View Single Post
  #50  
Old March 4, 2014, 12:22 PM
Fazal's Avatar
Fazal Fazal is offline
Cricket Sage
 
Join Date: September 16, 2004
Posts: 18,718

Quote:
Originally Posted by RazabQ
Typical deshi thinking.

Graeme Smith would have been kept captain by the Saffer selectors. He felt he was not meeting his high standards any more and retired. Gilchrist dropped a few catches, felt he was not as nimble as he needed to be and retired. Andrew Strauss - retired voluntarily. That your captain or selector keeps selecting you does NOT absolve one of his responsibility to his country and more important to his self!

That is one of the reason so many people lost respect for Sachin Tendulkar. That he couldn't make the decision that the selectors were clearly too chicken to make. Razzak can set a better example.

Razzak has been a great servant for BD cricket. I read some of the disrespectful statements above with dismay - yes he bowled poorly today, as he has all through the tournament. But that does not negate the great job he has done over the years. His ODI economy and wicket rate are outstanding by BD standards and pretty decent by international norms. His T20 economy is world-class.

Still, his time has come. The hammie injury in the Chittagong test should have been a clue. He is clearly older than the official age of 31 and it's beginning to show. Never the best of fielders, he is positively geriatric on the green these days. His hit and miss batting surely reached it's zenith in that slogathon he unleashed against Zim in the last tour. Most important, his bowling has lost the zip and skid that made him so effective. He is now the purveyor of slow-medium lollipops that even the likes of Fawad Alam can dispatch.

So to Abdur Razzak I urge, retire. Go with the dignity you deserve and don't let the selectors force the issue. If he retires today, the selectors can name a replacement for him in the T20 tournament.

To Arafat Sunny, Taijul, Shohrowardy, Roubel and others - time for you to step up and replace a legendary player.
Actually you are wrong. Its not deshi thinking, its american way of thinking.

Just see how the professional superstars end up their career here in USA. NFL, NBA, MLB. the superstars when their days are over, will not quit as long as teams give them opportunity to play. And they retire only when they get the signal that the team will not retain them and no other team will give them another contract. There are exceptions, but they are few.

This is a player's profession, its their livelihood, why should he retire if he see that he can squeeze more money at the end of his career? And why should I blame him for that?

On the other hand the management has the job to make the hard choice, they have to make a choice that will benefit the team and that's what they are supposed to make.


And oh please don't compare Razzak with Smith or Tendulkar. They have already earned enough fame, money and public influence. Razzak was good to us, but he is nowhere near close to them and I am not sure he is as financially solvent as Sakib or Tamim or Mushfiq. So why should I expect that he would voluntarily retire?

Actually your way of sentimental thinking is more in line with Deshi thinking.
__________________
"Make Bangladesh Cricket Great Again"
Reply With Quote