Explosive openings, the occasional duds and why it is more about partnerships

[Zeeshan]

Plus ça change, plus ce n'est pas la même chose! Contrary to the French saying that "More it changes, more it stays the same" it is actually not in the case of Bangladesh opening partnership.

Criterion 1: Last 5 years (between 26 Feb 2006 and 26 Feb 2011)
Criterion 2: Opening partnership
Criterion 3: Highest run rates
Criterion 4: 0-49 runs

Link 1

As evidenced by the stats listed above, over the years from as Tamim-Kayes duo took over from the Nafees-Omar era, team has managed to put up explosive totals in the board. Run rates has drastically improved and intuitively seems to be directly proportional to the date.

However, all that glitters is not gold. Despite the flashy and blitzy starts, many times than not they have failed to capitalize on them. Explosive openings is not necessarily the answer to a winning result. the team's problem has been they get carried away with the momentum, as nerves tense up and cannot capitlize on them.

Filter the above stats by winning matches and three things are observed:

• Kayes is not even in the picture in the top 8 matches
• Runrate drops drastically from 11.47 to 7.82 reaching a plateau around 5.00
• Barring the famous WC 2007 India match all of them are against the so-called minnows

Link 2

Take the same stats and filter it by the matches lost and yes, Kayes miraculously appears on the scene.

Link 3

So what are we to make of the above datas? Simple. Our greatest gift is our greatest curse. We somehow cannot seem to find a balance between explosive opening combo and exploiting the platform it builds.

And since, Kayes appears to stick out like a sore thumb, it seems although our players are improving leaps and bounds by each match, with RR climbing up as time has progressed with the openers Kayes and Tamim have each having mutual understanding, but they have not simply creolized into offering solid Stonewall resistance.

Consider the case of highest first wicket opening partnership. But first in order to summon some greater innings let's expand the 5 year constraints to overall history. What pictures do the numbers paint?

Link 4

What inferences can we immediately draw?

• There is not a single solid partnership of Tamim and Kayes
• Most of the strong first opening partnership were crafted in Bangladesh's heydeys.
• Pioneers and cricket sages had the appreciation of value of fundamentals ie namely modest RR with no rash sacrifices for a BIGGER PICTURE of a respectable final score

And what was the result of the application of their knowledge? Not-so-naive ones of winning result:

Link 5

Our batting stalwarts, Tamim and Kayes, yet to have won watch 'memorable' matches, that of against test playing nations, due to lack of strong opening partnerships.

Morale of the story:

• Morning does not show the day; starting off with a bang means jack if the deal is not closed.
• It's not about flashy blitz innings.
• It's about partnerships; partnerships win matches.
• It's about playing out 50 overs and having enough individual batting fuel power to do so.
• All is not lost. After having a healthy start, openers need to curb their aggression and master the fine art of nurdling and rotating strikes in the pith of the middle overs.

In conclusion, the key to beating stronger teams in the current World Cup can be manifested by a very simple opening mantra: Partnership matters.

[al Furqaan]

excellent work. however, notice that link 4 doesn't show many major victories. massive opening stands are also useless if scored at 3.5 an over.

balance is key, as you pointed out.

Tamim is getting there. He will mature. He will crack biggies (200s in tests, and 150s in ODIs)...just have to wait a bit longer. We also need to be smart about the batting PP.

Imrul is the best we have for now. Once we get a better opener, we can think of replacing him. But for now Imrul adds a bit of solidity, although he hasn't shown it so far this WC.

And i hope people don't hate on the innings that Rahim and Rock played today. Even Naeem did a decent job, although it could always have been better. But we got the W, and I don't mean Bush.

[Zeeshan]

Originally Posted by al Furqaan
excellent work. however, notice that link 4 doesn't show many major victories. massive opening stands are also useless if scored at 3.5 an over.

balance is key, as you pointed out.

Tamim is getting there. He will mature. He will crack biggies (200s in tests, and 150s in ODIs)...just have to wait a bit longer. We also need to be smart about the batting PP.

Imrul is the best we have for now. Once we get a better opener, we can think of replacing him. But for now Imrul adds a bit of solidity, although he hasn't shown it so far this WC.

And i hope people don't hate on the innings that Rahim and Rock played today. Even Naeem did a decent job, although it could always have been better. But we got the W, and I don't mean Bush.

Thanks.

At least someone appreciates my 1-hour of work with Statsguru and trust me....plodding through CI statsguru is one of the biggest chore ever. They should really use java or something to make it more user friendly.

And yes you are right big partnership don't mean anything either as seen by the 170 one where we lost.

Edit: No I agree. They are really good openers Tamim-Kayes; it's just that they need to work more on lengthening their innings than some blitzy cameos. That was my point. In fact, I think this is the best opening combo so far we got.

[kalpurush]

Originally Posted by ZeeshanM
. They are really good openers Tamim-Kayes; it's just that they need to work more on lengthening their innings than some blitzy cameos. That was my point. In fact, I think this is the best opening combo so far we got.

I want to see how Tamim and Nafees do as opening partner after the WC 2011.


Great analysis Zeeshan.
FP article IMHO. Congrats

[Spitfire_x86]

A minimum "X runs scored" filter should be applied (I propose 30). 8 ball 9, or 9 ball 11 doesn't qualify as any kind of meaningful partnership.

[BANFAN]

in WC so far, Imrul is trying to play like Tamim, that's a worry. Although he managed to score good against India, but failed against Ire. he should go back to playing within his capacity & rotate strikes, while Tamim takes on the bowling. That was working well, why does he want to change that suddenly?

I tem batting tactics are very very poor, the players need to play to the situation than what has been predetermined. Our predeterminations are pretty poor, that does force the players to play un characteristically. That is damaging our batting performances.

[al-Sagar]

we need two really good players at no 3 and 4 who can continue the good work of imrul and tamim after the opening partnership is gone.

[Zeeshan]

Originally Posted by Spitfire_x86
A minimum "X runs scored" filter should be applied (I propose 30). 8 ball 9, or 9 ball 11 doesn't qualify as any kind of meaningful partnership.

You are right. One of the constraint was fastest 50. But when it filters by RR, then those other runs creep in. As I said, it's a chore.

Feel free to tweak it around if you have time and post better results.

[Zeeshan]

Originally Posted by Spitfire_x86
A minimum "X runs scored" filter should be applied (I propose 30). 8 ball 9, or 9 ball 11 doesn't qualify as any kind of meaningful partnership.

Filtered to 30 -75 runs.

Link 0

[Robi]

what is interesting shahriar nafees is there in all the big partnership

[Robi]

also that all big partnerships are with the kenya and zimbabwe...

it would be better if we have the highest first wicket partnership against the G8 teams.
and see who has them.and the strike rate too

[Tdot_Tiger]

Really good points, I really never understood why our batsmen are always looking to make boundaries. You're only supposed to make boundaries from the bad deliveries, from good deliveries we need to take singles and rotate the strike. Really shows our batsmen are immature in their thinking. However, one thing you all have noticed is that our players have acquired the ability to overcome adversity. We did so against India by not being bowled for less than 200 and defending our low total against Ireland. It's really a matter of time, I hope so at least.