View Single Post
Old November 27, 2012, 06:06 PM
Rinathq's Avatar
Rinathq Rinathq is offline
Join Date: January 1, 2010
Location: Alberta, Canada
Favorite Player: Mash, Riyad, Tamim
Posts: 5,872
Default Time to drop a "must have pace attack" strategy?

I have been wondering and to me the idea keeps coming back. Specially when we are playing a non Asian team where the opponent is generally a bit weaker towards spin. What is the point of serving the visitors with fortune cookies in the form of "pace attack"?

lets face it, even at their best, how much damage can our pacers do to players like Gayle, Pollard, Samuels, Bravo and others? I would say at MOST, an upset.... thats all

Unless we play on a completely bouncy, green surface, i see no point of playing our pacers... Specially at home. Playing an extra spinner can save at least 20-30 runs and bring 1 wicket... this is usually the difference between Bangladesh winning a game or not.

I am speaking for the shorter formats ofcourse. Even though out longer format situation is worse, you can't expect to win a test match without a pace attack unless its a complete mine field.

How does this squad look like for ODIs?


Stanby: Zia, Gazi, Nazmul, Anamul

We have Mash... good or bad, form or of-form, he will be there.. I don't think there is any need to play any other pacers. If Mash gets injured, than bring in Nazmul ( I know its never gonna happen ). If by any chance, Zia gets a chance... there you go. You just earned yourself 3-4 overs of slow medium bowling... Good enough

With Raj, Sunny, Enamul, Shakib.... How much can the opponent score? Over 250? I dont see how

Think it this way,
Abul > Sunny?
Shafiul > Enamul?

Please dont say "you are comparing apples with oranges, IOS with Android bla bla bla"
Think who can save more runs, get more wickets.... the basic principle of bowling
thoughts guys...
Reply With Quote