PDA

View Full Version : Heart Over Talent


samircreep
January 27, 2005, 04:40 AM
This is actually a difficult piece to write, not because I'm not sure what to write, but because it's for an audience who probably won't know what I'm talking about. A significant part of the people who come to this site haven't seen Bangladesh play over the past few years. In fact, a lot of us haven't seen Bangladesh play at all. Yet we feel perfectly comfortable to pass judgements on players who we haven't seen and analyze their performance based on cricinfo reports or hearsay. The practical repercussions of this is the generation of pure misinformation like Rana being a class act, saving Bangladesh time and again with his heart and other crap like Shariff being the best reverse swinger of the country. In a way, this piece is an appeal for all of us to stop generating urban legends and start coming up with not only more constructive criticism, but also INFORMED criticism.

Wow, I really ranted. Anyways, in case everyone is still wondering, I got cajoled into writing about Rana. I've seen Rana play every single match he's played for bangladesh and here are the conclusions:

He's not talented. Which is fine, Border wasn't either. The problem with rana is that his fabled guts and heart ain't enough to overcome his shortcomings which can be summed as: he has no technique. Neither his batting or bowling has any authority to earn a permanent place in any of the other 9 international test sides. Let's analyze this a bit more in depth shall we?

Batting: As said before, he doesn't have any technique. By virtue of him being a left hander, he finds it easy to drive the ball, esp when it comes up to him. Think back to his only test 50, that against India (and here I'm sure only 5 % of the people here actually have seen that inning) when Pathan and Co were bowling full to him. Almost all his runs were from cover drives to half volleys, pitched outside the off stump in an effort to swing the ball. His leg side shots were all identical and pretty much against the same bowler: leg side hoiks when the ball was pitched on his leg stump by Kumble. In fact, even if you saw the highlights, you'd think that Rana has only one shot in his armoury, the cover drive. And that too, only to half volleys. Mind you, Rana can't play leg side half volleys, I've yet to see him score more than a run with a flick off his pads.

But his realy problem is not against the pacers but against good ol' fashioned spinners: he simply can't read 'em (ironic isn't considering that he came into the team as a "spinner", but more on that later)! I think one of the most embarassing dismissals I've ever seen was when Rana was out to Vettori trying to sweep him when the ball was pitched right outside his legs. If it were merely a top edge or a mistimed shot, would have been fair enough. But no. Rana actually played three different shots BEFORE he eventually played the sweep (first he tried to sweep even before the ball was delivered, then thought about flicking it, then changed his mind again and tried to block it, eventually settling for the sweep) and in the end, I don't think the bolwer himself realized what had happened.

He's also a terrible one day batsman. Consider this: he can't hit the ball hard, nor can he rotate the strike, two essential qualities if you're coming to bat at number 6-7.

Bowling: All this guy does is run up and bowl. I've never seen him flight the ball, turn the ball, have any variation, arm ball/top spinner, or even tie the bastmen down at test level. The funny thing is, rana bowls a lot with his body and you'd think he'd extract some turn and bounce from the wicket. He doesn't, not one bit. The bastmen have no problems reading him, nor has he ever put doubts in the batsman's mind. In fact, i'd say Ash or Rajin are far better bowlers than Rana.

Fielding: At last a ray of hope. The guy is a decent slipper, I have to admit. he has good reaction time and has a safe pair of hands. But unless we start taking specialist fielders in the test team, this guy's not gonna make it as an international test player.

Bottom line: With all the guts and will power in the world, you're not gonna be a test player son if you don't have a bit of technique. I wont even pick Rana as a one day bolwer since I think Razzak is a better bowler. But the kid's young. He might change. And Mohd. Shariff will be our best pace bowler.

Bat-PadTogether
January 27, 2005, 05:15 AM
ha ha another Rana hater.Dont forget u r alive man in the 5 match series against the Zims for his bowling.Just tell me who else in this Bd side has the technique?And those who have good technique!Why they cannot implement it after so many matches.We love to play across the line.Thats it!This is the reality.Where is Shariff?Why he is out of the squad?Do you have any personal grude against Rana?It seems so!!!!

samircreep
January 27, 2005, 05:28 AM
Um. The Sharif bit at the end was supposed to be my dabble with sarcasm.Sigh, back to the drawing board I guess.

:fire:

Sham
January 27, 2005, 05:34 AM
I think anyone who has actually seen the kid play will have a personal grudge against him, its almost so painful! But Samircreep is right about Rana, as he usually is about most players. He was the first one on this board to talk highly of Rajin and then Enamul, well before either made it into the Test side. His career as a talent spotter is on the line now with Shafaq and we'll see if he can make it three in three. But getting back to Rana, the point I am trying to make is, yes he has played well for Bangladesh once in a while, but anyone who knows anything about cricket and has seen this guy play will tell you that he doesn't have a big future. Its that simple. He might scratch out a 50 once in a while, or take a four for because some stupid batsman will come charging down to the first delivery he bowls, but thats not gonna convince us Rana bashers anytime soon!

Flip Master Mick
January 27, 2005, 06:02 AM
A very timely analysis of Manzur-ul-Islam Rana's cricketing skills. I fully agree with your insight about our so called all rounder. But, what are we supposed to do when a bat-some-bowl-some cricketer grabs four wickets and wins the MOM award? Our fans and the media are still extremely immature about cricket. Relative success in the name of runs and wickets does wonders for a player's reputation whether he can actually play cricket at top level or not. Rana is a classic case in point. So are others who I wouldn't mention here to avoid stirring emotions in our partisan fans. And I have a feeling that these cricketers when given a dose of relative success start comparing themselves to players of higher climes as if to say "I have finally arrived at the international level and I have solidified my position in the squad." A case in point could be Mohammed Ashraf-ul-Matin.


a great analysis nonetheless... keep 'em coming samir...

Edited on, January 27, 2005, 11:03 AM GMT, by Flip Master Mick.

akabir77
January 27, 2005, 08:50 AM
Good points and agree... I guess dav wants to use these kind of alrounders!!! to fill the gaps a little bit closer as they do what ever he tells them to do like For example ( i am guessing here) he might have told him not to hit the legside balls and he does that cause he knows he is not a good cricketr but on the other hand our talented bunch will pull or swip when its not needed and get out... SO thats the dailma dav has and thats why plyr like rana or mushfiq get chance....I really hope rokon and durjay can make it to the team the durjay will be confirmed and rokon and ash can make each other think twice before hitting like a fool (i am guessing one will get chance in others place)

oracle
January 27, 2005, 08:58 AM
Rana's "relatively" good batting average vis a vis the other players has ensured his place in the team. Yeah, and unfortunately for us (as to SLA), I would'nt mention his name in the same breath as Messrs Rafique and Enamul.
Having said that, the title is appropriate "heart over talent" - many a BD players have done wonders with that, so why not continue?

Rubayed
January 27, 2005, 11:01 AM
Originally posted by samircreep
.........In fact, i'd say Ash or Rajin are far better bowlers than Rana.......

I wholeheartedly disagree with this part, it's ok criticizing Rana's cricketing talent because i've seen all the games he played for bd but to go as far as saying that his bowling is worse than Ash or Rajin is a hogwash. Only god knows what made u say that. Sorry to say that this kind of criticism is neither CONSTRUCTIVE nor INFORMED. Its simply rubbish and tarnished your wellwritten analysis. U faltered sameercreep according to the standard created by yourself.

Fazal
January 27, 2005, 11:10 AM
I have seen Rana bowling in the test against India, and was very disapointed. However I think for one-day batting friendly pitches, his type of bowling can be more effective than Enamul's type of (flighted) bowling.

At present, I have no problem if Rana is selected instead of Enamul or Alok in the one-day batting friendly pitch. In future, I see no place for Rana, unless he continue to prove us all wrong and keep producing...

chinaman
January 27, 2005, 12:17 PM
In my personal opinion, the top post is anything but "constructive criticism" as it claims and represents personal disliking more than anything else and a grave injustice to a player who continues to serve his nation to his ability and fair share of contributions.

Cricket46
January 27, 2005, 01:32 PM
I must first say that I have not seen Rana play, as in watching on the ground or on TV. However, one thing is clear from this and some other threads that Rana does not have much technique either as a bowler or batsman at the international level. I am not in a position to judge that.

The issue to me is not so much as to who is talented or possesses good techniques but how much they contribute. It is a very pleasant sight to see a batsman who drives fluently, pulls elegantly, has copybook backlift and follow through or a bowler who runs in like a well oiled machine. There are many elegant bowlers and batsmen in world cricket, but there are also many others who are not such but have contributed from time to time. I would always have players, who would give all that they have even if they are not a treat to my eyes.

I am not in favor or against Rana or anyone else. As a matter-of-fact even Rana does not contribute most of the time. But then, who does in our team, may be with the exception of Rafiq. To me, it does not matter whether you are a Rana or an Ashraful or whoever. You have to perform to be in the team and it should also depend on the need of the team, the state of the pitch, strength of the opponent and so on and so forth.

Samicreep it is evident that you understand the technicalities of cricket better than most others here, but may be there are some people here who also understand a little bit.

Beamer
January 27, 2005, 01:35 PM
samircreep, great insights. I have watched him on TV and truely believe what you have said and what sham has been saying. It is what it is. He has heartand guts. Zero talent .People have trouble understanding that. Well, not everybody. I have repeated many times in this forum about his batting. Him playing at no.6 is utter lunacy. It is nothing personal, but sooner or later it will become one, if he is persisted with at no.6 with many members. We all love our team to death and if someone is a clear obstacle to the betterment of the team, he will become a target. Khaled Mahmud became one after almost all realized that he was of no use in the test team. Some belatedly though. Not all cricket fans are created equal. Your points will fall in deaf ears as most identify themselves with mediocrity. We are ruthless on talented ones, yet love the average ones to death ( Rana, shujon..etc ), as they are more reflective to our own attributes. We identify with them better. Anyway, keep voicing your intelligent opinions. It will grow cricket culture.

Fazal
January 27, 2005, 01:48 PM
Originally posted by Beamer
We are ruthless on talented ones, yet love the average ones to death ( Rana, shujon..etc ), as they are more reflective to our own attributes. We identify with them better. Anyway, keep voicing your intelligent opinions. It will grow cricket culture.

I guess you mean, "We are ruthless on talented <b>(but not "producing to their potential" ones)</b>, yet love the average (<b>on talent but producing to their/close to their potential</b>)ones to death ( Rana, shujon..etc ), as they are more reflective to our own attributes. We identify with them better"

In that case you are right. Normal people always loves average Joe who over achieve given an opportunity and hates talented players who under-achieve based on their potential.

Hollywood even makes movies on those ave. Joe's success story. 'Rudy' is one. There was another Baseball player, I forget his name though.

oracle
January 27, 2005, 01:55 PM
We are ruthless on talented ones, yet love the average ones to death


the problem is that there is no agreement as to who is talented and who is not.:)

Optimist
January 27, 2005, 02:03 PM
Bowling: All this guy does is run up and bowl. I've never seen him flight the ball, turn the ball, have any variation, arm ball/top spinner, or even tie the bastmen down at test level. ............ In fact, i'd say Ash or Rajin are far better bowlers than Rana.


Here is just one example:
Manjural Islam 42-12-84-3
Rajin Saleh 1-0-4-0
Alok Kapali 2-0-6-0
Mohammad Ashraful 1-0-7-0

Whatmore, Khaled Mashud (captain for this match) and our management must be insane (to say the least) to bowl a bowler "who can't even tie the batsmen down at test level" for 42 overs...................while they had at their disposal the enviable talent of Rajin, Ashraful and Alok Kapali the bowlers!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

N.B. I'm not a fan of Rana.

Optimist
January 27, 2005, 02:20 PM
Manjural Islam 8.4-2-24-0 (against NZ)

Manjural Islam 10-2-21-3 (against WI)

Boy! this guy is Lucky! He is such an ordinary bowler that WI and NZ players got confused!

Optimist
January 27, 2005, 02:23 PM
Against England:

Tapash Baisya 5-0-29-0
Mushfiqur Rahman 6-1-34-2
Manjural Islam 8-1-33-1
Jamaluddin Ahmed 4-1-28-0
Alok Kapali 2.3-1-15-0

Man even england never played such a poor quality bowler!

rafiq
January 27, 2005, 02:36 PM
I have to temporarily come out of a self-imposed ban on wasting time analyzing this cricket team to plead that we shouldn't turn this into a camp of cricket elitists and other fans who were also-rans. That's as boring as all the calls to sack so-and-so. After all, it is fans of all types who add variety to our useless ramblings on this board.

Samir, one question for you: early on Whatmore claimed he really liked rana because the guy was always getting runs at that stage. What was that comment all about? Can't a coach tell the basics? Anyway, I've seen rana on TV and have never seen him as a #6 although he has had more success as a bowler. (I guess we now need to issue a disclaimer at the bottom of our posts indicating our level of experience watching the cricketer in question, kind of like stock analysts these days need to say whether they own the company or not).

Back to exile...hope you guys win tonight.

Fazal
January 27, 2005, 02:41 PM
Originally posted by rafiq

Back to exile...hope you guys win tonight.

Is it tonight or tomorrow night?:-/

Special 1
January 27, 2005, 02:50 PM
I think the author of this thread has lost it. What is he trying to say. Who cares about talent, every team needs players who will get the job done for you. Majural islam Rana has done it for bangladesh in one dayers. Chris Harris look at him. I have been seeing him since i was a kid. He aint the best batsmen or the best bowler in the side, not even a good quality anything, besides feilding. But he is still there. This thread is a disgrace to us fans who are trying to constructively criticise our players for their benefit.

Sham
January 27, 2005, 02:56 PM
Optimist,

I think Samir's take on Rana's bowling is with regards to Test cricket. As for ODIs, he is effective sometimes, especially when the opposition is trying to force the pace, because he bowls flat and quick. Kind of like Kumble in one-dayers. However, in test cricket, if you wanted, you could block him all day long and never have to worry one bit, which is what Samir meant by saying that he never gets the batsmen on two minds, something absolutely essential if you want to be a successful bowler in Test cricket! As for his 42 overs and and 3 wickets, you have to realize that the strike rate for those wickets is 84! Again, keeping the runs down is not his problem, his problem is bowling wicket taking deliveries, which he doesnt do at Test level.

As for Chinaman's comment, I couldn't disagree more. They may seem personal, but I couldn't disagree with much that Samir wrote, having seen Rana play. Which part exactly does the grave injustice, the description of his batting, bowling or fielding? Or is it the entire piece taken together? At some point, someone should should do a poll of just how many of those who are in the pro-Rana camp and like to eulogize so energetically about his heart and fight have actually seen him play.

Rubayed's comments are justifiable, although I would tell him to keep an eye out for Ashraful's bowling. He actually turns the ball a lot. But he suffers from lack of bowling practice. You can't be a leggie and only bowl very occasionally. If they want to use his bowling, AND I REALLY THINK THEY OUGHT TO, he should bowl regularly in the nets. I guess because he is so inconsistent with the bat that the management is just happy to let him concentrate on his batting for the time being. But Samir isn't too far off, Ashraful in my opinion could be quite a good bowler if he bowled more. He sometimes gets prodigious turn and troubles the batsman quite a bit. A bit like Tendulkar, its a wonder he didn't take his bowling more seriously and India didn't make better use of it because he spins both ways and spins a mile!



Edited on, January 27, 2005, 8:25 PM GMT, by Sham.

Zephaniah
January 27, 2005, 02:56 PM
Greeks won the EURO 2004 and everyone absolutely hated them for their boring/talentless football.

I was watching the match with my friend and his Greek girlfriend.
She had the biggest grin on that day in London.

We, after the match, discussed at lenghs what could have happened if.....
a) Wayne Rooney could play all England matches
b) Beckham could concentrate on football more than his PA at that time
c) Sven Ericsson could find some time to think about team strategy rather than setting up series of hot dates with Farah Alam.

Beamer
January 27, 2005, 03:03 PM
Rana's inclusion in the one day squad is not being questioned if he is picked as a bowler only. He has actually been pretty decent as a bowler in one day games. The problem is him coming to bat at no.6 which he is not suited for or not capable of doing so. He can come as a bowler but shouldn't bat before no.8. What is so hard to understand? Why would people argue his spot with Alok or even Ashraful? Those are batsmen playing up the order. Rana is been forced up the order. Asking a bowler to do a specialists job is neither right nor fair for him. On bowling merit alone, he can replace Enam or Raj and bat accordingly at no.8 or 9. He is not the answer at no.6. This issue is becoming redundant to a point of utter boredome.

Navarene
January 27, 2005, 03:06 PM
...shhhh...Optimist! Refrain yourself from those Rana stats and rather feel more comfy of being "arm chair" ethorist since you dont want to label the tag of "a lot of us haven't seen Bangladesh play at all...we feel perfectly comfortable to pass judgements on players who we haven't seen and analyze their performance based on cricinfo reports or hearsay" and "We are ruthless on talented ones, yet love the average ones to death.., as they are more reflective to our own attributes" on your back. Do you?

Beamer
January 27, 2005, 03:07 PM
By the way..Rana has zero value as a test bowler. I won't even debate that part. Actually, we won't need to as he would never be picked in the test team again, unless rafiq or Enam gets injured or something of that freakish nature.

Fazal
January 27, 2005, 03:08 PM
...shhhh...Optimist :up:

Hay.... I didn't say anything.

AsifTheManRahman
January 27, 2005, 03:26 PM
Originally posted by BBgun
I think the author of this thread has lost it. What is he trying to say. Who cares about talent, every team needs players who will get the job done for you. Majural islam Rana has done it for bangladesh in one dayers. Chris Harris look at him. I have been seeing him since i was a kid. He aint the best batsmen or the best bowler in the side, not even a good quality anything, besides feilding. But he is still there. This thread is a disgrace to us fans who are trying to constructively criticise our players for their benefit.

like boycott used to say..."he comes in and throws rubbish..."

yeah, whats the fuss about the lack of talent and class and all that crap when hard work and determination overrules all that?

Fazal
January 27, 2005, 03:33 PM
The talented under achiever are like the 'blue-blooded' untouchables in the society who always gets the free-pass all the way because when it comes to talent its 'subjective' and not easily measurable so they don't have to prove anything as long as they are tagged as 'talented;.

Whereas players like Rana and ChaCha are like the blue-collar workers, who always need to prove to the society that they belongs there also as its easy to tag them as 'not talented' which is also subjective and not easily measurable. And then its up them(players) to prove again and again with their performance.




Edited on, January 27, 2005, 8:37 PM GMT, by Fazal.

Optimist
January 27, 2005, 03:37 PM
Sham,

I don't think Manjural is test material. I even don't think he is a very good one day bowler. I'm following cricket for far too long to not-know the desired qualities of a test and one day bowler. But my problem is.............I think one of the the easiest thing in the world is to point out the problem. Do you think our think tank does not know his short comings? Do you think Whatmore has become what he is without knowing these simple (a, b,c s) things? Faruk, Whatmore and Co. has the hardest thing to do...............solving the puzzle with whatever they have.

Please read the piece by samircreep again. This is what he has to say "I've never seen him .......... even tie the bastmen down at test level"

Manjural has done it in both one-dayers and tests. I repeat I'm not saying he is test or one-day class........................And I don't know how many test class players we have (Do we have more than a couple!!)! The most important thing that IMHO should matter is the combination that will give us the best result. Experiments, investment for future should mostly be done with the A team.

Edited on, January 27, 2005, 8:49 PM GMT, by Optimist.

Beamer
January 27, 2005, 03:49 PM
IS THE TITLE OF THIS THREAD MISLEADING?

Once again we have tagged an urban myth of "heart" to a non-descript player like Rana. Same label was tagged with Shujan and still we are carrying him around. How are we so sure that he has heart and others don't? What I don't understand is how someone can come to bat at no.6, team 4 wkts down on the 35th over and plays 18 balls for 6 runs?? Looks pretty selfish to me. Well, he can be exonerated for not having the ability according to the situation. But, people refuse to say that he doesn't have the ability. Ok. Granted, he has the ability for arguements sake. Why does it take him 3 overs worth of balls to take a few runs?? where is the heart? Isn't that what gutsy and courageous do to take few chances when the team is in trouble??

Please..no bowling arguements here. Talk about the middle order bat that he is.

Sham
January 27, 2005, 03:53 PM
I couldn't agree with you more. We indeed do have to pick the best combination we can. And what all of us alleged Rana bashers have been saying is that we don't think he is good enough to bat at 6 in the national side. If he can get in on the strength of his bowling, then fine, but then he has to take a bowler's place. On his batting, he doesn't deserve a chance in the top six. Simple as that. And all we have got in return in the name of rebuttals are attacks on Ashraful and Kapali and a few sermons on Rana's heart! Not that I'm saying heart is a bad thing, its essential in a cricketer who is representing his country. But you need to have a certain level of ability to bat top six for a Test side, and almost all of us who have seen him play have stated that he lacks that ability!

Edited on, January 27, 2005, 8:54 PM GMT, by Sham.

Fazal
January 27, 2005, 03:59 PM
Its all depends what we currently have as an alternative.

If you see 6 runs from 18 balls it looks ugly

But again if you see some other scores, it may not be that bad (based on what we have right now in the team)...

13 runs from 31 balls
1 run from 14 balls
4 runs from 14 balls

Now who are those? I guess if you care enough, you will find out from the score cards by yourself.

Hints: they all played as #6 one time or another. Also the score mentioned above is when they played as #5 or #6. And these scores are picked from current (BAN-ZIM) one-day series.



Edited on, January 27, 2005, 9:11 PM GMT, by Fazal.

Beamer
January 27, 2005, 04:12 PM
so, you really think rana is a better batsman than ashraful, aftab, bashar..etc...

like i said, rana can bat at no.9. and yes..we have better player in this squad who can play at no.6. Pilot is one. Alok is another one.

Optimist
January 27, 2005, 04:14 PM
Sham,

The selectors have to find what's best for the team. If they find it better to have a bowler rather than a batsmen..........then I have no problem.

Now the no. 6. Now about batting.

Aftab scored 1 of 14 deliveries (first one day)
Alok 4 of 14 deliveries (first one-day)

Ashraful 13 of 31 deliveries (2nd one-day while Manjural scored 16 of 23)

And all these after a very very good start and against possibly the weakest bowling attack possible. So the selectors have two logical options....................persist with Aftab, Alok, Ash or push Pilot up to 6. IMHO both are equally likely to fail. Aftab, Ash and Alok are not ready to play the no. 6 position and Pilot (many of you will disagree) is a good no 7 and less than average no 6. They gambled with Manjural (I think most of the time it will fail) just hoping he will some how stop the rot. I don't think it is the best solution..............but I don't know what is the best solution. Manjural is some one who showed he can stick it out there (may be he is lucky...........I have not seen him bat though) and often bangladesh only needs some one just to stop the rot. That is the reality now........................even when Manjural did not come at 6 we have the record of losing the way. I'm all for the best composition and adjustment..............there is no one-way to success........SL would never have become world champion...........remember Dharmasena!!!

Sham
January 27, 2005, 04:16 PM
I think its my turn now to tell you to give up. Let it go mate, we won't get anywhere with this. Good luck to Rana, hope he does well for Bangladesh's sake, since it looks like he will be in the team for the forseeable future.

Fazal
January 27, 2005, 04:18 PM
It really doesn't matter what I or you think it matters what the coach thinks and what the scorecard shows.

However what I can say is, presently I have no problem picking up Rana over Alok (with is current form) as long as he produce. In future Alok, Mr. X or Mr. Y can be a better choice over Rana, who knows.

pagol-chagol
January 27, 2005, 04:41 PM
A lot of nice points made throughout this thread. Both positive and neg.

One thing I didn't see is how gifted his eyes are. His lack of swordsmanship and his ability to focus gets all the attention. Talents can be of many forms. This guy probably see the ball better than anybody in the Bangladesh team. (not counting Pilot of course)

Edited on, January 27, 2005, 10:54 PM GMT, by pagol-chagol.

RazabQ
January 27, 2005, 05:34 PM
Sami - your post had some kernels of truth - the biggest being the use of Border as an example. I have in numerous posts pointed out that Rana needs to reinvent himself as a dogged batsman whose spin is not entirely unuseful. I had forgotten about Border but that's the perfect role model for him. If I were Rana, I'd go to his NL team coach and captain and say, please give me the opportunity to bat in the top 4. And then, I'd scrounge around for every jodu modu kodu I ccould find to bowl at me in the nets, tape it and go to a Dav or McInnnis for ways to shore up the tecnhique. Then I'd score a mountain of runs - there is space in any side for a cussed cricketer like a Border, Hussain or McMillan (the last two started out as spinners who had to reinvent themselves).

I have watched Rana play in Windies and against India and now against Zim. Remember this is a guy who in his 3rd odi scored a run-a-ball 20 (20 off 21 against Eng). More impressive this is a guy who in his 1st ODI outing of his 1st away tour (and in only his 4th match), on a Harare greentop, against a Zim attack sporting Streak & Price, in a series decider, is asked to open the batting for the 1st time in his life, and manages to put together a composed 63. His sheer doggedness and an apparent ability to forget the previous ball is not something that Bangladesh cricket can throw away at this point, especially since he's one of the very few southpaws in the side. Technique alone an international player doth not make.

BTW, I agree, he is not a Test bowler at this point in time, he can be useful in slow turners for the ODIs. (Read my profile on him) :)

Edited on, January 27, 2005, 10:37 PM GMT, by razabq.

al
January 27, 2005, 05:46 PM
rana instead of alok for now. alok can play in bcb x1 and prove himself