PDA

View Full Version : Our achievement (in the lights of others)


Tigers_eye
July 11, 2010, 06:37 PM
ODIs:
It took SL 15 plus years to win at England against England.

Ind 11 years.

NZ 10 years.

SA winless in the last 8 years running!! 0-6. last 12 years and counting 1-7.

Bangladesh achieved it in 5 years despite being a minnow.

rahat90
July 11, 2010, 06:41 PM
wow thats interesting
but instead of counting the years can u give a stat on the number of odis played by these teams against england in england until the first win?
for bd its 15

Baundule
July 11, 2010, 06:41 PM
Bangladesh is actually not a minnow. We have enough weapons to compete against any top side. We just lack some confidence and mental toughness. Beating England when they have just won a series against the mighty Aussies is something to be proud of.

Tigers_eye
July 11, 2010, 06:47 PM
wow thats interesting
but instead of counting the years can u give a stat on the number of odis played by these teams against england in england until the first win?
for bd its 15
It is not 15. We only played 5 matches at England. So BD won in the 5th match at England.

SL 5th.

Ind 6th match.

NZ 7th.

Tigers_eye
July 11, 2010, 06:51 PM
In the ODI rankings all teams mentioned had much more points than BD. They were very close to England or higher even (point wise).

So our achievement is even better considering the difference we have with England.

(Reminder: We came very close to winning at home 2nd game but the umpire wouldn't give Morgan out. )

simon
July 11, 2010, 08:02 PM
ya,still rmbr how Morgan & the umpire took the game away from us.
In yesterday's match at some point I thght this time Trott will take it away from us.

al Furqaan
July 11, 2010, 09:21 PM
wow thats interesting
but instead of counting the years can u give a stat on the number of odis played by these teams against england in england until the first win?
for bd its 15

we've played 5 ODIs in england...maybe 6 if we played them in WC 99. so we won on the 5th or 6th try.

Tigers_eye
July 11, 2010, 09:24 PM
Adapting to new conditions, boys are just 23-25 year olds. Next time if they still be in the sides (8 years from now) they will be in prime age of 31-33. England must be sh$ting their pants already.

bujhee kom
July 11, 2010, 09:35 PM
Adapting to new conditions, boys are just 23-25 year olds. Next time if they still be in the sides (8 years from now) they will be in prime age of 31-33. England must be sh$ting their pants already.

Heheheehhe...England is wearing a very dirty pair of soiled pajamas.... very nasty!...heheheehh~

al-Sagar
July 12, 2010, 12:18 AM
this should have been our 2nd WIN over them......

i still cant believe we lost that 2nd ODI in front of my eyes. the england dressing room were celebrating like they have won the World Cup

Rifat
July 12, 2010, 12:33 AM
Bangladesh is actually not a minnow. We have enough weapons to compete against any top side. We just lack some confidence and mental toughness. Beating England when they have just won a series against the mighty Aussies is something to be proud of.

I have always been a firm believer in this statement. it is about correctly utilizing your weapons and training them to the best of their unearthed potential!

ditto :)

MatinSux
July 12, 2010, 01:02 AM
Couting number of years are meaningless. Overall it took #tries to win first game against ENG
SL 2
South Africa 5
India 5
NZ 6
BAN 13

But I dont know what this really proves?

BANFAN
July 12, 2010, 01:29 AM
Bangladesh is actually not a minnow. We have enough weapons to compete against any top side. We just lack some confidence and mental toughness. Beating England when they have just won a series against the mighty Aussies is something to be proud of.

That is so much mental and if you have people with negative attitude on top (Coach /Captain), it can be damaged so much. Players were under pressure due to recent performances and had to break it for many of their own survival. So they had to try and win, despite all negativity at the top regarding our ability to win.

Dealey pith theke gele people bounce back with all strength. This can also be done through inspiration and positive attitude, unfortunately we want to continue with a guy loaded with negativity regarding our capacity to win.

BANFAN
July 12, 2010, 01:42 AM
Adapting to new conditions, boys are just 23-25 year olds. Next time if they still be in the sides (8 years from now) they will be in prime age of 31-33. England must be sh$ting their pants already.

TE, that is an obsolete logic for Bangladesh. Due to lack of grooming, coaching, mentoring, policies we haven't been able to develop the players as they grow older. We may be saying the same thing after 8 years, with a new set of players averaging 23years of age.

auntu
July 12, 2010, 02:47 AM
Adapting to new conditions, boys are just 23-25 year olds. Next time if they still be in the sides (8 years from now) they will be in prime age of 31-33. England must be sh$ting their pants already.
Good thread Mijan bhai.
Ishh..8 years!!! That's a long time and injustice to us. :(

lamisa
July 12, 2010, 06:16 AM
this should have been our 2nd WIN over them......

i still cant believe we lost that 2nd ODI in front of my eyes. the england dressing room were celebrating like they have won the World Cup

where were u sitting?i was there at that match 2!

Imteaz
July 12, 2010, 09:24 AM
Bhalo.

boka
July 12, 2010, 09:44 AM
te, that is an obsolete logic for bangladesh. Due to lack of grooming, coaching, mentoring, policies we haven't been able to develop the players as they grow older. We may be saying the same thing after 8 years, with a new set of players averaging 23years of age.

[বাংলা]এক্কেবারে খাটি কথা... তয় মনথেইক্কা চাই যেন কথাটা বেঠিক দেখি ৮ বছর পর.... [/বাংলা]

zainab
July 12, 2010, 05:58 PM
I feel that as fans, we should relish the win in the second ODI, it could have been a whitewash, but the boys did well to win their first game against England and can safely say that they have won matches against all the G8 teams. England was the only one missing and they accomplished it on English turf. Something went wrong with their bowling today, I hope that they get a bowling coach quickly. Shafiul and Rubel, with proper coaching can become much better. I felt sorry for Shai today, he tries very hard, and let's face it, he gave BD the win.

rahat90
July 12, 2010, 06:16 PM
It is not 15. We only played 5 matches at England. So BD won in the 5th match at England.

SL 5th.

Ind 6th match.

NZ 7th.

thanks for the correction
had abit of a blond moment there lol

Tigers_eye
July 12, 2010, 10:17 PM
TE, that is an obsolete logic for Bangladesh. Due to lack of grooming, coaching, mentoring, policies we haven't been able to develop the players as they grow older. We may be saying the same thing after 8 years, with a new set of players averaging 23years of age.
We started with the teens average batsmen. In came the 20 ave younglings. Now we have the 30 average ones. In 8 years if we still have the 23 year olds in the national team, rest assured their average would be in the 40s. So in any ways you look at it "sh$ting their pants" comments stands.

MatinSux
July 12, 2010, 11:06 PM
Hmm interesting. Ten years ago Matin came and tore apart the Indian bowling attack and went on to score The youngest test century. Ten Years later I am sure bowlers like Steyn, Mitch, Lee are terrified of him.

chotpoti
July 12, 2010, 11:11 PM
ahahhahah..when i read about the numbers, i was like (.what a meaningles thread ( no offence to the opener) I kinda think time iz never the best base to judge any team over other. There is never a comparison as Bd getting much more chances than the teams compared to once got. Therefore, dont go by time, go by the number.

magic boy
July 13, 2010, 12:45 AM
ahahhahah..when i read about the numbers, i was like (.what a meaningles thread ( no offence to the opener) I kinda think time iz never the best base to judge any team over other. There is never a comparison as Bd getting much more chances than the teams compared to once got. Therefore, dont go by time, go by the number.

here's the number showed by Thread opener that you overlooked.We dint take too much matches in English condition/soil to beat them.that's what this thread indicating.

It is not 15. We only played 5 matches at England. So BD won in the 5th match at England.

SL 5th.

Ind 6th match.

NZ 7th.

MatinSux
July 13, 2010, 01:16 AM
here's the number showed by Thread opener that you overlooked.We dint take too much matches in English condition/soil to beat them.that's what this thread indicating.
hmm too much doses of Zafarullah Sarafat's magnificent analysis of Holland vs Spain?
What you've overlooked is what does all of this mean? More accurate stats showed that Sri Lanka beaten England in their second try. However, I am puzzled as to what it really proves. We've only taken like 7th try to beat Pakistan, but I am puzzeled again as to what it means since we've lost to them ever since.

BANFAN
July 13, 2010, 01:27 AM
Couting number of years are meaningless. Overall it took #tries to win first game against ENG
SL 2
South Africa 5
India 5
NZ 6
BAN 13

But I dont know what this really proves?

I think number of years are more meaningful than number of matches. The game develops more over time than over number of matches. Although both contributes to develop, time is a greater factor when you have a decent cricketing structure at home.

MatinSux
July 13, 2010, 02:22 AM
I think number of years are more meaningful than number of matches. The game develops more over time than over number of matches. Although both contributes to develop, time is a greater factor when you have a decent cricketing structure at home.
Well in that case it took:
SL(active in ODI 1975) about 7 years to beat England in any ground.
India (active in ODI 1974) about 7 years to beat England in any ground.
NZ (active in ODI 1973) about 10 years to beat England in any ground.
BAN(active in ODI 1986) about 24 years to beat England in any ground.

Pretty silly stats if you ask me.

BANFAN
July 13, 2010, 02:51 AM
Well in that case it took:
SL(active in ODI 1975) about 7 years to beat England in any ground.
India (active in ODI 1974) about 7 years to beat England in any ground.
NZ (active in ODI 1973) about 10 years to beat England in any ground.
BAN(active in ODI 1986) about 24 years to beat England in any ground.

Pretty silly stats if you ask me.

Unless a country gets the test status, you cannot compare that period to other test playing nations. The cricketing development takes place rapidly after you attain the test status, due to additional facilities to ensure the development of the game.

In that case, the count down of Ireland, Scotland, Kenya, Uae, Afg, bermuda, Holland etc will be too painful.

And it was not only beating England in England, we completed the cycle. I will definitely go by years.

Baundule
July 13, 2010, 05:04 AM
We started with the teens average batsmen. In came the 20 ave younglings. Now we have the 30 average ones. In 8 years if we still have the 23 year olds in the national team, rest assured their average would be in the 40s. So in any ways you look at it "sh$ting their pants" comments stands.
In Bangladesh teams are not selected based on averages. If that were the case, HaBa, Rafique and Mashud would have been playing till now. The newer generation is supposed to be better than the average players we have at the moment.

Tigers_eye
July 13, 2010, 08:53 AM
Dear MatinSux,
Home cooking is always good. Adjusting foreign conditions is what I am trying to potray. If you can not comprehend this simple logic I have nothing to say. We did achieve something that is par with some countries. I carefully didn't include Pakistan, WI, ZIM for obvious reasons in the opening post. If you want to talk about the losing streak or percentages and compare eras, you are more than welcome to do so. Create your own thread. :)

By the way, I like your name. Very similar to my signature.

Raynman
July 13, 2010, 10:01 AM
If someone has the time, could you please dig up another stat. How many overall ODIs had those teams played to that point?

My thinking is that we have played a huge number of ODIs where we should be help to higher standards instead of celebrating comparative stats that really don't have anything to do with each other given the infancy of ODI cricket at that time.

MatinSux
July 13, 2010, 12:14 PM
Unless a country gets the test status, you cannot compare that period to other test playing nations. The cricketing development takes place rapidly after you attain the test status, due to additional facilities to ensure the development of the game.

In that case, the count down of Ireland, Scotland, Kenya, Uae, Afg, bermuda, Holland etc will be too painful.

And it was not only beating England in England, we completed the cycle. I will definitely go by years.
I am not getting you, now you need more specific number of years such as "# of years it took for a certain team after their test status to beat England"? In such case it took NZ 53 years to beat England. Similarly, it took Pakistan 21 years to beat England. Bangladesh less than 10 years to beat England. Happy now?

Ireland and Kenya have already beaten multiple test teams without even having test status. In fact, Kenya I believe was even a semifinalist in a world cup!

Neel Here
July 13, 2010, 02:49 PM
Ire and Ken would have negative values when they get their test status. :-p well, so did BD, beat pakistan before test status.

zainab
July 13, 2010, 05:15 PM
After seeing how BD is struggling in Test cricket, I doubt whether the ICC will give any other country test status. BD was indeed very lucky to get it.

Ajfar
July 13, 2010, 05:20 PM
After seeing how BD is struggling in Test cricket, I doubt whether the ICC will give any other country test status. BD was indeed very lucky to get it.

yup we were very lucky. We did a pretty damn good job and ruined the chances for all other associates.

zainab
July 14, 2010, 06:21 AM
yup we were very lucky. We did a pretty damn good job and ruined the chances for all other associates.

Indeed! you are right. BD better perform better, or they will be playing less test matches when the new FTP is completed by the ICC. doubt whether they will play more than 4 matches per year, and they might be home matches. I feel that Zim and Ireland are on the same level with BD, so BCB should try to arrange more 4 day matches with the boards of these countries, also the UAE, Afghanistan and Kenya. Also playing against the A teams of the G8 countries will be good.
For now, the G8 teams dont want to play BD, feels that it is not a good contest, and really, you cannot blame them.

mij
July 14, 2010, 06:49 AM
Indeed! you are right. BD better perform better, or they will be playing less test matches when the new FTP is completed by the ICC. doubt whether they will play more than 4 matches per year, and they might be home matches. I feel that Zim and Ireland are on the same level with BD, so BCB should try to arrange more 4 day matches with the boards of these countries, also the UAE, Afghanistan and Kenya. Also playing against the A teams of the G8 countries will be good.
For now, the G8 teams dont want to play BD, feels that it is not a good contest, and really, you cannot blame them.

We need to understand playing test match mean every thing. which means more game and you are playing all format of the games and more opportunity.

lamisa
July 14, 2010, 07:20 AM
are improving in test cricket now.we have been doing quite well in test cricket,taking most of the games to the last day but our major problem is the batting collapse and our players should learn how to bat out atleast 3 sessions

crikfreak
July 14, 2010, 02:56 PM
my god... this thread is so confusing...:S...... i 1st bit i cudnt deicde wat u ppl were tryin to say...

bt its better now....

bd needs to improve on their test performance... we wre lucky to get status.... we shud try n make use of it.....