his last two profiles, while praising Bangladesh on the surface still contains some thinly veiled stabs.
For example, notice the wording in his most recent piece:
In their hour of need at this World Cup, Bangladesh have had a 21-year-old, unassuming, short-for-a-fast-bowler fast bowler rise a notch above the rest and keep them alive in the tournament.
Firstly, while he may be far from tall, Shafiul is not that short. Shafiul is around 5-9 or 5-10. Would the same lines be used for other not-so-tall pacers like Shoaib, Roach, Steyn, or Malinga?
Secondly, saying someone is undersized, is perfectly legimitate in the world of sports journalism. Its not OK as a general table topic in "civilian" life, buts its OK in sports. But it could have been phrased in a hundred and one less offensive words. "Short", "slightly built", and "modest vertical endowment" are just a handful of the various things that could have been said. Instead we get "short-for-a-fast-bowler fast bowler".
Then we get continued barbs against Shakib's supposed lack of "tactical" acumen and Bangladesh's over reliance on Tamim to win matches, and how we were "never in the game" against India, although we were well within the required run rate for around a quarter of our innings. Fleeting it might have been, but "never" is not a word that can be used lightly.
That will be a big relief for a group that can't be the best team to support: they give up chases once Tamim gets out, and they often bat first without plan or brains.
Who gave Mongrel the authority to judge which teams are good to support and which aren't. Forget being a well-wisher, the fact that his verbal jabs continue after impressive wins indicates that a even a Bangladesh neutral he is not.