PDA

View Full Version : Should we play only four bowlers in the England tests?


mwrkhan
February 16, 2005, 11:31 AM
IMHO we should only play four specialist bowlers against England in the test matches.

Our primary aim has got to be survival at any cost. I do not think we are in a position to dictate terms in the games. Our strategy must be to bat like we did in the second innings of the recent second test against Zimbabwe. Given our propensity for batting collapses, be it at the top or middle order, we must err on the side of caution and pack the batting line up with as many specialist batsmen as possible.

Since the two left armers Rafique and Huque Jr. pretty much select themselves (not including them both is folly, regardless of the conditions), the choice boils down to the opening partner for Mortaza. I would stick with Baisya simply because he has more experience. I would definitely take Rajib along on the tour and play him against a few counties. I feel he may shine in some of these games. Who knows, he could be picked for the second test.

Who do you think will provide us with a fifth bowling option and who will be the sixth batsman (in addition to the wicket keeper)? I don't think Khaled Mahmud is an asset in the longer form of the game. Ashraful with his leg spinners maybe? Feedback is appreciated.

Edited on, February 16, 2005, 4:33 PM GMT, by mwrkhan.

AsifTheManRahman
February 16, 2005, 12:09 PM
playing a bowler short is probably the biggest mistake we've been making over and over again over the last couple of years. many a time the inclusion of an extra batsman has resulted in an additional failure to the line up. if we decide to play rafique and enam together (which we should, as we have no quality medium pacers worthy of test cricket), and taking masri and tapash for granted, we will still need someone else to back these four up. england will be playing in their home ground, mind you - we don't want to get thrashed. i would have loved a bowling allrounder in the team - someone who can bowl pretty good (not just decent) medium pacers and save blushes later in the order if needed. unfortunately, we don't have one. nazmul would be the best choice we have right now. however, i would wait till the duleep trophy and the A team's tour to zimbabwe are over.

as for the batsmen - same old story. i want javed omar to open with nafis. unless someone does really well in the duleep or zim, there's no reason why javed should be left out. he may not be the ideal choice with his crappy footwork, but i still think he should be given more chances - he didn't do too bad against the zims at home. bashar will come in at one down, with rajin to follow (this may be reversed if required). ash should hold his position at 5, followed by khaled mashud. then the five bowlers.

now here is the tricky part. where does aftab fit in? if we finally DO decide to go in with 4 bowlers and rely on aftab's medium pacers, then he could easily come in before mashud. similarly, if rajin is sent in to open with nafis, aftab can secure a place even if we pick an extra medium pacer. however, sending rajin in to open will not be a smart move, since he hasn't made a decent job of it in tests (or was he ever sent in to open at all in tests?).

therefore, after much pondering and guessing and wasting my time, i come to the conclusion that the question aroused in this thread is a million dollar one.

cisco-guy
February 16, 2005, 12:23 PM
We are fortunate to have 3 spinners and IMHO, we should have all of them against England:

Rafiq, Enamul Jr. and Rana

I also believe that we should be fine with 2 pacers:

Mashri and Tapash

We should only consider Nazmul and/or Shahadat if Mashri or Tapash is unavailable due to health issue.

Sham
February 16, 2005, 12:24 PM
Rajin never did open in Tests and never should! A test opener is a different breed, can't just promote someone who is doing well in the middle order or has done well in the ODIs to open in Test cricket! While I would also like to play five bowlers, 3 quickies and the 2 spinners against England. But I think we definitely need 6 batsmen! If Aftab's medium pace was good enough or qiuck enough for him to be the third seamer, that would have been fine. He could have been a geniune all-rounder at 6. But he isn't! Going in with two seamers and Aftab will mean that we will be a pacer short in England.

I understand all the talk of Enamul and Rafique picking themselves. However, I just don't see how we can fit them both in. Lets not forget, this is England in May and early June. There won't be much spin off the wicket, andwhatever spin there might be will be on the 4th and 5th days, provided we get that far. If we have to bowl on the first day on a green wicket with a cloud cover, we really will want three seamers and going in with two will hurt us! On the flip side, our spinners are better quality bowlers than our pacers. So its a difficult one. I would rather not discuss this much more for now, and just take a good number of seamers and the two spinners to England, give them all a go in the county games and take it on from there. Discussing this now is pointless!

AsifTheManRahman
February 16, 2005, 12:25 PM
We are fortunate to have 3 spinners and IMHO, we should have all of them against England:

Rafiq, Enamul Jr. and Rana

I also believe that we should be fine with 2 pacers:

Mashri and Tapash

We should only consider Nazmul and/or Shahadat if Mashri or Tapash is unavailable due to health issue.



but we will still have to decide who will bat and who won't

Edited on, February 16, 2005, 5:30 PM GMT, by AsifTheManRahman.

mwrkhan
February 16, 2005, 12:39 PM
Originally posted by Sham
........If we have to bowl on the first day on a green wicket with a cloud cover, we really will want three seamers and going in with two will hurt us! ......

I really wish I could share your confidence in our seamers' abilities to exploit English conditions, but it remains to be seen. I was thinking more in terms of survival and not forcing a result which i don't think we are capable of yet. Given the survival imperative, our bowlers have to play a much more containing role.....frustrate the batsmen over long periods of time and induce mistakes. Our two spinners bowling in tandem over long spells might just achieve that. But they must be given a target to bowl at if we bat first. Of course if we bat second the responsibility of survival falls almost entirely on the batsmen. Either way you look at it a batsman heavy selection would appear sensible.

Dawah
February 16, 2005, 12:44 PM
England condition suits fast bowlers and a spinner who can use the bounce.

I frequent to U.K. a lot since I have relatives over there.
I also played 1 full summer of cricket over there with local club teams.

There should be 3 fast bowlers, 1 spinner (Rafiq!) and 1 all rounder.

3 fast bowlers

1. Masfee
2. Nazmul
3. Taposh

1 all rounder

1. Khalid Mahmud or Mushfiqur rahman

1 Spinner

1. Rafiq (test Enamul haq also!)

5 bowlers will be a waste of a batsman.

In UK there are a lot of movement on the ball. Thats why 2W's wasim waqar was enough for distroy England.... remember.

Bangladesh team should go to U.K. at least 1 month before and play 3/4 four day matches.

Edited on, February 16, 2005, 5:49 PM GMT, by dawah.tabligh.

mwrkhan
February 16, 2005, 12:52 PM
If BD had two bowlers of the ability of the two W's a lot of our problems would have been solved a long time ago. :)

RazabQ
February 16, 2005, 12:59 PM
Originally posted by Sham
I would rather not discuss this much more for now, and just take a good number of seamers and the two spinners to England, give them all a go in the county games and take it on from there. Discussing this now is pointless!

Hear hear, ainnit what I said months ago in my article? Let them play a few weeks in England before we discuss the team?

Ahmed_B
February 16, 2005, 01:19 PM
As far as I hav seen BD team play so far... they are the worst team when they are in 'Defensive' mode.

And playing only 4 bowlers is one way to get ourselves in Defensive Mode!
Thats probably only suicidal..

RazabQ
February 16, 2005, 06:12 PM
Originally posted by crickethorizon
As far as I hav seen BD team play so far... they are the worst team when they are in 'Defensive' mode.

And playing only 4 bowlers is one way to get ourselves in Defensive Mode!
Thats probably only suicidal..

What about that last innings against Zim - in my mind that might just have turned it around ... Let's see :)

BTW Aussies and England are playing aggressive cricket and they go with 4 speciallist bowlers too. So your oginal premise is somewhat problematic

little_master
February 16, 2005, 08:45 PM
Muhammad Rafique should be considered as an all-rounder.
Look at his test average:

<pre style="font-family:Lucida Console; font-size:8pt">
TESTS
(including 14/01/2005)
M I NO Runs HS Ave SR 100 50 Ct St
Batting & Fielding 18 34 5 685 111 23.62 61.93 1 2 6 0

O M R W Ave BBI 5 10 SR Econ
Bowling 889.4 216 2196 67 32.77 6-77 5 0 79.6 2.46
</pre>

I think this statistics is enough to consider him as a test all-rounder in the standard of bangladesh. So we can have 4 bowlers (3 pacers and 1 spinner(=Enamul) in our best 11. I dont consider Aftab in test right now. We can test him in the three 4-day matches before first test, then we should decide about his inclusion in the best 11.
And the questtions about 3 pacers.
Mashrafe : automatic choise.
Tapash : almost an automatic choise.
Shahadat Rajib: see his performance in ZIM and 4-day matches in England.
Nazmul: not preferable in test.
Talha: ?

Edited on, February 17, 2005, 2:00 AM GMT, by little_master.

little_master
February 16, 2005, 08:57 PM
Inclusion:

Look at Rafique last carrier average and last 10-tests average:

<pre style="font-family:Luciada Console; font-size:9pt">
Mat Runs HS BatAv 100 50 W BB BowlAv 5w Ct St

unfiltered 18 685 111 23.62 1 2 67 6/77 32.77 5 6 0
filtered 10 516 111 32.25 1 2 31 6/122 38.67 2 3 0

His last 10-tests battings:
3 5; 26*; 111 29; 30 2; 0 24;
32 31; 47 11; 4 22; 69 14*; 56 DNB;
</pre>

So, his last 10-tests batting average is better than his carrier average.
and it is 32.25.

RazabQ
February 16, 2005, 09:43 PM
the above stats also kinda confirm what I've noticed - he's becoming more Giles-ish day by day. Which isn't all that bad. In UK, a tight containment role might just work.

mwrkhan
February 16, 2005, 10:08 PM
Let's hope Rafique can handle the pressure. He will be expected to shoulder a heavy bowling load as well as bridge the middle and lower order batting.

Now, who will be the third seamer? Rajib if he performs well against the counties?

little_master
February 16, 2005, 10:30 PM
I think Rajib will be a better choice than Nazmul and Talha if he have learnt how to keep line and length. He has everything to be a fast bowler except keeping line and length.

Sham
February 16, 2005, 10:46 PM
Yeah, Rajib has obviously put his hand up with his recent performance. Lets see if he can continue. I would like a longer look at the other guys as well, Rassel and Shafaq!

As for Rafique's, I am obviously a big fan (who isn't?), but I think Rafique is best when he can go out to have a go! The innings in West Indies had quite a bit of substance, but that was again a pretty darned flat pitch! In England, if he can come in at 8 after the keeper and play a few cameos, I'll be very happy. I just don't think a 30+ average in the last ten tests should make him bat in the top six, if that is what you are suggesting by calling him an all-rounder.

ps. I don't have a personal grudge against Rafique!

Rubu
February 16, 2005, 10:53 PM
My prefered 11 for england TEST:

01. Javed Omar: not that i like him, but because we don't have any replacement for him yet.
02. Nafis Iqbal: no question asked.
03. Aftab Ahmed: He did better coming before basher in odi, i believe same will happen in test.
04. bashar: this gives a late exposer to the new ball. since loosing bashar means loosing half the batting, 4th position if better for him unless he feels uncomfortable.
05. rajin saleh: no question asked.
06. mohammad ashraful: no question asked.
07. khaled masud: no question asked.
08. mohammad rafique: nqa.
09. mashrafee: nqa
10. taposh/nazmul: nazmul's swing realy gives him advantage over taposh since its england.
11. enamul jr/taposh: now, u wanna make it spin or pace?

i'm confused. and so will be selectors, i'm sure. consider enamul's performance he how can he be side lined? well, rafique is there upon whom no one can even think of anything unless he is unfit. no do we really wanna go without a 3rd seamer in seaming condition of england or we wanna play informed enamul. i don't know the answer.

I think Rajib will be a better choice than Nazmul and Talha if he have learnt how to keep line and length. He has everything to be a fast bowler except keeping line and length.

no, nazmul might advantages even above taposh. here is the reasons:

1. taposh is not in very good form.
2. nazmul has recent memory of playing in england (u19 england tour)
3. he is a bowler who depends on swing, he really has swing. and thats what suits more in english conditions.

shaheen
February 17, 2005, 12:17 AM
Originally posted by mwrkhan

Who do you think will provide us with a fifth bowling option and who will be the sixth batsman (in addition to the wicket keeper)? I don't think Khaled Mahmud is an asset in the longer form of the game. Ashraful with his leg spinners maybe? Feedback is appreciated.

Edited on, February 16, 2005, 4:33 PM GMT, by mwrkhan.

I think that 5th bowlers position may be shared by Aftab/Rajin/Ash. Thus we can have an extra batsman which may be Tushar. You are right rajib may go with the team just to get familiar with England conditions. Even we may go with an extra bowler because there is a high chance of injury for Rafique and Morteza (if that the case we should bring another bowler)

Edited on, February 17, 2005, 5:18 AM GMT, by shaheen.

bourny3
February 17, 2005, 01:19 AM
I think we should have 6 bowlers

Enamul
Rafique
Masri
Tapash
Rana
Nazmul.

lol only jokes

Enam
Rafique
Masri
Tapash
Rana

feisal
February 17, 2005, 02:07 AM
[quote]Originally posted by AsifTheManRahman
playing a bowler short is probably the biggest mistake we've been making over and over again over the last couple of years. many a time the inclusion of an extra batsman has resulted in an additional failure to the line up.

** just on this point: we in fact always did other way round.. except the debut test..even that is not true if you treat Naimur Rahman as someone who can bowl.. having 6 batsman and 4 specialist bowler cannot be treated as a bowler short..

I can remember all the english summer since 84.. 20 years.. can't see when some one played with 5 specialist batsman..
it did NOT happen... unless one had agenuine allrounder.. Even Pakistan in 87, despite having Imran Khan and avery strong tail had Izaz at number 7...(openers, mansoor, javed, malik, imran, ejaz was the order..) the all conquering Aussie side of 89 and 93 had S Waugh at 6.. In 96 they had martin at 6, Gillchrist at 7.. Sri lanka in 88 had mendis batting at 7... Windies in 84 and 88 ( richie 3, hooper 4, richards 5, logie 6, dujon 7) also had a genuine batsman at 6. I believe i can give more examples..

another comment: to strengthen the batting one has to have more batsman, not one fewer so that other batsman can apply themselves!!!!

anyway, team composition of our team will depend on many things.. and probably it is difficult now to predict what happens..

offcutter
February 17, 2005, 12:24 PM
Since our bowlers tend to score more runs than the 'batsmen', I would put more bowlers then batmen in the team.

AsifTheManRahman
February 17, 2005, 02:07 PM
Originally posted by feisal
** just on this point: we in fact always did other way round.. except the debut test..even that is not true if you treat Naimur Rahman as someone who can bowl.. having 6 batsman and 4 specialist bowler cannot be treated as a bowler short..


I was actually referring to the occassions when we were more intent on strengthening our batting - thus sacrificing a bowler - only to get crucified all the same.


This is getting interesting, nevertheless. This kind of dilemma is actually very good for our cricket - indicates that we have a large pool to select from.

couger
February 17, 2005, 02:16 PM
Originally posted by little_master
I think Rajib will be a better choice than Nazmul and Talha if he have learnt how to keep line and length. He has everything to be a fast bowler except keeping line and length.

Rajib probably needs a bit more polishing. But he should be given some exposure.

couger
February 17, 2005, 02:17 PM
Originally posted by offcutter
Since our bowlers tend to score more runs than the 'batsmen', I would put more bowlers then batmen in the team.

Which bowlers would you include and which batsmen would you discard?

tansir
February 17, 2005, 03:16 PM
Which test team now a days play 5 specialist bowlers anyway? The ideal composition of a test team is 4 specialist bowlers, 1 WK and 6 specialist bastmen. Some points taken into account are having some batmen who can bowl a bit to give the specialist bowlers some respite and bring in some variation, if needed. A good batting WK is considered to be an added advantage. Just look how the other test teams are selecting their best eleven.

To me, BD's biggest mistake, so far, was to rely too much on player who can bat-a-bit and bowl-a-bit. A BD test team comprising of Sujon, Mushfiq and Rana was the worst team I ever felt. Nevertheless, now the BD think-tank seems to be realizing that tests're for specialists.

Specifically for Eng tour, I believe there's no point in playing two spinners together. Rafiq's a proven cricketer. And the best thing's that his style of bowling would suit English condition very well. 'Cause in seaming wickets with lot of grass a spinner who relys more on turn may not succeed. Rafiq has decent speed and deadly arm ball. Some may argue that Enam succeeded in grassy wickets in Zimbabwe, but we all need to remeber that the standard of English batsmen aren't the same! Thorpe, Treskothick and Strauss seem to be very apt at playing quality spin. We're getting too carried away with Enam at this moment, he needs some time and experience. Rana's out of question in Eng playing eleven. It'd be Enam vs Rafiq, and I'd go for experience and condition.

We should rely on our pace attack which's very decent in every aspect. Perhaps, on an average, it's better Indian pace attack exempting Pathan. So, the team should be like this:

(1) Gullu
(2) Nafis
(3) Rajin
(4) Sumon
(5) Ashraful
(6) Aftab
(7) Pilot
(8) Rafiq
(9) Mashrafi
(10) Tapash
(11) Nazmul
(12) Rana (for good fielding!)

In this team composition, Aftab, Rajin and Ashraful may add ample variations as part-time bowlers.

Rajib and Enam should be drafted in tour matches, and we'd have a clear view about their ability in unfamiliar condition then (in Enam's case, only). If Enam succeeds (I don't think so) then we'd have a second thought. If Rajib succeeds then there'd be an open fight between Nazmul and Rajib.

Greetings to all.

Tansir

tansir
February 17, 2005, 03:35 PM
Forgot to mention one important thing. It's the BD batting that needs to be strengthened. So playing 5 bolwers seems to be out of question. In my team combination, may be one all-rounder's missing, but we lack a quality all-rounder like Kallis or Flinthof. So, we've to rely to specialist batsmen for doing all-rounder job, unfortunately. We can't imagine bringing back Mushfiq again! Rana might be an option but definitely not in English condition! If we really need one all-rounder to be grafted in the playing eleven then still Sujon is the best option.

Danke.

Tansir

AsifTheManRahman
February 17, 2005, 03:37 PM
i just pray that chacha does extremely well with both bat and ball in the national league and then gets to play in a couple of first class matches in england and does well there too. we really need an all rounder in the team, and unless chacha evolves before the test series, we really don't have an option.

feisal
February 17, 2005, 09:33 PM
Originally posted by AsifTheManRahman
i just pray that chacha does extremely well with both bat and ball in the national league and then gets to play in a couple of first class matches in england and does well there too. we really need an all rounder in the team, and unless chacha evolves before the test series, we really don't have an option.

** does that mean u want him as number 6??? or 9?? at six he has to be as good as a batsman, at 9 he has to be as good as specialist bowler.. under the circumstances 9 is better... mashrafi, tapash and rafique will be the other bowlers and they have to bat at 10, 11 and 8 respectively, and now I feel that given mashrafi's and tapash's batting ability, chacha can well be a number 11.. no expectation in batting.. just a specialst bowler..

feisal
February 17, 2005, 09:35 PM
[quote]Originally posted by tansir

Which test team now a days play 5 specialist bowlers anyway? ............

**** looks like I, not you have written this. Can't agree more with MOST of the things that you brought forward..