Originally Posted by al Furqaan
Why doesn't everything think Anamul is an (Test) opener? He's a #3. How hard is that concept to grasp? Its better to keep someone on the bench then to play him out of position. Or are we trying to perpetually re-create the Ashraful fiasco?
It doesnt matter if he is #3 but he opens the batting, Anamul should be able to show that he can perform decently. A player doesnt perform horribly if he is a natural #3 but he opens. If Ponting opened the batting he wouldnt do 'horrible'. If Trott opened the batting he would do horrible. This logic of 'he is a #3, so if he opens the batting he will do bad' logic doesnt make sense to me.
“The long I play, I will try to play good cricket. And if I succeed, that will be the biggest satisfaction.” - Imrul Kayes (April 2016)