Cricinfo article showing Bangladesh's progress since Champions Trophy 2004

[Miraz]

This is the first time Bangladesh is occupying some respectable position in the Cricinfo article analysing ODI progress of all test playing nation. Key excerpt from the article is

1. Bangladesh occupies 7th position among the teams based on win percentage
2. Bangladesh ranks 7th based on averages and strike rate since Champions Trophy 2004
3. Bangladesh ranks joint 3rd with Australia as the least wides and no balls per match
4. Mashrafee is considered as one of the best ODI bowler with 41 wickets and better economy than Lee, Bracken, Ntini and Pathan.

Full article

[sar2005]

Good one. Nice to see BD is well ranked in many departments. Have to say we are going definitely towards right direction. Perhaps little slow.

Btwn, your comment 4 would be misleading since bowler's performances is measured based on avg i.e. run per wicket instead of economy rate. See below -

Nathan Bracken - gives 21.32 runs per wicket
Brett Lee - gives 21.46 runs per wicket
Makhaya Ntini - gives 22.60 runs per wicket
Irfan Pathan - gives 24.73 runs per wicket
Mashrafe Mortaza - gives 28.39 runs per wicket

[sar2005]

By the way, though Bangladesh is occupying respectable position in terms of stat, cricinfo indeed used their usual tone -

"Bangladesh's numbers are a bit flattering: seven of their wins came against Kenya, and five more against a severely depleted Zimbabwe."

Of course they are not lying.

[Cricket Crazy]

Yeah its good to see they are in 7th place. Also. Mashrafee in top bowling table. but theres no one in batting table. we are way behind in betting.

[Miraz]

Originally Posted by sar2005
Good one. Nice to see BD is well ranked in many departments. Have to say we are going definitely towards right direction. Perhaps little slow.

Btwn, your comment 4 would be misleading since bowler's performances is measured based on avg i.e. run per wicket instead of economy rate. See below -

Nathan Bracken - gives 21.32 runs per wicket
Brett Lee - gives 21.46 runs per wicket
Makhaya Ntini - gives 22.60 runs per wicket
Irfan Pathan - gives 24.73 runs per wicket
Mashrafe Mortaza - gives 28.39 runs per wicket

Yeah I know, but in ODI economy rate is another parameter for judgement. In tests you can simply judge using bowling averages.

[Ahmed_B]

Originally Posted by sar2005
By the way, though Bangladesh is occupying respectable position in terms of stat, cricinfo indeed used their usual tone -

"Bangladesh's numbers are a bit flattering: seven of their wins came against Kenya, and five more against a severely depleted Zimbabwe."

Of course they are not lying.

Yes they did... but it is the truth also. I wouldn't be too much pleased with such a high ratio of wins when we played so many matches against ZIM/KEN.

[Miraz]

At least Bangladesh won the ODI's they played. Bangladesh had no opportunity to play other teams over the last 9 months.

In early days Bangladesh managed only one win against Kenya.

[cricket_dorshok]

Yeah, its nice to see that BD is in good place in CI analysis. They always need to undermine us!! They could simply overlook the weak team issue. SA and WI also played against ZIM. Anyway, our batsman need to cut this mark. Once they do, we will be one of the top team. I hope, those days are not so far away!

[Tokyobreeze]

Nice to see some positive remarks from cricinfo...No wonder they don't come up with positive sides of our cricket, most of the writers are indians.Don't understand what is the problem with India regarding our cricket development?They are jealous or afraid?

[Rabz]

Regardless of the opponents, a win is a win.
It helps to boost up the moral of the players, beef up the record book and shines our image.
Few years back, we could not even win regularly against the likes of Zim or Kenya, let alone thinking of the bigger powers.

Now, a 7-0 thrasing of Kenya, 5-5 with Zim ( 3-2 at home, 2-3 away) plus the occasional wins against Aus, Ind, SL certainly shows we are improving.

As it is said, "maximum force is being used at the point of ignition/start", then we have certainly ignited our engine. Now its just about time to shift the mode into 2nd gear then 3rd and so forth.

Believing the initial period is over, we can certainly accelarate on a faster pace this time.

[oracle]

In a more sombre note, I find the wides/no ball statistics to be the only flattering stat. And that Masrafee managed to be in the bowlers chart.

[Braveheart]

Originally Posted by Tokyobreeze
Nice to see some positive remarks from cricinfo...No wonder they don't come up with positive sides of our cricket, most of the writers are indians.Don't understand what is the problem with India regarding our cricket development?They are jealous or afraid?

Aren’t you being bit too harsh? Not all the cricinfo writers are from India. There are few but mostly each test playing nation has at least one dedicated writer while big market countries such as India, Australia, England, etc have more than one. And your point of Indian writers trying to overlook positive aspect of Bangladesh cricket is simply not true. I remember S. Rajesh nominated Ashraful’s innings of 158 against India in 2004 as the best innings of that year. However, it is sometimes hard to be enthusiastic about Bangladesh's cricket when you see them perform so poorly sometimes.

[Tokyobreeze]

Originally Posted by Braveheart
Aren’t you being bit too harsh? Not all the cricinfo writers are from There are few but mostly each test playing nation has at least one dedicated writer while big market countries such as India, Australia, England, etc have more than one. And your point of Indian writers trying to overlook positive aspect of Bangladesh cricket is simply not true. I remember S. Rajesh nominated Ashraful’s innings of 158 against India in 2004 as the best innings of that year. However, it is sometimes hard to be enthusiastic about Bangladesh's cricket when you see them perform so poorly sometimes. :p:p

Okk..I guess I was too hursh.Sorry for that.

It probably had to do with my frustration regarding India's negligency to help promoting our cricket.See mate, ofcourse they had played the first test against us.But, after that they kept cancelling tours.And, even in near future the possibility that they will host us for a full series is very thin.Surely, that grief shouldn't be taken with cricinfo writers.

But, cricinfo too often is very much reluctant to come up with good news or good side of our cricket.Most of the positive things about us are written by Rabeed Imam.And, probably you too remember that just a few days ago Rafique was overlooked in a topic about best SLAs in the world.When someone within us contacted that writer, he gave some strange parameters.Anyways, sorry if I hurt someone's feeling.Never meant that.

[SMHasan]

Good to see we are doing pretty good but we need to lift our batting none of our batsmen made a mark in the list. We need to improve the batting as a whole.

[Tigers_eye]

Originally Posted by oracle
In a more sombre note, I find the wides/no ball statistics to be the only flattering stat. And that Masrafee managed to be in the bowlers chart.

Can you make your post bold, italic, underlined, highlighted with larger fonts please. As we in college football say "playing against cupcakes" or having a cupcake schedule only pads the stat. In reality, we are improving but still way behind.

[Fazal]

Yum Yum cupcakes!!!!
Are they yellow or chocolate?

[Sovik]

its good to see that we are doing well.

[al Furqaan]

rasel misses the bowlers list because to qualify one had to bowl 150 overs minimum...rasel has only bowled 130.3 overs.

his average 22+ and econ 4.00 would place him amongst the top 6 bowlers

[sar2005]

Originally Posted by al Furqaan
rasel misses the bowlers list because to qualify one had to bowl 150 overs minimum...rasel has only bowled 130.3 overs.

his average 22+ and econ 4.00 would place him amongst the top 6 bowlers

Russel got 23 wickets in ODI so far.

[sar2005]

Originally Posted by Miraz
Yeah I know, but in ODI economy rate is another parameter for judgement. In tests you can simply judge using bowling averages.

In test, most crucial is strike rate. In ODI, avg per wicket is more important than rr. RR is of course important, but if you look into the list of this article, it is clearly made of avg as you can see Bond top the list and Mash at bottom.

However, the bottom line is Mashrafi is in the list.
Cheers....

[Tupun]

Maybe our wins are against weak teams but a win is a win.Maybe our perfomances are poor time to time, but the occational wins against the big teams shows that we do have the ability and potential. We should be seeing it this way that we are on the top of the bottom three teams and trying to get the last team of the upper half.

[al Furqaan]

Originally Posted by sar2005
In test, most crucial is strike rate. In ODI, avg per wicket is more important than rr. RR is of course important, but if you look into the list of this article, it is clearly made of avg as you can see Bond top the list and Mash at bottom.

However, the bottom line is Mashrafi is in the list.
Cheers....

yes in Test bowling, SR is most important and that average should be coupled to that. but in ODI, i would say economy rate is even more important that bowling average. because say you bowl a 10 over spell and concede 25 runs without taking a wicket. you create pressure on the batsmen because they have to accelerate the run rate to make up for your 10 miserly overs. in doing so, you indirectly create wickets when your team mates pick up the wickets even if they bowl more loosely. this has happened to mashrafee many times.

and even if no wickets are taken, a RR of 2.5 is nothing to be pleased about.

bottom line is, in an ODI whether batting 1st or 2nd, i would rather have a bowler bowl 10-2-30-1 than 10-0-80-3 even tho the 2nd bowler has the better average and way better SR.

[sar2005]

Originally Posted by al Furqaan
bottom line is, in an ODI whether batting 1st or 2nd, i would rather have a bowler bowl 10-2-30-1 than 10-0-80-3 even tho the 2nd bowler has the better average and way better SR.

I agree. You are right.
But all I wanted to say is that the list cricinfo created are based on avg.

[Sovik]

Originally Posted by al Furqaan
rasel misses the bowlers list because to qualify one had to bowl 150 overs minimum...rasel has only bowled 130.3 overs.

his average 22+ and econ 4.00 would place him amongst the top 6 bowlers

rasel is a very good bowler.i would like to see him in the playing eleven ahead of shahadat

[kaisermatin]

Bowlers have reached class. How about stats on our batsmen? I bet they have improved too.