PDA

View Full Version : Please Don't Bring Test Status "Q" Anymore


tpusltn
May 25, 2004, 09:24 PM
We've won the Test Status:

The reason:
1. Bangladesh- Has a Mass following of the Sport.

a. Ali Bacher reported to ICC, after seeing the over crowded Dacca-stadium, watching the ABAHANI- MOHAMEDDAN match. Ali Bacher was amazed, only local club-match & packed stadium. So much love for the cricket. This nations millions of people deserve the best best of cricket.

b. Dacca-stadium was a Test venue. It was the inaugral Test venue (if I'm not wrong) for the combine Pakistan (east+west).

c. East Pakistan was the frequent finalist in the Quaid E Azam trophie.

d. Bangladesh has a mass following of cricket more than Zimb, NZ, Eng, S-Lanka, Kenya

e. Yes, you could argue the quality. Our quality (is/was) between above Associate members & below Full member. It is not by definition rather by acheivement Bangladesh proved its' position.

f. Bangladesh's argument for the Test status was stronger than Zimbabwe. because, BD was in ICC-trophie- Champion, Runner-Up; & many time BD was in the top 4 semi-finalist. At the end, BD proved that we've beaten all the associate member team, fare & square. Therefore, Bangladesh deserve to play with the big boys. Only way to improve is to play the big boys league. That was the only argument for Zim when they applied for the Test status. But we the Bangaldeshi, proved all the above plus we've beaten one of the big boy (Pak, no kidding) plus BD has Test quality stadium with other facilities in other parts of the country, that is better than Zimbawe inspected by various ICC high profile officials.

g. BCB is capable of organizing highest quality of tournament. And BCB proved it by organizing mini-world cup in Dhaka.

Please don't bring your crap that BD don't deserve Test status. It was never pre-mature.

Bangladesh waited for a while, when the other permanent member, like NZ, Australia, S.A. & England wanted to find out the fact about BD cricket. It was never about the quality-only rather it was about fulfilling many factors. Bangladesh was accepted/elected to full membership by unanimous vote (all associate vote + all full members vote) in London.

If ICC's true mission was to globalize the cricket. Then, BD's name comes first. Kenya plays cricket and their cricket quality is same as ours. They also beat some big boys. But Kenya doesn't have mass following of cricket and they've to fulfill all the other requirements just like Bangladesh. Buncha city boys like desi-patel & local players comprises the Keneyan cricket there.

Please be fair to Bangladesh cricket and talk sense not rubbish. If you don't like Banglacricket & cannot endure the pain as much as us, then you're not true tiger fan. See, so much people loves our BD team, even we loose again and again ......angai. But, one day we shall over come & win the world cup for sure.

Rubu
May 25, 2004, 09:27 PM
one question: why u are using dacca instead of dhaka?

reverse_swing
May 25, 2004, 09:29 PM
Bangladesh's argument for the Test status was stronger than Zimbabwe. because, BD was in ICC-trophie- Champion, Runner-Up; & many time BD was in the top 4 semi-finalist.

As far as I know Zim won ICC trophy atleast 3 times before getting test status.



[Edited on 26-5-2004 by reverse_swing]

tpusltn
May 25, 2004, 09:34 PM
Thanks for correcting my spelling.
Dacca - Dhaka
Calcutta - Kolkata
Bombay - Mumbai
Madras - Chennai
Burma - Myanmar
Chittagong - ChottoGram ?????? (oppse went too far)

reverse_swing
May 25, 2004, 09:36 PM
nothing wrong about that spelling. u r using old names. I think most probably after 1981 we changed Dacca to Dhaka.

fwullah
May 25, 2004, 11:00 PM
We were semifinalists twice - during 1990 and most probably 1982.

Both times, we lost to Zimbabwe in the semifinal.

I think in Dhaka stadium, it does not get overcrowded as it used to be - even during a New Zealand-Zimbabwe match. The reason being the people of this particular area is bored tasting International cricket for over 6 years (since 1998). Now the mass crowd come to see when crowd-puller matches like India-Pakistan cricket matches are organized now. That is why the BCB is arranging to prepare more venues all around Bangladesh where the desire to watch International cricket matches is much more intense.

East Pakistan might be frequent finalists, however, players coming in (born and brought up) from West Pakistan, but working & living in the East had the chance to play for the East Pakistan, not the real East Pakistanis.

Bangladesh definitely has more people following the game than Zimbabwe/Kenya/England/New Zealand, but I doubt whether the number is more than in Sri Lanka. May be, the number of the cricket followers is the same.



It is not by definition rather by acheivement Bangladesh proved its' position.


In addition, no other neighbouring country helped Bangladesh in improving the cricket in the country.

fwullah
May 25, 2004, 11:11 PM
I think Collin Croft said in an interview (source: Prothom Alo, Daily Star) that nobody will stop questionning about our test status unless we win 1 test match.

Rubu
May 25, 2004, 11:24 PM
Originally posted by fwullah
I think Collin Croft said in an interview (source: Prothom Alo, Daily Star) that nobody will stop questionning about our test status unless we win 1 test match.

who knows, may be then they will say that, that test was fixed!

we need to perform and perform continuously to stop those critique. see, some people are big fan of critisism. they will always find someone or something to criticise. we can't stop them, all we can do is give them as less chance as possible to criticise.

SS
May 26, 2004, 07:16 AM
yea yea i guess u are talking about me
i will criticize becuz it's fact that BD
batsmen are irresponsible..they know
the basic but they forget when they play
and also Bashar was shamelss even
BD lost in third ODI and he was
smiling like a clown..thinking only
he scored 42!!!
I never saw a captain smiling like that
when his team looses though that
captain makes hundred or take 5 wkt
haul. This is another record just set
up by our Great "Mr Dependable(!)"
Why I will stop criticizing...may be
after ten years when our batsmen
will learn how to play

crazyisland
May 26, 2004, 08:29 AM
Good Post. Test Status is well deserved. It's a matter of time when we will start beating those "big boys" on a regular basis. We just need 2/3 solid batsmen. Our bowling is already world class.

fwullah
May 26, 2004, 10:05 AM
We're not world class yet, we just know how to utilize our bowling - given the conditions.

You know what - today's ESPN SportsCenter (shown only in South Asia, I think) said that Zimbabwe has talent - after scoring 200 odd runs against Australia - HOW EASY! (we all know what everybody was saying about them before)

rafiq
May 26, 2004, 01:13 PM
Originally posted by fwullah

I think in Dhaka stadium, it does not get overcrowded as it used to be - even during a New Zealand-Zimbabwe match. The reason being the people of this particular area is bored tasting International cricket for over 6 years (since 1998). Now the mass crowd come to see when crowd-puller matches like India-Pakistan cricket matches are organized now. That is why the BCB is arranging to prepare more venues all around Bangladesh where the desire to watch International cricket matches is much more intense.



Good point FW, hadn't thought of that but it does make sense that people in Bogra, elsewhere are excited. Is this point true for Chittagong as well?

fab
May 26, 2004, 05:56 PM
I think in Dhaka stadium, it does not get overcrowded as it used to be - even during a New Zealand-Zimbabwe match. The reason being the people of this particular area is bored tasting International cricket for over 6 years (since 1998).
So even BD matches aren't crowd pullers? To me that suggests we're not as 'cricket mad' as we project ourselves to be. How can we get bored of International cricket in just 6 years! I guess if we can start winning matches frequently this may change.. :umm:

Flip Master Mick
May 28, 2004, 05:37 AM
tpusltn...

chittagong = chatgaon

Zephaniah
May 29, 2004, 08:58 AM
A country should lose Test status when over a prolonged period their opponents score more than twice as many runs per wicket. In other words, in the average Test, their opponents would win by an innings and plenty.

Twice this rule has been violated, when it should not have been. The first time was in the 19th century when privately organised teams from England, some including amateurs from club cricket, toured South Africa. These utterly unrepresentative teams were still good enough to average 25 runs per wicket against South Africa's 10; one English bowler took 15 wickets for 28 in a match, another 35 wickets at five runs each in a three-match series. Only retrospectively did a couple of statisticians decide these games were Tests.

The second period was during World Series Cricket, because Australia and West Indies were so strong that their second XIs could hold their own. It was when Bangladesh were prematurely promoted to Test status, when the game's own administrators violated 'the integrity of Test cricket'. In their first 21 Tests Bangladesh averaged 18 runs per wicket to their opponents' 59.

Starting with their inaugural Test against England last autumn, Bangladesh's Test status has no longer been a travesty. Thanks to the ICC's High Performance Programme, and Dav Whatmore's coaching, Bangladesh in their last seven Tests have averaged 23 runs per wicket to their opponents' 37, which at least makes a game if not a contest.

In their two Tests against Sri Lanka, as this massacre of the innocents was formally known, Zimbabwe averaged 19 runs per wicket and their opponents 96. In other words, in a theoretical average match, Zimbabwe would have needed five innings to score as many as Sri Lanka in one innings.

Source: telegraph.co.uk (http://sport.telegraph.co.uk/sport/main.jhtml?xml=/sport/2004/05/23/scscyl23.xml&sSheet=/sport/2004/05/23/ixcrick.html)
Extracts from "Zimbabwe must lose their Test status". Scyld Berry gives the statistical reasons why

Zobair
May 29, 2004, 09:59 AM
Originally posted by Zephaniah
A country should lose Test status when over a prolonged period their opponents score more than twice as many runs per wicket. In other words, in the average Test, their opponents would win by an innings and plenty.

Twice this rule has been violated, when it should not have been. The first time was in the 19th century when privately organised teams from England, some including amateurs from club cricket, toured South Africa. These utterly unrepresentative teams were still good enough to average 25 runs per wicket against South Africa's 10; one English bowler took 15 wickets for 28 in a match, another 35 wickets at five runs each in a three-match series. Only retrospectively did a couple of statisticians decide these games were Tests.

The second period was during World Series Cricket, because Australia and West Indies were so strong that their second XIs could hold their own. It was when Bangladesh were prematurely promoted to Test status, when the game's own administrators violated 'the integrity of Test cricket'. In their first 21 Tests Bangladesh averaged 18 runs per wicket to their opponents' 59.

Starting with their inaugural Test against England last autumn, Bangladesh's Test status has no longer been a travesty. Thanks to the ICC's High Performance Programme, and Dav Whatmore's coaching, Bangladesh in their last seven Tests have averaged 23 runs per wicket to their opponents' 37, which at least makes a game if not a contest.

In their two Tests against Sri Lanka, as this massacre of the innocents was formally known, Zimbabwe averaged 19 runs per wicket and their opponents 96. In other words, in a theoretical average match, Zimbabwe would have needed five innings to score as many as Sri Lanka in one innings.

Source: telegraph.co.uk (http://sport.telegraph.co.uk/sport/main.jhtml?xml=/sport/2004/05/23/scscyl23.xml&sSheet=/sport/2004/05/23/ixcrick.html)
Extracts from "Zimbabwe must lose their Test status". Scyld Berry gives the statistical reasons why


I think Bangladesh's rise from the ashes started even earlier...in their of Pakistan...surely Pakistanis didnot average more than twice our runs per wicket.