PDA

View Full Version : Abdur Razzak


Miraz
February 29, 2008, 07:04 AM
Is he a Test material?

Never looked like a Test standard bowler in all 3 matches he played.

He is a very fine ODI bowler, where is the problem? A mental block?

Rafique is retiring after this Test, it seems Razzak is no replacement for Rafique.

His Test bowling really baffles me, middle... middle-leg line of bowling with flatter trajectories...easy pickings for batsmen especially with the defensive field setting.

He is failing to step-up to fill the void, the scenario looks ominous for Bangladesh.

Omio
February 29, 2008, 07:39 AM
Whenever he played for us opposition took the big score. He is perfect for T20 and 50 over match. He looks quite ordinary , no variation at all while bowling.
So our selector needs to think abt him.

BD-Shardul
February 29, 2008, 08:01 AM
I am just tired of our SLA. SLA kono spin hoilo?

:hairpull:

Alien
February 29, 2008, 08:06 AM
Is he a Test material?

Never looked like a Test standard bowler in all 3 matches he played.

He is a very fine ODI bowler, where is the problem? A mental block?

Rafique is retiring after this Test, it seems Razzak is no replacement for Rafique.

His Test bowling really baffles me, middle... middle-leg line of bowling with flatter trajectories...easy pickings for batsmen especially with the defensive field setting.

He is failing to step-up to fill the void, the scenario looks ominous for Bangladesh.

Miraz bhai, at this moment none of them look test standard. Even guys like Mashrafe are going through the worst of times. No point picking on one individual. Today, all their cracks and faults are visible wide and clear.

Miraz
February 29, 2008, 08:17 AM
Miraz bhai, at this moment none of them look test standard. Even guys like Mashrafe are going through the worst of times. No point picking on one individual. Today, all their cracks and faults are visible wide and clear.

The wicket is to blame, but other bowlers enjoyed reasonable success on many occasions. Razzak is failing on every occasions.

Rabz
February 29, 2008, 08:39 AM
The wicket is to blame, but other bowlers enjoyed reasonable success on many occasions. Razzak is failing on every occasions.

If im not mistaken, he played only 3 tests ( including this one)...
so "every occasion" would probably a little bit harsh on him...

today's play should not be taken into account...
it was a nightmare of a day....

may be he is a late bloomer..

abu2abu
February 29, 2008, 08:42 AM
Razzak is nowhere near test class yet and should not have been picked for this game. according to the BBC:

"Slow left-armer Shakib Al Hasan was the only bowler to emerge with any credit, his 10 overs going for just 33."

I agree with that. Razzak did nothing today that Shakib could not have done.

Just because no-one took wickets today that does not mean our bowlers aren't world class. When Lara scored his test record against England did that mean that caddick, Gough fraser etc were not world class? It's just a bad day at the office. For razzak, though he's never looked penetrative in the (few) tests he's played so far...

abu2abu
February 29, 2008, 08:46 AM
If im not mistaken, he played only 3 tests ( including this one)...
so "every occasion" would probably a little bit harsh on him...

today's play should not be taken into account...
it was a nightmare of a day....

may be he is a late bloomer..

Miraz's comments may be harsh but they are entirely accurate.

You don't have to take wickets in very match but you do have to show promise by bowling tightly. In the past enamul (not just against Zim but against England too), rafique and even kapali have shown glimspes of brilliance. in tests, razzak has not, so far...

imon
February 29, 2008, 08:53 AM
We need some one like (mustaq ahmed , saqlain mustaq, Danish kaneria, Harbhajan, Kumble) to win test only in home series.

Its painful we failed produce that in 8 years(2000-2008).

its also painful that any of our batsman hasn,t scored 200+

BanCricFan
February 29, 2008, 08:57 AM
Has Enamul retired already? He was very promising and set for many great stuff!

imon
February 29, 2008, 09:00 AM
Razzak is nowhere near test class yet and should not have been picked for this game. according to the BBC:

"Slow left-armer Shakib Al Hasan was the only bowler to emerge with any credit, his 10 overs going for just 33."

I agree with that. Razzak did nothing today that Shakib could not have done.

Just because no-one took wickets today that does not mean our bowlers aren't world class. When Lara scored his test record against England did that mean that caddick, Gough fraser etc were not world class? It's just a bad day at the office. For razzak, though he's never looked penetrative in the (few) tests he's played so far...

I agree. India scored 410/0 against pakistan with make shift openar (Dravid)+Shewag.But the queston will arise if they failed to play the last 3 days of the match with their 20 wickets( Assuming they have to follow-on)

CHABAN
February 29, 2008, 09:04 AM
Is he a Test material?

Never looked like a Test standard bowler in all 3 matches he played.

He is a very fine ODI bowler, where is the problem? A mental block?

Rafique is retiring after this Test, it seems Razzak is no replacement for Rafique.

His Test bowling really baffles me, middle... middle-leg line of bowling with flatter trajectories...easy pickings for batsmen especially with the defensive field setting.

He is failing to step-up to fill the void, the scenario looks ominous for Bangladesh.

Even Shane warne started his debut with 120 odd runs before he picked a wicket. Not to suggest that Razzak is Shane Warne. However, it is a little difficult to judge the competence of a person on the basis of 3 tests. (12 days of cricket). I am not disputing your prime contention that he lacks variety, I am only suggesting that just because he is not doing well now is not a predictor he will not do well in the future.

Baundule
February 29, 2008, 09:46 AM
Good to see that they did not bring Nicky.

sadi
February 29, 2008, 09:58 AM
If I had to choose between Razzak and Rajin in this test, I would've choosen Razzak too. But if they had decided to play a second specialist spinner, they could've picked Enamul.

lamisa
February 29, 2008, 10:33 AM
no,hes not test material

Fazal
February 29, 2008, 10:41 AM
So its not Belal's fault this time... its Razzak's fault this time ?
As if (except Shahadat's 1st TEST performannce) any bowler have done anything yet in these two tests so far...

Good ... Keep on digging..... who will be the next scape goat for 3rd TEST?
Thukku there is no 3rd TEST... Jaak Bacha Jelo.


btw I was hoping it would be Farhad or Rasel instead of Razzak. But at the end it would make little difference unless our star bowlers bowl like real stars and our star captian start playing like a real captain.

Miraz
February 29, 2008, 10:49 AM
Oh!! C'mon Fazal!! Don't be so typical in thinking.

Razzak isn't the scapegoat here. I wanted to have some discussion about potential of Abdur Razzak as a Test bowler.

We needed this discussion as he is now the premier spin bowler after the retirement of Rafique.

Dhakablues
February 29, 2008, 11:02 AM
Again the selection comes to discusssion,,,, we discard Enamul for Razzaque who has taken only 1 wicket at the average of 284.00. Why not? None of their "creative" decisions made any sense and this one either. The selectors get another slap in their face for their brainless decisions. Now atleast we are confirmed that Enamul and Rafique are not the same kind of bowlers..I hope the selectors get it as well.

Fazal
February 29, 2008, 11:11 AM
You don't become a star TEST spinner all in a sudden. You become a good one by playing four days and TESTs itself.

Is he a good test spin bowler? No not yet.

Would I select him in This TEST ahead of Enamul (Spinner) or Farhad (All rounder- FB)? No

Can we already discount him that he will be a 'no good' TEST spinner after playing 3 TESTs? I don't think so.

Why I don't think so?

If you see Razzak's track record, he proved one thing: he is a figher and he can improve and learn and become better over time. He did that in his ODI career and based on his track record its not impossible for him to do that in TEST. Remember people was redeculing him, why he is occuping a slot in ODI team? Now he is more valueble than Rafiq in ODI team in-terms of their current performance. btw Rafiq had similar problem with his career also. He as tagged as an ODI spinner and that cost him 3 years of his TEST career (at the beining of his TEST career). So it looks like we (the fans) doesn't learn anything.... and we always pull the trigger too early.... but for some favorite players of ours we never pull the trigger at all.

So the summary is: Razzak's selection may not be the best choice (in book value)... but it may turn out to be not a bad idea in future...and definitely its not the end of the world

Miraz
February 29, 2008, 11:14 AM
That's an excellent post, Fazal.

I think Razzak has better potential to be a Test bowler in bouncy pitches than slow and low sub-continent pitches. Enamul should be ahead of Razzak in home condition.

If Razzak can get some wickets outside sub-continents, he will increasingly become confident and will be able to find his feet in the sub-continent as well.

Just one gentle reminder to you, no one is pulling trigger here, we are having a discussion not a witch hunt.

akabir77
February 29, 2008, 11:36 AM
can we ask our selectors to drink what Rebbok Farook Used to drink?

I mean if we Fans can realize this after watching a DAY one what the hell they r doing watching all those league matches and practice matches?

I guess they decide the team by blind folded using a pin to put on the list of names on the board.

Can we have some kind of contract on the head of head selector?

akabir77
February 29, 2008, 11:37 AM
mamu r post to heavy... it always comes with a summary...

Fazal
February 29, 2008, 11:39 AM
mamu r post to heavy... it always comes with a summary...

Next time I need to add executive summary. (at the begining) :-D

zainab
February 29, 2008, 11:43 AM
Reza should have been the choice. Wrong selection of bowlers and it shows.

Beamer
February 29, 2008, 12:03 PM
It will take time for Raj to adjust. He was bowling last night very much in a one day mode. I am yet to see him do with the red ball what he does with the white ball. I think Enam is still a better option than Raj in tests. He flights the ball, spins it a lot more, and a lot more attacking. It probably wouldn't have mattered yesterday anyway.

It think our team is too toss depended. You have to go with the mindset that there is a 50% chance that we won't win the toss. In a placid wkt like that, having three SLA's toiling away for the first two days would not yet yield much in terms of wkts. They might get some assistance from day three onwards, but, you have to win the toss to bat first, otherwise, this stares you in the face. We have to build sporting wkts. In Fatullah, one can get wkts and also score runs. We should always slot in a test match there in future unless we change the characters of Mirpur and this dead pitch of Chittagong. Now, with the burden of heavy runs staring over our shoulders, their bowlers won't have to do anything special. We will give wkts. Any team will. We, probably more so, than others.

Padosan
February 29, 2008, 12:14 PM
As for me, Razzak is always a ODI material. Flat, fast on the middle and leg with a set field. He can contain with that field and the batsmen will get out only if they try to improvize on his accuracy. He is kinda Jayasuriya. I guess y'day game even before he can settle and try his bowling, he had to go on the defensive, i.e., ODI mode. Flight razzak flight, thats the only way you will get wickets in a test match.

Whereas, the veteran Rafique has flight and variation in his armory. When razzak learns it or rather should i say starts using it, he will be as effective since he already has the big game exposure.

On the other hand, why is BD not exploring other options ? Isn't there any quality off spin or leg break bowlers playing first class at all ? or is SLA the trend ?

I remember in my school days, my coach used to tie a rope in along the nets, parallel to the ground, as high as the batsmans head and ask the spinners to toss/flight the ball up above that rope when bowling to the batsman. He always insists that going higher level, spinners main aim is to flight the ball. wonder if they still do it around the coaching academies


cheers !
Padosan

cricketboy
February 29, 2008, 01:05 PM
Even Shane warne started his debut with 120 odd runs before he picked a wicket. Not to suggest that Razzak is Shane Warne. However, it is a little difficult to judge the competence of a person on the basis of 3 tests. (12 days of cricket). I am not disputing your prime contention that he lacks variety, I am only suggesting that just because he is not doing well now is not a predictor he will not do well in the future.

Razzak is not Warne class man. He cant turn the ball even.

Ishtylish cricketer
February 29, 2008, 01:35 PM
Abdur Razzak is not a turner of the ball. In fact we don't have a single bowler who can turn the ball because they are afraid of getting hit. If you can't turn the you have to be very accurate and vary pace. If you bowl too quickly, you're playing at the hands of SA batters, bowl slowly they will struggle mightily. It's also has to do with the fact that it's day 1 of the test match. We play too much ODIs in domestic and in international cricket so the art of flight and drift remains unexplored because we feel that can do without. I really don't enjoy watching our spinner bowl because every ball the batsman's hitting off the bat. That's better than batsman leaving everything but if we could actually turn a few than batsman won't be as sure of the trajectory. It's funny how all our cricketers lack basic things to be successful at the top ie. temperment and shot selection for batsman, and line length, drift and flight for bowlers. Pathetic performance by all the BD players not just Razzak.

Ishtylish cricketer
February 29, 2008, 01:44 PM
As for me, Razzak is always a ODI material. Flat, fast on the middle and leg with a set field. He can contain with that field and the batsmen will get out only if they try to improvize on his accuracy. He is kinda Jayasuriya. I guess y'day game even before he can settle and try his bowling, he had to go on the defensive, i.e., ODI mode. Flight razzak flight, thats the only way you will get wickets in a test match.

Whereas, the veteran Rafique has flight and variation in his armory. When razzak learns it or rather should i say starts using it, he will be as effective since he already has the big game exposure.

On the other hand, why is BD not exploring other options ? Isn't there any quality off spin or leg break bowlers playing first class at all ? or is SLA the trend ?

I remember in my school days, my coach used to tie a rope in along the nets, parallel to the ground, as high as the batsmans head and ask the spinners to toss/flight the ball up above that rope when bowling to the batsman. He always insists that going higher level, spinners main aim is to flight the ball. wonder if they still do it around the coaching academies


cheers !
Padosan

Well put. You have to get the ball above the batsman's eye level and put drift on the ball. Warne did masterfully and Murali still does it. It's so beautiful to watch those guys bowl. Should learn from those guys. I think they should've played Enamul Junior and play him in tests only so he learns how to bowl spin properly. Spin bowling takes years to master. ODI 20/20 cricket ruins spinners. I can speak from experience, the easiest spinners to hit in practices or in games I found are the ones that don't flight the ball above batsman's eye level and have a roundish arm action delivering from slightly below the batsman's eyelid. It becomes easy to track and without drift you can load up very early and deposit it wherever you want.

Fazal
February 29, 2008, 11:22 PM
So who got the 1st wicket?

When all failed, the 'n0 good' TEST spinner got the 1st wicket. :-D

oracle
February 29, 2008, 11:25 PM
He got the first wicket allright but this is not the match where we should have 3 spinners.

irteja
February 29, 2008, 11:42 PM
he he...razzak got a wicket

Sohel
March 1, 2008, 01:35 AM
Too early to tell who is and who isn't at this point IMHO, but I feel the frustration without any difficulty.

That said, neither Razzak, nor Moyna has looked anything near test-class in their 2 and 6 matches to date. BTW, Razzak just needs one more wicket to equal his 300% more experienced partner in crime: Shakib Al Hassan with his 2 wickets in 6 matches !

Dhurr
March 1, 2008, 03:24 AM
What is happening to our team?

SLAs were supposed to be the backbone of our team, with too many SLAs at one point than we could handle. Now Manjarul is no longer with us, Rafique is set to retire, Rajjak does not look like a test spinner, and Enamul is? I don't know where Enamul is.

Mashrafee was supposed to be our pace spearhead and our premier allrounder. He was supposed to be an automatic selection to the team. Now he bowls without heart, and moves away from every ball. He needs to be dropped, because it looks like a psychological issue more than anything.

So our bowling is pretty much in shambles. Shahadat is the only shining light at the moment. Our bowling has always been the strongest department. Now that seems to be in tatters too. Our batting always let us down and it does not seem to be improving. So what is there to be happy about?

Shaan
March 1, 2008, 03:49 AM
Enamul Jr. is better test spinner than Razzak that has been proved now. Razzak got very little turn and drift of the ball plus missing much variation.

So Enamul should be considered for the future test and accordingly should guided.

Eshen
March 1, 2008, 11:01 AM
Currently our best ODI bowler is Razzak, and the best test bowler is Shahadat - it's disturbing to see they are not being able to contribute in both forms of cricket together.

Miraz
March 1, 2008, 11:03 AM
Currently our best ODI bowler is Razzak, and the best test bowler is Shahadat - it's disturbing to see they are not being able to contribute in both forms of cricket together.

Shahadat should be picked for the ODI series. I think he is coming out of age and will be able to contribute in ODIs as well.

lamisa
March 1, 2008, 11:29 AM
well,u know what?razzak had a decent economic rate,whereas farhad reza could be expensive.i do not trust farhad's bowling totally yet but i truly believe that given proper coaching,he can be a handy bowler.

One World
March 1, 2008, 12:58 PM
its also painful that any of our batsman hasn,t scored 200+

Its more pain when you will find Zim has four already.
http://www-uk2.cricket.org/db/STATS/TESTS/BATTING/TEST_BAT_ALL_INNS_200S.html

Russell2k7
March 1, 2008, 01:21 PM
Give him more test matches and I am sure he will do much better. But really though, one cannot really complain much about the bowling when the batting is absolutely junk.

Nafi
March 1, 2008, 03:42 PM
How funny would it be if Razzak made a double tommorow

Tigers_eye
March 1, 2008, 08:30 PM
This was a batting pitch. So no matter who played (Farhad, Enam) the SA openers wouldn't get out in day one. They came with a mission they fulfilled it.

As for Enam, how many wickets did he get in the last test match he played? I recon Vettori is a spinner too (before some one says anything about that pitch).

Yup, I am backing Abdur Razzak all the way since he is in the team. Go make a fifty tomorrow and show the captain how to bat. My worries are more with our strike bowler Mashrafe Bin Murtaza.

dash
March 1, 2008, 08:36 PM
nothing would have made a difference.
nd dont judge a bowler so quickly.
remember how many shahdat went for in his first test.
it is the same situiation with rafiq. when rafiq was overlooked at first for what ever reason there wasnt a huge media out cry coz enamul sr was there nd was known to be more of a flighter than rafiq.

RazabQ
March 2, 2008, 02:58 AM
If Razzak really wants to be a test bowler, he'd do well to watch Kumble tapes. He's more of a skiddy bowler who spins the ball just a bit so we can't expect classical spinner style bowling from him. I've never seen him get any loop or drift going. Wanna see Rubel bowl

al-Sagar
March 2, 2008, 11:14 PM
mosharraf hossain rubel

Tintin
March 2, 2008, 11:41 PM
If Razzak really wants to be a test bowler, he'd do well to watch Kumble tapes. He's more of a skiddy bowler who spins the ball just a bit so we can't expect classical spinner style bowling from him. I've never seen him get any loop or drift going. Wanna see Rubel bowl

All Bangladeshi batsmen must be made to watch Sachin Tendulkar's 241* at Sydney in 2004 before every Test match as a demonstration of what discipline in batting is all about and how not to let your ego hinder you from what you want to achieve.

Bengali Bum
March 2, 2008, 11:54 PM
Bravo RAZZAK!!!
he has more runs than six of our batsmen combined, which includes the openers and the middle order batsmen except Nafees.
Two days in a ROW!!
wow.

I think BD batsmen need to kiss his @$% everyday for the nxt three months.

Sohel
March 3, 2008, 12:22 AM
Way.To.Go Abdur Razzak ... :applause:

Murad
March 3, 2008, 12:23 AM
He's averaging exactly 66 in this series...

more than anyone else in the team...

ash odher attohotta kora uchit...:mad:

Tintin
March 3, 2008, 12:29 AM
He's averaging exactly 66 in this series...



Fifth best :

http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;orderby=batting_average;team=25 ;template=results;type=batting;view=series

Tigers_eye
March 3, 2008, 12:33 AM
Ash scored 34, 24, 0, 4 totaling 62 runs; Averaging a whooping 15.5. Way to go Ash. Still waiting on the 100 you promised in this series.

Abdur Razzak with two less innings scored 66 runs with one notout. Averaging lol, shame on everyone.

Replacing Rafique as a batsman, he has potential and showed promise. Replacing rafique in bowling category, no one can. Not even Enam 3.5 version.

Murad
March 3, 2008, 12:34 AM
Fifth best :

http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;orderby=batting_average;team=25 ;template=results;type=batting;view=series

WOW

Thats nice.

Thanks for letting us know:)

sandpiper
March 3, 2008, 12:42 AM
Well done dude. But I expected some more charisma with the ball. You saved our blushes.

Tigers_eye
March 3, 2008, 12:44 AM
Well done dude. But I expected some more charisma with the ball. You saved our blushes.
I would have asked Mash to re-evaluate his test performance against SA first.

CricTiger
March 3, 2008, 01:22 AM
What a display of pathetic Show -WOW I am impressed ? Well done BD - KEEP THIS GOOD WORK

abu2abu
March 3, 2008, 07:28 AM
Razzak batted better than Bashar has done in the last 6 months, but that still doesn't mean he was the right pick for this game.

We lost because the batting was pooor, there's no getting away from that. But purely on the selection point, Rajin should have played and for me this is proven by the fact that razzak was a long way off being our best spinner in the match. In fact both rafique and shakib bowled better than him.

ahaque
March 3, 2008, 09:59 AM
razzak batted well, bowling was ordinary. i think for future we should use enamul for tests.

Tigers_eye
March 3, 2008, 10:05 AM
razzak batted well, bowling was ordinary. i think for future we should use enamul for tests.
yes, Enam is the answer lol.
Here you go: Enam's last few games stat:
<TABLE class=engineTable><THEAD><TR class=headlinks><TH noWrap>Overs (http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/engine/player/55882.html?class=1;orderby=overs;template=results; type=bowling;view=innings)</TH><TH noWrap>Mdns (http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/engine/player/55882.html?class=1;orderby=maidens;template=result s;type=bowling;view=innings)</TH><TH noWrap>Runs (http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/engine/player/55882.html?class=1;orderby=conceded;template=resul ts;type=bowling;view=innings)</TH><TH noWrap>Wkts (http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/engine/player/55882.html?class=1;orderby=wickets;template=result s;type=bowling;view=innings)</TH><TH noWrap>Econ (http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/engine/player/55882.html?class=1;orderby=economy_rate;template=r esults;type=bowling;view=innings)</TH><TH noWrap>Pos (http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/engine/player/55882.html?class=1;orderby=bowling_position;templa te=results;type=bowling;view=innings)</TH><TH title="innings number in match" noWrap>Inns</TH><TH noWrap></TH><TH class=left title="opposition team name" noWrap>Opposition</TH><TH class=left title="ground played on" noWrap>Ground</TH><TH noWrap>Start Datehttp://stats.cricinfo.com/navigation/engine-nav/up.gif (http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/engine/player/55882.html?class=1;orderby=start;orderbyad=reverse ;template=results;type=bowling;view=innings)</TH></TR></THEAD><TBODY></TBODY></TABLE>

<TABLE class=engineTable><TBODY><TR class=data1><TD>33.0</TD><TD>8</TD><TD>106</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>3.21</TD><TD>4</TD><TD>2</TD><TD></TD><TD class=left noWrap>v Sri Lanka (http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/content/team/8.html)</TD><TD class=left noWrap>Colombo (RPS) (http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/content/ground/59306.html)</TD><TD noWrap>12 Sep 2005</TD><TD style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 3px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 1px; PADDING-TOP: 1px; WHITE-SPACE: nowrap">Test # 1764 (http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/engine/match/218813.html)</TD></TR><TR class=data1><TD>18.0</TD><TD>2</TD><TD>70</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>3.88</TD><TD>5</TD><TD>1</TD><TD></TD><TD class=left noWrap>v Sri Lanka (http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/content/team/8.html)</TD><TD class=left noWrap>Colombo (PSS) (http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/content/ground/59303.html)</TD><TD noWrap>20 Sep 2005</TD><TD style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 3px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 1px; PADDING-TOP: 1px; WHITE-SPACE: nowrap">Test # 1766 (http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/engine/match/219612.html)</TD></TR><TR class=data1><TD>24.1</TD><TD>5</TD><TD>76</TD><TD>2</TD><TD>3.14</TD><TD>4</TD><TD>2</TD><TD></TD><TD class=left noWrap>v Sri Lanka (http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/content/team/8.html)</TD><TD class=left noWrap>Chittagong (CDS) (http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/content/ground/56658.html)</TD><TD noWrap>28 Feb 2006</TD><TD style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 3px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 1px; PADDING-TOP: 1px; WHITE-SPACE: nowrap">Test # 1784 (http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/engine/match/238167.html)</TD></TR><TR class=data1><TD>9.0</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>50</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>5.55</TD><TD>3</TD><TD>4</TD><TD></TD><TD class=left noWrap>v Sri Lanka (http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/content/team/8.html)</TD><TD class=left noWrap>Chittagong (CDS) (http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/content/ground/56658.html)</TD><TD noWrap>28 Feb 2006</TD><TD style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 3px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 1px; PADDING-TOP: 1px; WHITE-SPACE: nowrap">Test # 1784 (http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/engine/match/238167.html)</TD></TR><TR class=data1><TD>26.0</TD><TD>3</TD><TD>71</TD><TD>2</TD><TD>2.73</TD><TD>4</TD><TD>2</TD><TD></TD><TD class=left noWrap>v Sri Lanka (http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/content/team/8.html)</TD><TD class=left noWrap>Bogra (http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/content/ground/56670.html)</TD><TD noWrap>8 Mar 2006</TD><TD style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 3px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 1px; PADDING-TOP: 1px; WHITE-SPACE: nowrap">Test # 1786 (http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/engine/match/238168.html)</TD></TR><TR class=data1><TD>6.0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>19</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>3.16</TD><TD>4</TD><TD>4</TD><TD></TD><TD class=left noWrap>v Sri Lanka (http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/content/team/8.html)</TD><TD class=left noWrap>Bogra (http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/content/ground/56670.html)</TD><TD noWrap>8 Mar 2006</TD><TD style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 3px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 1px; PADDING-TOP: 1px; WHITE-SPACE: nowrap">Test # 1786 (http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/engine/match/238168.html)</TD></TR><TR class=data1><TD>25.0</TD><TD>4</TD><TD>83</TD><TD>2</TD><TD>3.32</TD><TD>4</TD><TD>2</TD><TD></TD><TD class=left noWrap>v Australia (http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/content/team/2.html)</TD><TD class=left noWrap>Fatullah (http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/content/ground/56667.html)</TD><TD noWrap>9 Apr 2006</TD><TD style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 3px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 1px; PADDING-TOP: 1px; WHITE-SPACE: nowrap">Test # 1797 (http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/engine/match/238171.html)</TD></TR><TR class=data1><TD>27.0</TD><TD>5</TD><TD>80</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>2.96</TD><TD>4</TD><TD>4</TD><TD></TD><TD class=left noWrap>v Australia (http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/content/team/2.html)</TD><TD class=left noWrap>Fatullah (http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/content/ground/56667.html)</TD><TD noWrap>9 Apr 2006</TD><TD style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 3px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 1px; PADDING-TOP: 1px; WHITE-SPACE: nowrap">Test # 1797 (http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/engine/match/238171.html)</TD></TR><TR class=data1><TD>15.0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>59</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>3.93</TD><TD>4</TD><TD>1</TD><TD></TD><TD class=left noWrap>v India (http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/content/team/6.html)</TD><TD class=left noWrap>Chittagong (CDS) (http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/content/ground/56658.html)</TD><TD noWrap>18 May 2007</TD><TD style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 3px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 1px; PADDING-TOP: 1px; WHITE-SPACE: nowrap">Test # 1832 (http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/engine/match/282691.html)</TD></TR><TR class=data1><TD>1.0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>6</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>6.00</TD><TD>4</TD><TD>3</TD><TD></TD><TD class=left noWrap>v India (http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/content/team/6.html)</TD><TD class=left noWrap>Chittagong (CDS) (http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/content/ground/56658.html)</TD><TD noWrap>18 May 2007</TD><TD style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 3px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 1px; PADDING-TOP: 1px; WHITE-SPACE: nowrap">Test # 1832 (http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/engine/match/282691.html)</TD></TR><TR class=data1><TD>22.0</TD><TD>4</TD><TD>57</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>2.59</TD><TD>4</TD><TD>2</TD><TD></TD><TD class=left noWrap>v New Zealand (http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/content/team/5.html)</TD><TD class=left noWrap>Dunedin (http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/content/ground/58827.html)</TD><TD noWrap>4 Jan 2008</TD><TD style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 3px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 1px; PADDING-TOP: 1px; WHITE-SPACE: nowrap">Test # 1859 (http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/engine/match/300429.html)</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

last 11 innings he got 9 wickets. Anyways, at home both Enam and Abdur Razzak will be playing from now on. We will see who is better.

Fazal
March 3, 2008, 02:01 PM
Ki Bhai... koisilam na Razzak Mia Nirash korbey na....one way or another. We dumped the 2nd worst batsman (Tamim being the 1st) in this series and came up with a new Best batsman of the series for BD.

Tigers_eye
March 3, 2008, 03:34 PM
Ki Bhai... koisilam na Razzak Mia Nirash korbey na....one way or another. We dumped the 2nd worst batsman (Tamim being the 1st) in this series and came up with a new Best batsman of the series for BD.
Positive gain of infinite.

here what I had said before (post 42)
Yup, I am backing Abdur Razzak all the way since he is in the team. Go make a fifty tomorrow and show the captain how to bat. My worries are more with our strike bowler Mashrafe Bin Murtaza.

He ran out of partners but did show his captain how to bat. There was truly no demons in the flat pitch.

Shobha
March 3, 2008, 03:51 PM
Abdur razzak can actually bat under pressure. he's helped us out a lot in hopeless situations (even thought it didnt result in a win). srilanka, newzealand to name a few.

Fazal
March 3, 2008, 03:55 PM
All these days we were looking for all rounders from batting end i.e. a good batsman who needs to bowl better. But all in a sudden looks like we may have couple of future prospect from the batting end... Razzak and Shahadat. Their batting improvement can play a significant role in our ODI team.