Quote:
|
Originally Posted by M.H.Rubel
A big no to Ash. A player who don't want to stay in the crease or can't play big innings in test cricket is just a no to him. Junaid is a good option to me. I want to open with him.
Though Nazimuddin is a crap but dropping him from test will be just a sin. ...
|
Are you serious? How can dropping a "crap" player from the NATIONAL team (not a family owned or neighborhood club of part-timers) be a "sin"? How can you conclude that he has the ability to "stay in the crease" from just
ONE performance under extremely favorable conditions (78 from 183)? Going by that deeply flawed and somewhat laughable logic, Mohammad Ashraful Motin, a player with far better ability sight the ball, footwork and overall batting ability should play for us until hell freezes over because he has had better success in tests (114 from 212, 158* from 194, 136 from 184, 129* from 236, 101 from 193, 98 from 181, 81 from 224, 77 from 201, 75 from 120, 73 from 158, 67 from 189, 67 from 41, 60* from 135).
How about all of the other times when Nazimuddin couldn't "stay in the crease" (31 from 79, 0 from 6, and 12 from 42)? You do realize that test batting is harder because bowlers get to bowl without field restrictions under a variety of conditions, not just the NCL ones, right? You do realize that it's not just about "batting slowly" and that you still have to put runs on the board under those conditions, right? Do you honestly think a "crap" player with appalling footwork, fragile character and without the ability to sight the ball early will survive in test cricket in bowler friendly conditions? If not, then why is leaving him out a "sin"? Does real-life cricketing context even matter anymore when decontexualized stats are used to advocate a weird agenda?
Have a little respect for the national team and our intelligence, please!