PDA

View Full Version : BCB Media: Ashraful on their preparation for the T20 WC


Zunaid
September 12, 2012, 09:41 AM
We have a better understanding of Twenty20 now: Ashraful

Wednesday, 12 September 2012

 

COLOMBO:  Bangladesh batsman Mohammad Ashraful gives his impression of the recent T20 tournament in Trinidad and looks ahead to the ICC WT20 upon the Team’s arrival in Sri Lanka –

On Bangladesh’s performance in the recently concluded four-team T20 tournament commemorating Trinidad & Tobago’s 50 years of independence

I think we did fairly well. We won easily against Barbados and Afghanistan by chasing in rain-reduced games. We should have beaten Trinidad & Tobago in the last match after having them reeling on 12 for five but they got home in the final over. Batting second was a lot easier at Queen’s Park Oval as the bowlers were finding it extremely difficult to grip the ball as there was dew and the ground was wet because of all the rain during the competition.

How the team is shaping up for the WT20

We have played a lot of Twenty20 matches during the past couple of months. If you include the practice games then we will have around 17/18 matches going into the first encounter of the WT20. This is probably the best preparation we have had before a World T20 event. Also, some of us have participated in the Sri Lankan Premier League last month and that experience could be crucial. I believe everyone has a better understanding of the requirements of the shortest version of cricket now.

Comparing the present Bangladesh side with the previous World T20 squads

We have found some ideal cricketers for Twenty20 to compliment the likes of Shakib (Al Hasan), Tamim (Iqbal), Mushfiqur Rahim and Abdur Razzak. Ziaur Rahman is a handy batsman to have as he is a natural big hitter. Mahmudullah is becoming a very useful allrounder in these conditions and Elias Sunny has proved his worth in this version.  The return of Masrafe (Mortaza) is a big plus and he has got into a nice rhythm. His lower order batting can also change matches.

His own target

I have made good starts in recent times as an opener. I feel I am hitting the ball well. I love Sri Lanka. I have some excellent memories of this country and I have been on every tour of this country since my international debut. I am really looking forward to the tournament.

 

AsifTheManRahman
September 12, 2012, 09:48 AM
Lost the cup to Afghanistan and he thinks we did fairly well. :facepalm:

Does anyone else see it? This is a new low for us, doesn't matter what version of the game or in what conditions or what tournament, but we lost a cup to Afghanistan. This is actually extremely concerning and embarrassing, but no one seems to be taking it seriously. How long are we going to be in denial?

Maysun
September 12, 2012, 09:57 AM
He has been hitting the ball well and yet plays with a SR around 100 :lol:

Rabz
September 12, 2012, 10:01 AM
Stay positive.
That's the key.

Nice little interview.

Max100
September 12, 2012, 10:42 AM
We lost against trinidad and tobago, scotland, netherland, ireland, and several other low profile team. Which one is the worst?

I think its because over satisfaction

simon
September 12, 2012, 11:00 AM
don't understand the obsession about Ashraful.
BC aswell as BD media.
We need to leave this guy tranquille , this guy has always struggled with his consistency,let him concentrate on his game. (just my opinion)

zinatf
September 12, 2012, 11:05 AM
Haire M:facepalm:tin!

dash
September 12, 2012, 11:32 AM
i thought he said all the right things going into a big tournament--- how would this sound: Ashraful " we are a very poor team in t20, we lost to tnt, scotland and netherlands and so we are bit down with confidence.....we have two good players and the rest makes up the numbers....as far as i am concerned, i love to visit srilanka because i have memories of scoring some run here,, and since i can only score now days in dreams..i hope my dream turns into reality....but dont count on it..to summarize support us at your peril and it will not come with any warranty"

BrianLara7
September 12, 2012, 11:53 AM
Lost the cup to Afghanistan and he thinks we did fairly well. :facepalm:

Does anyone else see it? This is a new low for us, doesn't matter what version of the game or in what conditions or what tournament, but we lost a cup to Afghanistan. This is actually extremely concerning and embarrassing, but no one seems to be taking it seriously. How long are we going to be in denial?

For a guy who averages 20 in both odi and test and less than 20 in t20 after playing for over 10 years and almost 250 matches, losing cup to Afghanistan is nothing to be disappointed about.

ononto
September 12, 2012, 12:07 PM
Lost the cup to Afghanistan and he thinks we did fairly well. :facepalm:

Does anyone else see it? This is a new low for us, doesn't matter what version of the game or in what conditions or what tournament, but we lost a cup to Afghanistan. This is actually extremely concerning and embarrassing, but no one seems to be taking it seriously. How long are we going to be in denial?

We didn't do fairly well but saying it loud before a tournament won't do any good. Dash said it well. :up:

i thought he said all the right things going into a big tournament--- how would this sound: Ashraful " we are a very poor team in t20, we lost to tnt, scotland and netherlands and so we are bit down with confidence.....we have two good players and the rest makes up the numbers....as far as i am concerned, i love to visit srilanka because i have memories of scoring some run here,, and since i can only score now days in dreams..i hope my dream turns into reality....but dont count on it..to summarize support us at your peril and it will not come with any warranty"

kalpurush
September 12, 2012, 12:07 PM
Lost the cup to Afghanistan and he thinks we did fairly well. :facepalm:

Does anyone else see it? This is a new low for us, doesn't matter what version of the game or in what conditions or what tournament, but we lost a cup to Afghanistan. This is actually extremely concerning and embarrassing, but no one seems to be taking it seriously. How long are we going to be in denial?
The purpose of WI tour was match practice - finding the ideal combination for our WC squad - our gola is WC - now we have to wait and see if we can reach our goal or not. I am not too woried here Asif! :)

kalpurush
September 12, 2012, 12:10 PM
i thought he said all the right things going into a big tournament--- how would this sound: Ashraful " we are a very poor team in t20, we lost to tnt, scotland and netherlands and so we are bit down with confidence.....we have two good players and the rest makes up the numbers....as far as i am concerned, i love to visit srilanka because i have memories of scoring some run here,, and since i can only score now days in dreams..i hope my dream turns into reality....but dont count on it..to summarize support us at your peril and it will not come with any warranty"
Ha! Ha!! The other side of you Dash bhai - :floor:

And I thought you are a serious guy!!!

dash
September 12, 2012, 12:20 PM
Ha! Ha!! The other side of you Dash bhai - :floor:

And I thought you are a serious guy!!!

me serious :)..no no...i only pretend....

AsifTheManRahman
September 12, 2012, 12:31 PM
The purpose of WI tour was match practice - finding the ideal combination for our WC squad - our gola is WC - now we have to wait and see if we can reach our goal or not. I am not too woried here Asif! :)
This is the problem though. We always have an excuse for losing to supposedly inferior opponents. We are never too worried and that has brought us where we are today, losing a cup to Afghanistan. We shouldn't be coming in second behind them even if we're just practicing. We have lost to Zimbabwe, Scotland, the Netherlands and T&T in recent times and every time we seem to have an excuse ready.

How can we justify, even to ourselves, that we are superior to these teams if we keep losing to them? We don't have a history of beating better sides for fifty years, so every loss counts. We lose to sides that are weaker than us on a regular basis and not just as an upset/a one off. We can keep denying it as much as we want, but we really haven't proven ourselves to be better than associates by any comfortable margin.

We can say our goal is the WC all we want, but to get there we should stop losing tournaments to teams ranked 16th. I'm sorry, but I don't think we're going anywhere with this culture of excuses. This is a new low, sorry not a lot of people see it.

AsifTheManRahman
September 12, 2012, 12:33 PM
I don't expect Ashraful to say any of the stuff that dash posted. But to say we did fairly well? You lost the cup to freaking Afghanistan for God's sake! At least give us some indication that you realize how bad that sounds instead of patting yourselves on the back.

kalpurush
September 12, 2012, 12:59 PM
This is a new low, sorry not a lot of people see it.
Well, I agree we should have beaten the T & T. I still don't get it how come lost the match even when T & T was 12/5 !

Though, I don't see it as new low! We did beat the Afghans, right?

SS
September 12, 2012, 01:51 PM
Motin will try his best to give a super quick start when facing NZ and score some runs in the first game, if not he will score some runs in the next game with little slower rate to score few runs like 30+ to overall get a B grade for the WC tour. Isn't that how overall performance gets appraised with "fairly well performance "and "gradual progress and improvements" report card.
This is the new picture and the new expectations, when Motin is the only person to save us and others are in hybernation (Wake up TIK, Shakib, Mushy, Nasir...what has happened to you all of a sudden when we need you the most!!!)

SS
September 12, 2012, 02:42 PM
Cricinfo article : http://www.espncricinfo.com/icc-world-twenty20-2012/content/current/story/581926.html

My question is why this type of title we are 'never better prepared'. I just don't get it, aeishob bhua exaggerated kotha bolar ki dorkar ase...'positive' kotha bartha ki ar onno kono team chinta korena or bolena. crapinfo before used to put us down and now our own ppl putting us down as in reality they are still not that good. So, does this mean preivoulsy we were less prepared? What they will say if they lose both games and exit early ...other teams are 'more prepared'?

Zeeshan
September 12, 2012, 02:44 PM
"I love Sri Lanka."-Ashraful

SS
September 12, 2012, 02:50 PM
"I love Sri Lanka."-Ashraful

Srilankan reception paiya Motin shob kisu bhuilla gese...dosh ar ki dimu aeirokom hashi diya to keu tare receive korena in bd...what if Motin migrates over there because of the love...

al Furqaan
September 12, 2012, 03:16 PM
I don't expect Ashraful to say any of the stuff that dash posted. But to say we did fairly well? You lost the cup to freaking Afghanistan for God's sake! At least give us some indication that you realize how bad that sounds instead of patting yourselves on the back.



But they also beat AFG by 7 wickets. I'm not disagreeing with you completely ATMR, I think its disgusting that we lost the Cup on NRR (what else is new) and that we lost to TnT. However, I think that we need to reassess where we are and only then can we figure out what we need to do to get to where we want to be.

Since 2010 we lost ODIs to Ireland, Netherlands, 3x to Zimbabwe, and lost T20s vs Netherlands, Scotland, TnT, and Zimbabwe. No matter how you look at it, we're not good enough to have a perfect or even 90% record against minnows.

I suspect we will be winning 3-4 ODIs vs the top sides every year to the point where we will probably be something like Zimbabwe at their peak under A Flower or maybe the Lankan teams of the late 80s, early 90s. But we will continue to lose to Associates until we reach the strength of the 6th ranked side.

I see this as more of a paradox rather than a cut and dry thing...

On the one hand we're not nearly as good as the current SL side...but I'd give us a fair shot of pushing them in a 5-match ODI series at home or on neutral ground. With any FC/Test experience, we're probably a long way from them in that format although we could have been much much closer.

Now here's the thing...look at the ODI ratings. We're within striking distance of NZ. As imbalanced as it is, its still a mathematical calculation and numbers can't lie. Therefore we must be somewhat close to NZ if the numbers say we are. Now, Bangladesh because we are Bangladesh plays a lot of matches against Associates and you can't really blame them because we keep losing to them. Its possible that NZ and WI would also lose several games IF they played them as often as we did. If we lose 10 games, maybe they would lose 2 or 3. Its also possible that they would destroy the minnows and not lose any games at all. In which case its more of a mental thing and not one of actual lack of talent on our part.

But I sort of get your frustration. Which is why I don't put much relevance into T20 cricket. Let ODIs and Tests die first, then I'll see but for now T20 while replete with its own skillset is still "lottery" cricket to me.

Ajfar
September 12, 2012, 04:31 PM
^ let Test and ODI die first? Ya in the mean time let the rest of the world get used to this format and get ahead of us.

We have no reason to be so much behind the other teams in this format. This format was invented after we already became a Test nation. We never took T20 as seriously as other teams did right from the beginning and that's why our player still have to say things like 'We have a better understanding of T20'. We should not be having a better understanding of this format after playing in T20 world cup 3 times already. T20 is already having major impacts on ODI, there is no wait and let's see what happens. If we keep saying oh its just T20 we will only be moving down the ladder one more step while everybody else is planning to go up.

AsifTheManRahman
September 12, 2012, 05:18 PM
I suspect we will be winning 3-4 ODIs vs the top sides every year to the point where we will probably be something like Zimbabwe at their peak under A Flower or maybe the Lankan teams of the late 80s, early 90s. But we will continue to lose to Associates until we reach the strength of the 6th ranked side.

Zimbabwe at their peak hardly ever lost to us (let alone teams ranked below us). There was just that one loss, where Ashraful made a 50 and Tareq Aziz bowled a last over that Mash can only dream of in his dreams within his dreams within his dreams. They were always leagues ahead of us. Before 1997, one of our best performances at an ICC trophy competition came in the 1990 version, when the uncles made it to the semis, but lost, surprise surprise, to Zimbabwe. Had we won, we would only need to beat the Netherlands (very possible at that time unlike now) to play in the World Cup in 1992, and we - not Zimbabwe - would have become the 9th Test nation. Even in the beginning of the 90's, Zimbabwe were further ahead of us than we are than Ireland today.

Andy Flower was one of the best batsmen of his generation, Grant was very good, although nowhere close to Andy. Heath Streak would have made it to most Test teams, Paul Strang was probably one of the better (if not one of the best) spinners in the world at the time until he lost form prematurely. We could only dream of having someone like Neil Johnson in our wildest dreams within our wildest dreams within our wildest dreams. Ali Campbell was a great leader to a growing side and even lesser impact players like Guy Whittal, Craig Wishart, Eddo Brandes were coming of age and much better than the Mofeezes and Abuls and Mokhleses we have representing us today. They had won entire Test series, let alone single matches.

The Lankans were even better. Before Asia '96, they had already won the Asia Cup (in the mid/late 80's I think) and had come in second several times. They had won Test series and had guys like Ranatunga, de Silva, Vaas and Murali, who were more than worthy opponents for even the best of players. Losing to lower ranked teams, especially Bangladesh and below, was out of the question and deemed an upset, not a weekly thing.

So no, we haven't achieved what the Sri Lankan sides of the 80's and early 90's or the Zimbabwean sides of the 90's had and neither will we if we keep losing to minnows and only win a couple of ODI's here and there. Let's not insult those great/very good players by comparing them to our no-name sissies who don't even know how to hold a bat when some Rayad Emrit, who the world has never heard of, starts bowling.

al Furqaan
September 12, 2012, 06:10 PM
Even in the beginning of the 90's, Zimbabwe were further ahead of us than we are than Ireland today.

I don't think it matters much if Zim - BD back then is > BD - IRE because I think the Irish are good enough and sustainable enough for Test status. So does Ian Pont.

But I've run stats on Zimbabwe in their peak (from Jan 1, 1992 till Mar 31, 2004) and they won exactly 40 matches against the top sides with 163 losses. Firstly 40 wins from 12 years is 3-4 wins per year. I think our current Bangladesh can manage that, and given that we've 4 wins vs NZ and one each vs WI, ENG, SL, IND in a 16 month stretch (including our torrid 58 and 78 all outs at the world cup) indicates that we are exceeding ZIMs rate throughout their peak years. I'm not including a bunch of near misses against PAK and others. Thats 8 wins in 16 months which is about 6 wins a year.
Further according to this BC article (http://banglacricket.com/html/features/article.php?item=567) our win % is higher than ZIMs.

Further ZIM had I think won 4 tests against top sides at that time which is of course better than us given we've only had about 4 near-wins. But two of those wins were against India - even more terrible at touring than they are now - and the other 2 against the always unpredictable Pakistan. Sure they drew more matches, but its misleading to make them sound like they were winning series after series as you did in your post when in fact they won all of 4 Tests.



The Lankans were even better. Before Asia '96, they had already won the Asia Cup (in the mid/late 80's I think) and had come in second several times. They had won Test series and had guys like Ranatunga, de Silva, Vaas and Murali, who were more than worthy opponents for even the best of players. Losing to lower ranked teams, especially Bangladesh and below, was out of the question and deemed an upset, not a weekly thing.

The Lankans from the time they got test status till 1990 were around about as good as our ODI side the past couple years. 16 wins and 71 losses against the G8 sides. They were considerably better in the 90s but in the 1980s they weren't considerably better than us if any at all. In tests, they only won twice and again it was against India and Pakistan.


So no, we haven't achieved what the Sri Lankan sides of the 80's and early 90's or the Zimbabwean sides of the 90's had and neither will we if we keep losing to minnows and only win a couple of ODI's here and there.

Firstly losing against Associates and winning against the F9/G8 are two totally separate things. Isn't it at least slightly ingenuous to equate one with the other? The real world is about maximizing your whatever...thats why economics exists as a branch of philosophy. At some point some white european philosopher realized that human wants are unlimited but that our earthly resources are scarce. Thus was born economics.

I see cricket as something similar. No team, not WI invincibles of the 70s or the Aussies of the 90-00s or India today will win every single game they play. Thus when it comes down to it, I'd rather beat top sides regularly with the same frequency losses to Associates than having a perfect Associate record and rarely beating top sides. This goes back to that poll I opened some weeks ago.

Now you might ask if that is the case what makes us different from top Associates like Ireland and Afghanistan. The answer is on what basis do we assume that we have to be superior to them to begin with? On what misguided notions of Bangla-supremacy are we constructing our sporting expectations? Have we seen the physical build of an Afghan or the athletecism with which they've been naturally blessed as a whole? I have, and that is why I loudly clamor for Ireland and Afghanistan to have Test status immediately if not sooner. If Bangladesh has it, why not them?

So to conclude my long-*** post...I agree with you its worrying to continually lose to Associates, but I'd rather focus on how we can increase our winning rate against top sides and that will automatically fix this problem. As it stands we've got 8 wins vs 13 losses since Nov 2010. That number looks very good compared to ZIM at their peak and SL even in the pre-96 90s (31 wins, 57 losses).

Gowza
September 12, 2012, 07:27 PM
he always says things are going well, whether it's just for the media or it's how he really feels i don't know. i'd say they did OK, got some wins but had some losses to, losses that shouldn't have happened.

cricket_king
September 12, 2012, 10:23 PM
Andy Flower was one of the best batsmen of his generation, Grant was very good, although nowhere close to Andy. Heath Streak would have made it to most Test teams, Paul Strang was probably one of the better (if not one of the best) spinners in the world at the time until he lost form prematurely. We could only dream of having someone like Neil Johnson in our wildest dreams within our wildest dreams within our wildest dreams. Ali Campbell was a great leader to a growing side and even lesser impact players like Guy Whittal, Craig Wishart, Eddo Brandes were coming of age and much better than the Mofeezes and Abuls and Mokhleses we have representing us today. They had won entire Test series, let alone single matches.

All of that (besides Andy Flower) is just utter exaggeration. You make them out to have been a #1 team. From what I recall, their position was the same as our current position. They definitely had more consistent performers, but this "wildest dream within a dream within a dream" crap is a just an inflated load of rubbish.

Gowza
September 12, 2012, 10:57 PM
streak was pretty good actually, overall test bowling average of 28 which is really solid and for the 90s he averaged 24 in tests, along with that he chipped in with some runs to including a test century. andy flower of course was a terrific batsman, the others were decent solid players. in terms of results they were at one time ahead of what BD is today, especially in test matches.

Jadukor
September 12, 2012, 11:44 PM
it's good that he thinks the side is better prepared. I would like to see him get out of the trend of scoring in practice matches and flopping in the real games. It's time for him to step up and make an impact during the powerplay overs with Tamim.

AsifTheManRahman
September 13, 2012, 12:59 AM
Well then clearly you didn't watch a whole lot of cricket in the 90's. I didn't say they were the #1 team, and don't rubbish me just because your memory deceives you.All of that (besides Andy Flower) is just utter exaggeration. You make them out to have been a #1 team. From what I recall, their position was the same as our current position. They definitely had more consistent performers, but this "wildest dream within a dream within a dream" crap is a just an inflated load of rubbish.
<br />Posted via BC Mobile Edition (Blackberry)

jeesh
September 13, 2012, 01:37 AM
I kind of agree with AsifTheManRahman's points. Zimbabwe always has the knack of producing quality cricketers-better than most of ours. Unfortunately their administration does a poor job of building a team and keeping them together. Its not just those names, i can add more: Murray Goodwin (Averages close to 50 in FC cricket having played most of it in Australia and England), Sean Ervine, Andy Blignaut, Travis Friend, Stuart Carlisle, Mark Vermeulen. Even they have very good players in their current squad-players who can easily break into ours. Unfortunately for them whenever they start to click, something bad happens.

Back to the topic, Ashraful is not exactly wrong. We have played quite a bit of T20 in recent times. And when i say that not just unofficial ones or those against associates. I believe there have been a lot of practice matches at home where the likes of Rakib has impressed. We are also one of the first teams in Sri Lanka for the tournament-gives us a head start to get used to the weather and conditions. WI tour would have also helped. So in a way we ve had decent preparation.

deshprem
September 13, 2012, 04:34 AM
What's the big deal over this zimbabwe madness? yeh ok they had a good past, but i believe we have dominated in recent past and we are ahead in rankings, and ahead on heat to head basis. end of story bangladesh > zimbabwe.

why does everyone go soft when assessing other teams? when it comes to looking at our team, we're quick to pull the gun on 'results'. as far as i know, the numbers say we are better than zimbabwe. end of story. screw their past.

cricket_king
September 13, 2012, 07:12 AM
The stats claim they've won 4 test matches against top ranked sides, against India and Pakistan respectively. From what I remember, India were completely hopeless away from home (much like us) at that time, and Pakistan...well, they can be a little unpredictable. Nonetheless, obviously these are 4 very significant victories in that we haven't been able to achieve it.
My point is, if we compare our current team to Zimbabwe's best 90s team, sure they'd be slightly better, but not so much that we'd only "dream" of matching their players. They aren't bloody Australia, calm down. I'd be extremely surprised to hear someone suggest that that team would beat us at home.

BrianLara7
September 13, 2012, 09:58 AM
The stats claim they've won 4 test matches against top ranked sides, against India and Pakistan respectively. From what I remember, India were completely hopeless away from home (much like us) at that time, and Pakistan...well, they can be a little unpredictable. Nonetheless, obviously these are 4 very significant victories in that we haven't been able to achieve it.
My point is, if we compare our current team to Zimbabwe's best 90s team, sure they'd be slightly better, but not so much that we'd only "dream" of matching their players. They aren't bloody Australia, calm down. I'd be extremely surprised to hear someone suggest that that team would beat us at home.
The zimbabwe of the 90's with the flower brothers, streak, campbell etc?They would easily beat us 4-1 in odi series and thrash us in tests at home. Andy flower alone is 10 times the batsman that Ashraful, nafees and co are.. the guy has 200's on Indian dustbowls. I think you havent watched much cricket in the 90's.

akabir77
September 13, 2012, 10:02 AM
And we almost beat them in at least 2 friendly odis in dhaka stadium with akram and bulbul.

al Furqaan
September 13, 2012, 01:56 PM
The zimbabwe of the 90's with the flower brothers, streak, campbell etc?They would easily beat us 4-1 in odi series and thrash us in tests at home. Andy flower alone is 10 times the batsman that Ashraful, nafees and co are.. the guy has 200's on Indian dustbowls. I think you havent watched much cricket in the 90's.

Flower is just one man. But the win loss ratios in ODIs don't suggest that either ZIM in the 90s or SL in the 80s and first half of the 90s are a better team than our current team. In Tests, yes they were better, but I doubt they were much better than the current WI or NZ outfits, and if we have a shot at competing with those sides, we'd surely be able to compete against the likes of those guys.

Zeeshan
September 13, 2012, 02:07 PM
John "glasses" Rennie could single handedly roll over ANY Bangladeshi team of any era. :-B

cricket_king
September 13, 2012, 11:39 PM
The zimbabwe of the 90's with the flower brothers, streak, campbell etc?They would easily beat us 4-1 in odi series and thrash us in tests at home. Andy flower alone is 10 times the batsman that Ashraful, nafees and co are.. the guy has 200's on Indian dustbowls. I think you havent watched much cricket in the 90's.

I don't think one man = whole team. Though in our case it is often Shakib = Bangladesh. And no, being born in '91, I wouldn't have watched or understood an awful lot of cricket in the 90s. But I've seen enough of the Zimbabwe team's scores to get an idea of the gap between them and our current side.

World Champs
September 13, 2012, 11:54 PM
My point is, if we compare our current team to Zimbabwe's best 90s team, sure they'd be slightly better, but not so much that we'd only "dream" of matching their players. They aren't bloody Australia, calm down. I'd be extremely surprised to hear someone suggest that that team would beat us at home.
Zim were a better team than present Bangladesh team. They won a test series in Pakistan, won against India a home. They would have beaten Bangladesh even in Bdesh and Bdesh would have had no chance against them in zim.

Its no use comparing stats with them, Bdesh may have the same number of wins as them but Zim were more competitive even away from home which your team isn't.

zinatf
September 14, 2012, 12:11 AM
Zim were a better team than present Bangladesh team. They won a test series in Pakistan, won against India a home. They would have beaten Bangladesh even in Bdesh and Bdesh would have had no chance against them in zim.

Its no use comparing stats with them, Bdesh may have the same number of wins as them but Zim were more competitive even away from home which your team isn't.

hmm agreed.

al Furqaan
September 14, 2012, 12:58 AM
Its no use comparing stats with them, Bdesh may have the same number of wins as them but Zim were more competitive even away from home which your team isn't.

But ultimately stats are all you have to go by. At the end of the day its the win-loss ratio over a large enough sample size that tells you where you're at. Even Bangladesh has a few near misses vs AUS, SA, NZ, PAK if you want to look beyond pure numbers. If we disregard numbers how do we know anything at all?

Btw, I'm not suggesting current Bangladesh team is better than or even as good as the 80s Sri Lanka or the 90s ZIM with A Flower. However, that our W-L ratios over the last 2 or so years compares favorably shouldn't be disregarded either. Reading the comments section on cricinfo one gets the impression that Ireland and Afghanistan are worlds better than us.

World Champs
September 14, 2012, 07:46 AM
But ultimately stats are all you have to go by. At the end of the day its the win-loss ratio over a large enough sample size that tells you where you're at. Even Bangladesh has a few near misses vs AUS, SA, NZ, PAK if you want to look beyond pure numbers. If we disregard numbers how do we know anything at all?

Btw, I'm not suggesting current Bangladesh team is better than or even as good as the 80s Sri Lanka or the 90s ZIM with A Flower. However, that our W-L ratios over the last 2 or so years compares favorably shouldn't be disregarded either. Reading the comments section on cricinfo one gets the impression that Ireland and Afghanistan are worlds better than us.
Win-Loss ratio doesn't tell the whole story. Its not about only the number of wins. Its about being competitive in playing matches. If we compare the two sides, Bdesh has it easy with Nz and WI who are not that strong compared to in the 90's. Zim challenged other teams in away matches also.

I am not saying that zim were a on whole different level but Bdesh has to perform consistently, even if you lose, be competitve, just like you were in Asia cup final. Whole world wanted your team to win the Asia cup excluding Pak for obvious reasons.

And no Ireland and Afghanistan aren't above Bdesh. People say that because its been a long time since Bdesh has playing cricket but they haven't managed to show their true potential yet. As one day Bdesh beats Eng or India and other day get all out on 58 or lose to a associate level team.

jeesh
September 14, 2012, 10:45 AM
Its very easy to say Ireland and Afghanistan are close to the level of Bangladesh. But you cannot judge them based on T20 and recent performances. A lot of people said Kenya were better than us, but while we progressed they didnt-they just couldnt replace their star players. We have replaced our players with better ones, and now we have a system in place which will enable this happen over and over again. It will be interesting to see whether Ireland can blood new talent beyond O Briens, Joyce, Portersfield etc. Usually such teams cant. Seen it in the past-Canada, Netherlands, UAE. Afghanistan might do well, but theres a long long way. Longer versions of the game will never be easy.

Nadim
September 14, 2012, 11:03 AM
http://www.iccworldtwenty20.com/videos/media/id/42d748e10ea848079a3c44c1263d2518/mohammad-ashraful-interview

Hope his brain is in very balanced too :waiting:

AsifTheManRahman
September 14, 2012, 01:13 PM
I don't think one man = whole team. Though in our case it is often Shakib = Bangladesh. And no, being born in '91, I wouldn't have watched or understood an awful lot of cricket in the 90s. But I've seen enough of the Zimbabwe team's scores to get an idea of the gap between them and our current side.
Really? You describe my post as "rubbish" and a load of "crap" based on what you've seen from a bunch of scores? That's laughable. Dare I say, the bit in bold is rubbish and a bunch of crap.

You would've had to watch enough cricket in the 90's to be able to judge the Zimbabweans at their peak. I stand by my claim that they had players who we could only think of having in our wildest dreams. Zimbabwe at their peak made it to the super sixes of the 1999 WC and that too by doing more than just getting a one-off win against a G8 team in the group stages. They didn't have it as easy as we did in 2007. They had to topple England (the hosts) and Sri Lanka (the defending champions), and beat India and South Africa. Forget Andy, we don't have anyone like Grant Flower, Andy Campbell, Neil Johnson and will be lucky if some of our sissies end up being as good as any of them.

It's easy to churn out stats without context. Our stats are inflated by beating a weakened Kiwi side and a severely weakened West Indies side, whereas the Zimbabweans of the 90's had it much harder. The West Indies had Ambrose, Walsh, Lara, Hooper, Richardson and were still a very dangerous and tough side to beat. Today they have Ravi Rampaul heading their pace attack :facepalm:. For NZ, while guys like Astle, Fleming, Styris, Morrison and Cairns weren't world beaters, they were far ahead of the Martins and Orams and Taylors :facepalm: that you see representing them today. Add to that a certain Martin Crowe (early 90's) and the New Zealanders were nothing like the sissies who play for them today.

To top things off, the Zimbabweans didn't have the luxury of beating up on lower ranked sides (like we did in the 2000's against their weaker version) to boost their stats. When they did play us, though, they made sure they beat us. Not how we lose to associates every chance we get.

If 4 Tests don't sound significant enough, then go look at how many Tests they drew without the help of rain. Yes, they would annihilate us (4-1 if not 5-0) even in our own backyard. So don't rubbish me if you haven't watched them and think a bunch of scorecards is enough for you to claim to know everything that there is to know about the best Zim team in history.

al Furqaan
September 14, 2012, 03:02 PM
Win-Loss ratio doesn't tell the whole story. Its not about only the number of wins. Its about being competitive in playing matches. If we compare the two sides, Bdesh has it easy with Nz and WI who are not that strong compared to in the 90's. Zim challenged other teams in away matches also.

I am not saying that zim were a on whole different level but Bdesh has to perform consistently, even if you lose, be competitve, just like you were in Asia cup final. Whole world wanted your team to win the Asia cup excluding Pak for obvious reasons.

And no Ireland and Afghanistan aren't above Bdesh. People say that because its been a long time since Bdesh has playing cricket but they haven't managed to show their true potential yet. As one day Bdesh beats Eng or India and other day get all out on 58 or lose to a associate level team.

Disagreed. Win-Loss ratio is all that counts, in the end. Being competitive and losing the Asia Cup final is a good result. Its a good result in the context of a few weeks after the game ends. No one will remember how close we came to beating PAK in the first match or the AC final. No one remembers or cares about it now, forget 10 years from now.

If win-loss doesn't matter, why worry about losing to Associates? It doesn't matter as long as we're "competitive" right?

Truth is, sure they were better teams, but why disregard Bangladesh completely when at the end of the day our recent W-L records are just as good as theirs regardless of what happened in the other games?

akabir77
September 14, 2012, 03:02 PM
AsifTheManRahman (http://www.banglacricket.com/alochona/member.php?u=292) but most of those zimbow were playing in england (county) as they had both citizen ships which our players don't...

al Furqaan
September 14, 2012, 03:33 PM
hey, how do u tag ppl in a post?

22Yards
September 14, 2012, 03:47 PM
AsifTheManRahman (http://www.banglacricket.com/alochona/member.php?u=292) but most of those zimbow were playing in england (county) as they had both citizen ships which our players don't...

Now this is just an excuse you are putting up here. It does not change the fact that those Zim players were better than the bunch we have.

P.S Shakib is made in Bangladesh or did he receive better treatment from the rest ? If this current system was able to produce one Shakib Al Hasan I don't get why others can not match his potential.

al Furqaan
September 14, 2012, 04:23 PM
Also that "weakened" NZ team we swept 4-0 made it to the world cup semi-finals 4 months later...so if the ZIMs are world beaters for going to super sixes, NZ should at least be not "weakened".

akabir77
September 14, 2012, 04:27 PM
Now this is just an excuse you are putting up here. It does not change the fact that those Zim players were better than the bunch we have.

P.S Shakib is made in Bangladesh or did he receive better treatment from the rest ? If this current system was able to produce one Shakib Al Hasan I don't get why others can not match his potential.
Shakib got in as foreigner. most zimboes gets in as local player (as they have dual citizens)

akabir77
September 14, 2012, 04:28 PM
hey, how do u tag ppl in a post?

lol just copied his user name but I don't think it has the same effect as FB...

AsifTheManRahman
September 14, 2012, 04:30 PM
Also that "weakened" NZ team we swept 4-0 made it to the world cup semi-finals 4 months later...so if the ZIMs are world beaters for going to super sixes, NZ should at least be not "weakened".
I never said they were world beaters, way to put words in my mouth. I said that the Zims at their peak were way better than us now.

The Kiwi teams of the 90's had better players than the ones today. Compared to the 90's, the team they have today is indeed quite weak. I mean Chris Martin :facepalm:, seriously?

The Zimbabwean players made it to the counties because they were good enough in the first place. We have only a couple who have made it and haven't done anything significant.

al Furqaan
September 14, 2012, 04:57 PM
I never said they were world beaters, way to put words in my mouth. I said that the Zims at their peak were way better than us now.

The Kiwi teams of the 90's had better players than the ones today. Compared to the 90's, the team they have today is indeed quite weak. I mean Chris Martin :facepalm:, seriously?

The Zimbabwean players made it to the counties because they were good enough in the first place. We have only a couple who have made it and haven't done anything significant.

Taylor, Ryder, Williamson, Vettori, are all very decent players. Chris Martin as a very handy pacer with over 200 wickets! The only ZIM pacer with better stats is Streak. Oram is one of the more destructive late order guys in recent times. They're at least as good as SL in the 90s or India in away games in the 90s.

Shouldn't a way better team win way more games? Or is winning just a random event? Maybe we're way better than England?

AsifTheManRahman
September 14, 2012, 05:10 PM
Taylor, Ryder, Williamson, Vettori, are all very decent players. Chris Martin as a very handy pacer with over 200 wickets! The only ZIM pacer with better stats is Streak. Oram is one of the more destructive late order guys in recent times. They're at least as good as SL in the 90s or India in away games in the 90s.

Shouldn't a way better team win way more games? Or is winning just a random event? Maybe we're way better than England?
I wasn't comparing Zimbabwe at their peak with New Zealand today. I was comparing the New Zealand teams of the 90's to the New Zealand team today, my original point being that Zimbabwe in the 90's had to face greater challenges, whereas we get to play with a New Zealand side that is weaker than they (NZ) were in the 90's and a West Indies side that is significantly weaker than they (WI) were in the 90's. Zimbabwe back in the 90's didn't have the luxury to belt lower ranked teams like we did in the 2000's (against the weakened Zimbabwe sides). They had to play and learn to win against the G8 in a period when the G7 and the G8 were stronger than they are today, which is one of the reasons why their quality doesn't reflect as much in their W/L ratio.

Zeeshan
September 14, 2012, 05:50 PM
http://www.iccworldtwenty20.com/videos/media/id/42d748e10ea848079a3c44c1263d2518/mohammad-ashraful-interview

Hope his brain is in very balanced too :waiting:

Enjoyed the interview. At one point he pursed his lips or rather :mukh ultayese: which to me looked like sign of saying : I've lost everything, now I am ready for anything. He seemed to be cocky and confidence at the same time and we need the old self back.

al Furqaan
September 14, 2012, 06:40 PM
I wasn't comparing Zimbabwe at their peak with New Zealand today. I was comparing the New Zealand teams of the 90's to the New Zealand team today, my original point being that Zimbabwe in the 90's had to face greater challenges, whereas we get to play with a New Zealand side that is weaker than they (NZ) were in the 90's and a West Indies side that is significantly weaker than they (WI) were in the 90's. Zimbabwe back in the 90's didn't have the luxury to belt lower ranked teams like we did in the 2000's (against the weakened Zimbabwe sides). They had to play and learn to win against the G8 in a period when the G7 and the G8 were stronger than they are today, which is one of the reasons why their quality doesn't reflect as much in their W/L ratio.

Gotcha...however, I made sure to include only G8 sides in the the win-loss analysis I did earlier...otherwise it would be a meaningless excercize. To re-summarize:

But I've run stats on Zimbabwe in their peak (from Jan 1, 1992 till Mar 31, 2004) and they won exactly 40 matches against the top sides with 163 losses. Firstly 40 wins from 12 years is 3-4 wins per year. I think our current Bangladesh can manage that, and given that we've 4 wins vs NZ and one each vs WI, ENG, SL, IND in a 16 month stretch (including our torrid 58 and 78 all outs at the world cup) indicates that we are exceeding ZIMs rate throughout their peak years. I'm not including a bunch of near misses against PAK and others. Thats 8 wins in 16 months which is about 6 wins a year...

The Lankans from the time they got test status till 1990 were around about as good as our ODI side the past couple years. 16 wins and 71 losses against the G8 sides. They were considerably better in the 90s but in the 1980s they weren't considerably better than us if any at all.

The current NZ team may not be as good as the team from the 90s, but I think they're more than a decent side in ODIs still. Guys like Taylor, Ryder, Williamson, Vettori are just as talented as Astle, Styris, and Cairns. The 0-4 Banglawashed Kiwis still reached a World Cup semi...thats got to count for something. To be fair, ZIM in the early 90s got shots against SL who were around as weak as current WI and NZ. SL had a 27-43 win-loss ratio against G8 sides from 1992-1995 inclusive.

I haven't included our 3-0 Banglawash of the Windies B team cuz that was a really weakened squad.

Similarly, I haven't included our stats of bashing the post 2004 ZIM teams and all the other Associates in our win-loss numbers of the past 2 years.

al Furqaan
September 14, 2012, 06:46 PM
why was Ash speaking so slowly...his English like his batting has gotten slower, lol!

Ajfar
September 14, 2012, 07:25 PM
I liked that he spoke much slower. No 'tara hura'. Makes it much easy to follow what he is trying to say.

AsifTheManRahman
September 14, 2012, 08:52 PM
His English has improved a lot. Effect of England.

World Champs
September 16, 2012, 12:49 AM
Disagreed. Win-Loss ratio is all that counts, in the end. Being competitive and losing the Asia Cup final is a good result. Its a good result in the context of a few weeks after the game ends. No one will remember how close we came to beating PAK in the first match or the AC final. No one remembers or cares about it now, forget 10 years from now.

If win-loss doesn't matter, why worry about losing to Associates? It doesn't matter as long as we're "competitive" right?

Truth is, sure they were better teams, but why disregard Bangladesh completely when at the end of the day our recent W-L records are just as good as theirs regardless of what happened in the other games?
What stats are you talking about??
From 1991 to 2003. their number of wins against top nations are

Over all wins
India- 8 10
england 8
Nz- 7 8
S-lanka 6 7
WI 5 9
aus 0 1
Pak 2
Sa 2

And not to forget that they won Test series against Pak in Pak and defeated India in Zim.

Care to tell me how your stats are similar to Zim???

AsifTheManRahman
September 20, 2012, 11:24 AM
Karthik understands:

Karthik: "If Andy Flower, Grant Flower, Heath Streak, Andy Blignaut, Henry Olanga, Alaistar Campbell were present now, they would have been a force to reckon. Unfortunately Zimb dont have successors with half that class and quality!! Such a pity!"

http://www.espncricinfo.com/icc-world-twenty20-2012/engine/match/533275.html

Nasif
September 20, 2012, 11:27 AM
^^^ And how is this connected to ashraful?

Oh yea, everything is his fault :)

zinatf
September 20, 2012, 11:31 AM
Auntie says: Ahh! Thaak na baapu....cheleta-ke ektu nistaar deya hok...onek to holo....bechara ki kom koshto kore? Ki shundor khelche aajkal...bhabte bhaloi lage....ebar WC theke firuk...Shomar shathei dekha koriye dibo...baki ta...

AsifTheManRahman
September 20, 2012, 11:39 AM
Our Bangladeshi bhaijaan gets it too:


Tushar: "@Karthik You forgot about Paul Strang, Neil Johnson, Guy Whitall, Murrey Godwin.. They all had great potential which current Zim team lacks."
http://www.espncricinfo.com/icc-world-twenty20-2012/engine/match/533275.html

Navo
September 20, 2012, 02:24 PM
Well then clearly you didn't watch a whole lot of cricket in the 90's. I didn't say they were the #1 team, and don't rubbish me just because your memory deceives you.
<br />Posted via BC Mobile Edition (Blackberry)

Agree with A. Flower and H. Streak being amazing. (I was a fan of Grant Flower, Blignaut, Ervine as well)

Would be great to have a pace bowling all rounder like Neil Johnson but obviously Shakib is a better all rounder overall.