib is not specialized spinner, Enam was bit unlucky, but he did bowl well, turning, spinning and variations were there. If it was Rafique than I definately go with Rafique than Enam. Sakib is kind of lets say part time like Shebag, jayasuriya or yubraj.

Enam not being a wicket taking option (from what I have seen in the first Test), I will prefer a more attacking bowler like Sakib. He might be a part-timer but is lot aggressive than Enam and his batting will be a big plus in the lower-middle order.

I would defnitely pick Enam ahead of Sakib in sub-continent conditions.

djnaved
January 6, 2008, 01:23 PM
r, Enam was bit unlucky, but he did bowl well, turning, spinning and variations were there.

Bro never mind, you should watch the 1st test match highlights again..any cricket pudit would say there was no turn from enamul's bowling. Yeah, he was looking for variation, but no turn and dropped far outside of legstamp and offstamp:-|

al Furqaan
January 6, 2008, 01:54 PM
enam has played 2 tests in the last 2 years and that too seperated by 6 months. it takes a while for a bowler to find his groove. heck it took mash 3 ODIs before he turned in this career best performance.

give enam some time...he will shine.

Murad
January 6, 2008, 02:06 PM
If he missed a spinner who could turn the ball as Enamul Haque Jr. hardly got any turn out of the wicket

I guess Enam bowled well. He was bowling to 130-odd runs on a day one, day two flat wicket and there was nothing that he could do to turn. That’s the difference. If he had 450 runs or 350 runs like they had on a wicket that was offering him a little bit then things would have been different. He has proven in the past that if he gets a turning wicket then he’ll trouble most batsmen in the world. I think he is a quality spin bowler and most spinners come good on day four or five of a Test match unless you are a Muralitharan or Shane Warne. So we need to make some runs first so that the spinners can come into play.


Siddon's Inteview with TC (http://www.tigercricket.com/viewNews.aspx?newsID=490)

I hope this satisfies the thread opener.

BD Tigers
January 6, 2008, 07:12 PM
i am with the members here who said to take Sakib instead of either. we need as many batsmen as we can.

scoilaheez
January 6, 2008, 08:01 PM
At the moment neither bowler has really cemented their spot. Not convinced either way. Razzaq is likely to take wickets when we have men around the bat as he bowls accurately and puts pressure on the batsmen but Enam has much better flight and looks much more as a test spinner.

Tiger Bhai
January 6, 2008, 11:25 PM
Enam sets the bats man perfectly getting used to the mellow batting.. and guess what happens when u face Narail Express on the other end...:shh:

wiseshah
January 7, 2008, 12:45 AM
i think sakib wont be bad. otherwise enam, no need for razzaq in test match. how about drop enam and razzaq, bring farhad reza for 2nd test. we have ashraful to do the spin job.

ialbd
January 7, 2008, 01:28 AM
i couldnt watch enamul bat, who's a better batsman? i hear enamul has a very correct batting technique...

lamisa
January 7, 2008, 01:46 AM
I am with you. I don't think Sakib can do much worse than Enamul. Enamul lacked almost everything in the first Test. He is a good Test bowler in the sub-continent conditions.

but he checked da runz tho!:waiting:

nobody
January 7, 2008, 03:33 AM
If I was a selector I would not change the team. But neither Sakib nor Reza is a bad option

BD-Shardul
January 7, 2008, 03:37 AM
Surprised to see that people want to see an off form Shakib in the test squad.

I wanna see Razzaq instead of Habla. I can bet that Razzaq will score more runs than Habla. Plus quality SLA.

cricket_king
January 7, 2008, 03:39 AM
I would keep Enamul. He didn't get any wickets, but he seemed to have bowled pretty well. I really don't rate Shakib's bowling at all, and so Razzak seems to be the only replacement to me. But I still say we should give Enamul another chance. He really didn't do too bad if you take a look at the stats.

Shaan
January 7, 2008, 04:02 AM
Bro never mind, you should watch the 1st test match highlights again..any cricket pudit would say there was no turn from enamul's bowling. Yeah, he was looking for variation, but no turn and dropped far outside of legstamp and offstamp:-|

baire highlihts dhekhar dorkar ki jhokhon live cricket dekhlam..Highlights diye to r sob bichar kora jayna..

Shaan
January 7, 2008, 04:04 AM
i couldnt watch enamul bat, who's a better batsman? i hear enamul has a very correct batting technique...

he was not out in both innings, sigh*

abu2abu
January 7, 2008, 04:56 AM
I think we should remember that Razzak has been less than convincing in the ODI series (and he's a fine ODI bowler), so do we really want to risk him in a test. They should keep faith with enamul for the 2nd test. But there's worrying news for the middle order from the coach:

On debutant openers Tamim Iqbal and Zunaed Siddique who put on a Bangladesh record stand of 161 runs

Tamim has been consistent all the way through this tour with his stroke playing. The New Zealand bowlers worked him out a little bit in the first innings but he was better in the second. I think he has definitely got a future. Zunaed is a really solid person and a solid player and he’ll get better and better. He has got one area he needs to work on and he is already addressing it and has addressed it pretty well in the second innings. It is very encouraging that a couple of openers come out of the blue and do that sort of a job. I think we can put those two aside now and worry about the next four.

zainab
January 7, 2008, 07:19 AM
Poor Coach! He has to worry about all the batsmen. He has a tough task ahead of him, but I have faith in him that he will do the best for this team. As he says, he has to concentrate on getting 6 batsmen mentally competent to stay at the wicket and play good cricket.
Some of them cannot play good cricketing shots and he has 1 month before the next tour to improve on this. I feel BCB should really have a bowling coach, without lethal bowling, you cannot win a match, fielding seem to have improved, but Siddons will address this area also.

abu2abu
January 7, 2008, 08:51 AM
Yes, but judging from the last sentence of siddons' quote, it looks like middle order places are not secure...