This really hurts Bangladesh

[rah]

Originally Posted by Fazal
This really hurts ...

Where?

in da a**
DANG WEREWOLF ALREWDY SED DIS

[Tigers_eye]

Originally Posted by syzygy
are nt those matches played before india's independance and at a time when the country had other challenges than watching or playing cricket? even bd was a part of ind i think that time..also batters did nt have the luxury of helmets and other pads those days, bowlers had the upper hand unlike 2day.(just take out helmets in 2days game and see what happens).also ind did nt have a cricket following in the 30s, 40s or 60s at all, hockey was the more popular game..and yes if u want to compare apples with apples compare the first 50 5 day test matches ind played with that of bd's.

You have completely missed what I was trying to say here.

A question was raised about wins-loses and draws. This is a mute point. This matters very little when some other test nations didn't start their test journey with 5 day test cricket. Even after 14 years they played 3 day tests.

Apples vs apples would be going over the 42 loses that BD had and see how many ended in 2+ days. Only those can be considered as losses. Any BD match that went over 3 days should be considered as draws. Why? Because the other teams couldn't survive 5 days for sure when they were infant, child even teenagers. Cause in India's case, their 183 draws are padded with that. Not only for India, also West Indies played 3/4 day tests.

We should be allowed to calculate like this till our 14th year at least? no?

As for batters not wearing the helmets, was it only the weaker teams were not allowed to wear that? - why discuss unrelated topics?

Instead of calling for heads, this and that, a little patience can fix/answer many questions over time.

[al Furqaan]

Mijan bhai:

i used that argument against India once, but was enlightened that though the tests may have been 3 days, they used to play 130-150 overs a day, meaning matches were essentially the same length.

now the way to really measure how BD stacks up against other teams, is to compare, the total overs bowled in India, Sri Lanka, New Zealand, Pakistan drawn Tests early in their histories.

i started with India, here are my findings:

India's first 9 drawn Test matches lasted on average about 339 overs. this was through 3 day, 4 day, 5 day, and even a 6 day Test match. interestinly, only 153 overs were played in that drawn 6 day Test against Australia.

339 overs equates to 11.3 sessions (30 overs per session) - thus in India's first 9 draws, they lasted on average (without rain delays) 3.76 days. thus it actually makes BD's performance look better as all teh arguments are that India, SL, NZ drew a lot more matches early on.

[Fazal]

Originally Posted by WarWolf
In the a**.

Originally Posted by rah
in da a**
DANG WEREWOLF ALREWDY SED DIS

Oh... ei problem! No problema. Just goggled and found this...

Thankfully curing can be as easy as following these simple practices:

- Sit on an inflatable cushion to minimize pressure on the posterior
- Avoid bearing down (straining) during defecation
- Avoid sitting on the toilet for prolonged periods of time
- Take warm Sitz baths
- Take stool softeners to prevent the need for straining
- Eat lots of fiber to prevent constipation
- Use herbs for a natural hemroid cure
- Some people have also found acupuncture to be effective .
- The ‘last resort’ cure, of course, is surgery.

[Rifat]

hmmm. i hope by the end of 2010, 4 of Bangladeshi players play first class cricket in England. my prospects are:

Mohammad Ashraful
Sakibul hasan(already got an offer)
Mushfiqur Rahim
Mashrafee Mortaza

maybe add razzak, rasel and aftab ahmed to this list...

simple solution to a simple problem: MORE FIRST CLASS MATCHES AGAINST QUALITY OPPONENTS UNDER A QUALIFIED SYSTEM

[al Furqaan]

Originally Posted by syzygy
are nt those matches played before india's independance and at a time when the country had other challenges than watching or playing cricket? even bd was a part of ind i think that time..also batters did nt have the luxury of helmets and other pads those days, bowlers had the upper hand unlike 2day.(just take out helmets in 2days game and see what happens).also ind did nt have a cricket following in the 30s, 40s or 60s at all, hockey was the more popular game..and yes if u want to compare apples with apples compare the first 50 5 day test matches ind played with that of bd's.

this is true. but at the same time, outside the Windian bowlers, i doubt there were very many 90 mph quicks in those days of pre-steroids, pre-weight training, pre-protein dieting cricket. nowadays, fielders are athletic, bowlers are fit and quick, etc. batting now is harder than in those days. each of the 9 test nations, has at least 2 140+ kmph bowlers today. some like australia, pakistan, etc have multiple 150 k bowlers.

for SL's first 10 drawn Tests the durations are as follows:

339 overs, 348, 368, 393, 372, 331, 363, 320, 310, 336

an average of 348 overs/Test match

now so far, in 4 miserable tests against Inda and SL, bangladesh have managed:

220, 260, 254, 236 ---> avg of 242 overs

now these are some of our worst performances, i would estimate that BD overall average is around 280 overs per match which would mean Sri Lanka drew matches by extending the game for about 2 more sessions than we do, and India by about 3 sessions. makes things look somewhat brighter for us. on a good day, BD tests prolly last 350 overs, yet no draws. e.g BD-Aus fatullah test lasted 375 overs without a draw. the BD-WI st lucia test which was a draw lasted 380 overs.

of course, i concede that both SL and India were much more competitive in their matches, but the lenght of time needed to force a draw, seems to be less than the 450 overs needed of BD today. perhaps it rained a lot more back then...who knows.

but one would think that drawn tests, without rain, lasted on average 15 sessions, or 450 overs aproximately. clearly, the India and Lanka draws where not even close to that duration, tho well ahead of Bangladesh's sub 300 over games.

[Buddhika_s]

i think sri lanka has given bangladesh and zimbabwe test matches than any other team.

[al Furqaan]

Originally Posted by Buddhika_s
i think sri lanka has given bangladesh and zimbabwe test matches than any other team.

yes sir, thanks a lot to the SL authorities...

[jabbar]

Originally Posted by rah
first of all da money system has to be changed. the playas at da moment r being payed the same for winning and loosing their matches, so y would a playa want to play out der hearts if they can jus go out for a duk and be payed the same weather they win or loose. their has to be more bonusses like more money for every 50, 100 a batsmen scores or for a bowla how many wicketrs he manges to take, dat way players will have somefink there for dem to perfrom for.

secondly our young playas like tamim, sakib and so on should be shipped to county cricket, cos at da moment i dont see any drastic changes being made for our domestic cricket now.

and finally our batsmen should have sessions with sports phsycologists and try to stop the "mad rushes of blood" they all have

Word!! Respect.....

[jabbar]

Originally Posted by Buddhika_s
i think sri lanka has given bangladesh and zimbabwe test matches than any other team.

But on the flipside, they make us look so bad... No ingratitude to SL at all, however. They have been great supporters of BD cricket.

[insideedge]

Cricket is not just about scoring runs, it is about taking the opposition wickets also. Much of the discussion in this thread is about the low scores that the Bangladesh batsmen manage in tests, but what about the bowlers. The bowlers fail to bowl out the opposition within a reasonable total and even tailenders have scored century ( even double century) against this bowling attack. The bowling has been just as bad ( if not worse) than the batting in the tests so far.

If one looks at the scorecards of the earlier tests played by some other teams, their bowling was not this poor. Those teams also struggled in their earlier test matches, but they made their opponents bat twice in many of these test matches. Bangladesh is failing to bowl out their opponents even once in most of the test matches that they play.

[Rifat]

Originally Posted by insideedge
Cricket is not just about scoring runs, it is about taking the opposition wickets also. Much of the discussion in this thread is about the low scores that the Bangladesh batsmen manage in tests, but what about the bowlers. The bowlers fail to bowl out the opposition within a reasonable total and even tailenders have scored century ( even double century) against this bowling attack. The bowling has been just as bad ( if not worse) than the batting in the tests so far.

If one looks at the scorecards of the earlier tests played by some other teams, their bowling was not this poor. Those teams also struggled in their earlier test matches, but they made their opponents bat twice in many of these test matches. Bangladesh is failing to bowl out their opponents even once in most of the test matches that they play.

yeah, mortaza is not bowling well, shahadat? he is bowling below par... but it is slightly improving( gotta get more consistent though), and we need razzak in tests. enamul jr. and mehrab jr. should have been given another chance in tests... right?

Javed omor is fine... let's not intimidate him much, but he should god willing continue his good form.

i do not like the BCB, the guys who should be given more chances like sakib and razzak are kept out and the guys who needs to be kicked out like bashar and possibly nafees are still playing scoring 10s and 30s

[bd_fan_from_india]

Originally Posted by BD_Ashraful
This Series ... our first 3 test series

this is not the 1st 3 test series for bd. bd has already played a 3 test series against pak way back in 2003 and in that series, bd despite having lost 3-0, were in a position to win in all the 3 tests even taking a 1st-innings lead in 2 of the tests and 1 of them was just a 1 wk loss