PDA

View Full Version : Why do we rate UAE so low in cricket?


fwullah
February 5, 2005, 12:07 PM
Actually, the heading of this thread should be 'why our players almost always find it easier to face Asian teams such as UAE?'.

Trueblue in another thread said somelike this that UAE is not a bad team and that they are as good as in the Scotland, Ireland, Canada - in the ranks.

I found the Intercontinental cup's point table link (http://usa.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/2004/OTHERS/ICC-CONT/ICC-CONT_POINTS.html) where I couldn't really make out which team is weaker or which team is stronger.

The only logical reason behind our playing well against UAE is that since we're both Asian teams, we have similar strengths and weaknesses, as well as the same conditions.

For the same reasons, we find it that it has been easier for India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka to beat us, rather than Kenya or Zimbabwe.

It is only recently that we have managed to beat India, but using our pace attack, not with our spinners. And when we beat Pakistan way back in the '99 world cup, it was in English conditions where spinners are not as effective as they'd be in the subcontinent or in Sharjah.

What do you think about this point?

Sam
February 5, 2005, 12:41 PM
Well, let's finish this tour then we can analyse your point. Because, in the first game it was the pace attack that destroyed UAE batting with Sharif's 6-wicket haul, not the spin attack. In the second One Dayer again a 5 wicket haul was by a pacer SK Russell.
So, I want to be cautious before I agree to your point.

rafiq
February 5, 2005, 01:55 PM
Not to dismiss the UAE team, which I am sure is fine, but what is there to analyze about this tour?

Zobair
February 5, 2005, 02:05 PM
I wish we could know a little bit more about the new members in our A-team. For example, what is Sk Russel like? His strong points, weak points? Sakib Al-Hasan?

Zobair
February 5, 2005, 02:19 PM
can we identify the players?
http://www.banglacricket.com/home/pictures/newpic403.jpg

I can only recognize two of the players!

5th from left, backrow: Shafaq Al-Zabir
6th from left, backrow: Shahadat Hossain Rajib


Big Shaq is a giant! sheesh! He must go to England if he has a good A-tour...can you imagine the kind of steepling bounce he can generate off of a good length?

Huda
February 5, 2005, 02:26 PM
pompous, u dont get much bounce from english wickets, they are more aussie wickets, in england the pithces proivde swing for the bolwers, rather than bounce, so players like tapash maybe mroe effective

Zobair
February 5, 2005, 05:19 PM
Yes I am aware of that...even then... a bowler of 6 feet 4 inches height will get the odd unsettling bounce regardless of the pitch if he bends his back...remember Harmison in Bangladesh...surely there is more bounce in the pitch than in Dhaka and Chittagong.IMO Shaq will get some extra bounce in addition to the swing.

Originally posted by Huda
pompous, u dont get much bounce from english wickets, they are more aussie wickets, in england the pithces proivde swing for the bolwers, rather than bounce, so players like tapash maybe mroe effective

tiger_man
February 5, 2005, 07:44 PM
the reason why everyone takes UAE lightly is because they got some amateur players most of them are imported

oracle
February 5, 2005, 09:37 PM
I don't think "asianness" has a logical part to play in our win over UAE.:)

UAE have left out some key players and I noticed that one of their foremost batsman, Ranveer, is missing. Moreover, in the BD A team there are several who have test and ODI experienece (such as Tushar), that are far above what UAE could muster.

bourny3
February 7, 2005, 12:42 AM
The bloke on the back left is small as. He would only be 5 foot.

jabbar
February 7, 2005, 12:54 AM
Originally posted by pompous
can we identify the players?
http://www.banglacricket.com/home/pictures/newpic403.jpg

I can only recognize two of the players!

5th from left, backrow: Shafaq Al-Zabir
6th from left, backrow: Shahadat Hossain Rajib


Big Shaq is a giant! sheesh! He must go to England if he has a good A-tour...can you imagine the kind of steepling bounce he can generate off of a good length?

Big Shaq: How tall is he? Relatively speaking (with other test sides) would he be big? McGrath or Curtly Ambrose big?

bourny3
February 7, 2005, 01:38 AM
No where nearly Curtly Ambrose he was 6 foot 8 or something like that.

howzatt!
February 7, 2005, 02:54 AM
to produce curtly amrose, we need to make shafaq sit on chacha's shoulder and then let him/them bowl. chacha has to do all the running.

AsifTheManRahman
February 7, 2005, 10:34 AM
stats can be deceiving, fwullah, and they sure have deceived you in this case.

with all due respect to the teams that share the same group with UAE, it is safe to say that the UAE have had relatively easier competition than Canada, Scotland, Ireland and Holland. Nepal, IMO, is one of the upcoming test nations, but have to go a long way in order to make the accomplishment. Same goes to Malaysia - they have the grounds and the popularity and should do well in the international arena fifteen years from now.

However, look at the group that consists of Ireland, Holland and Scotland. This is surely the toughest group, and it is only natural that the teams will find it hard to dominate in this group.

As for Canada, I wouldn't doubt their abilities after their successful world cup campaign, where they kicked our butts. USA are a pretty good team (they had recently qualified for the last CT), and Bermuda is also no walk in the park.

However, I must admit that I am surprised to see Namibia so low in the table. I had expected them to be ahead of Uganda. Maybe they are just on a bad run. They are capable of doing wonders, though.

crazyisland
February 7, 2005, 10:44 AM
We are beating UAE simply because our players are better now than UAE. They got better in last 4/5 years with proper coaching, fitness and training. Our domestic cricket structure SLOWLY getting better. However, we must continue to build a stronger domestic cricketing structure before we start beating teams like Pakistan, WI, India, England and so on.