Time to drop a "must have pace attack" strategy?

[Jadukor]

Originally Posted by Gowza
also the selectors and need a proper development plan for each pace prospect. like farhad reza is opening the bowling for the BCB XI right now. why isn't one of the kamrul's or dollar or sajidul or babu or jayed or taskin etc opening? it's no wonder the pacers don't develop very well, they don't even get the chance to.

The root of all problems is our batting. We sucked so bad in batting for so long now that even the selectors are always thinking about how to add more batsman to the playing 11. Farhad is there opening the bowling because he can bat. Although he has proven himself worthless with the bat several times before, still we foresee him as a rescuer with the bat at the expense of an attacking bowling option.

Most sides, with a world class al rounder like Shakib, would have no problems fielding a balanced side for an international game but when it comes to bd we even need the 8,9,10 to score heavily to get to a par score.

If we could fix our batting at least, then we could also go in with 3-5 specialist bowlers in one game. At present this is unthinkable from the selector's point of view.

[Rinathq]

I never claimed that a 1 pacer attack is a long term solution. It is more of a desperate measure to save some matches. Right now, our entire pace attack is a waste of space. I am sorry if it sounds rude but thats how it is. A 1 pacer attack would mean more competition between the pacers. This way our seamers will be forced to try hard for the slot rather than waiting for the other to flop which is exactly whats happening right now. Until we get Ian or a decent pace coach or an academy, no point using these pacers. They are not ready, they are not competitive.

and this experiment could be applied only towards non asian nations AT home. or spinning conditions away.

[BANFAN]

Aren't you watching how the world class spinners are being hit ... In the practice match...??

[boka]

৩০০+ রানের পিচে বোলারদের রান দেওয়া কল্পনা ছাড়া ঠেকানো সম্ভব না
আমগো মারাত্বক ব্যটাররা ৩০০+ রানের পিচে ২৫০ করলে তার দায় তো বোলারগো দেওয়া-টা ঠিক না

আমি নিশ্চিত দুই-টা সমান শক্তির দল এই পিছে খেল্লে ভালো বাইরা-বাইরি দেইখা দর্শকরা মজা পাইতো
তো আমগো ব্যটারগো লাইগা ব্যপারটা তা আর হয় না

[Jadukor]

Originally Posted by boka
[b]
আমি নিশ্চিত দুই-টা সমান শক্তির দল এই পিছে খেল্লে ভালো বাইরা-বাইরি দেইখা দর্শকরা মজা পাইতো
তো আমগো ব্যটারগো লাইগা ব্যপারটা তা আর হয় না

আমাগো ব্যাটসম্যান রা স্টেডিয়াম এর বাইরে বাইরা বাই রি দেইখা বিরক্ত তাই খেলার সময় পীডা পীডী করবার চায় না

[Rifat]

Originally Posted by Jadukor
The root of all problems is our batting. We sucked so bad in batting for so long now that even the selectors are always thinking about how to add more batsman to the playing 11. Farhad is there opening the bowling because he can bat. Although he has proven himself worthless with the bat several times before, still we foresee him as a rescuer with the bat at the expense of an attacking bowling option.

Most sides, with a world class al rounder like Shakib, would have no problems fielding a balanced side for an international game but when it comes to bd we even need the 8,9,10 to score heavily to get to a par score.

If we could fix our batting at least, then we could also go in with 3-5 specialist bowlers in one game. At present this is unthinkable from the selector's point of view.

Thank you for explaining the selector's point of view, this post sheds a lot of light on the current selection policy

[Rinathq]

Originally Posted by BANFAN
Aren't you watching how the world class spinners are being hit ... In the practice match...??

yup... First I saw the seamers getting bashed all out of park... than I saw the spinners getting bashed... However, on the bright side... 2 of the 3 wickets were claimed by spinners

[BANFAN]

Originally Posted by rinathq
yup... First I saw the seamers getting bashed all out of park... than I saw the spinners getting bashed... However, on the bright side... 2 of the 3 wickets were claimed by spinners

Obviously when comparing our C grade pacer Reza ... and two top spinners ...

[Rinathq]

bump...
this did work

[Tigers_eye]

Without Rubel the chasing target would have been 220+ today.

How about work on this strategy:

"Hold on to the catches?"

We would have won many more games in this series and in previous series'.

[Rinathq]

Originally Posted by Tigers_eye
Without Rubel the chasing target would have been 220+ today.

How about work on this strategy:

"Hold on to the catches?"

We would have won many more games in this series and in previous series'.

i am talking about ODI series

[jeesh]

In T20 having 2-3 pace bowlers might be useful. The problem is our spinners dont have anything unorthodox in their bowling. They are very predictable. All you need to do is just come some room and slog with all your power like McCullum did in WT20 and Samuels did yesterday. If our spinners did have some mystery element to their bowling or if they could pitch it up at pace like Gayle/Samuels was doing then its a different story.

But it ODI's its pointless having pacers even if there is grass and bounce in the wicket. Not because our spinners are so great, but because we lack quality in our pace bowling. Question becomes do i play Shafiul or Rubel who i know will neither give me 10 overs or add anything to the batting or play Sunny who will surely give me 8-10 overs conceding not more than 45-50 runs.

[Zunaid]

The issue is not about whether to have a pace attack or nor - the answer is yes. The issue is whether we have a pace attack?

[Zunaid]

Originally Posted by Zunaid
The issue is not about whether to have a pace attack or nor - the answer is yes. The issue is whether we have a pace attack?

Let me rephrase that better.

The question is not whether to have a pace attack, the question is do we HAVE a pace attack?

[jeesh]

Lol. We dont. The way Ziaur Rahman was bowling i d rather have him, Nazmul, and Mashrafee as our only pace bowlers. We dont have the pace or the skill, might as well try playing bowlers wo have discipline, line and length, consistency. There was a time England's ODI attack was based on a group of medium pacers-Adam Hollioake, Douggie Brown, Ealham. Their philosophy was to keep it tight and not allow any runs. Least we could do that is to follow a similar approach. Instead we ditch guys with good basics like Nazmul and pick guys like Shahadat, Abul hasan etc.

[Jadukor]

Originally Posted by Zunaid
Let me rephrase that better.

The question is not whether to have a pace attack, the question is do we HAVE a pace attack?

Indeed Z bhai. Pace "Attack" might be too strong a term for our generous pace bowlers.
We need to brainstorm on an alternative term in place of "attack"

[BANFAN]

Originally Posted by jeesh
Lol. We dont. The way Ziaur Rahman was bowling i d rather have him, Nazmul, and Mashrafee as our only pace bowlers. We dont have the pace or the skill, might as well try playing bowlers wo have discipline, line and length, consistency. There was a time England's ODI attack was based on a group of medium pacers-Adam Hollioake, Douggie Brown, Ealham. Their philosophy was to keep it tight and not allow any runs. Least we could do that is to follow a similar approach. Instead we ditch guys with good basics like Nazmul and pick guys like Shahadat, Abul hasan etc.

They had to discard that approach because that was not doing anything good for them....do you really like to adopt a failed approach?

Guys with more pace and accuracy should be the way to go. A little effort can make them more accurate. Shafiul and Rubel bowled well, but Rubel needs to learn keeping his brain cool under pressure. So we have Shafi, Rubel, Shahadat, Mash to chose from. Zia certainly can be in ODIs, due to his Allrounder ability.

Pace is an attack when they have pace, slow mediums even deteriorates effectiveness of our spin attack... Because facing them isn't any significant change for the batsman....so you don't unsettle any batsman while you change between pace and SLA/spin.

[Jadukor]

Gone are the days when we used to watch Wasim Akram bowl those reverse swinging yorkers ball after ball during the death overs.

[cricbook]

Originally Posted by rinathq
I have been wondering and to me the idea keeps coming back. Specially when we are playing a non Asian team where the opponent is generally a bit weaker towards spin. What is the point of serving the visitors with fortune cookies in the form of "pace attack"?

lets face it, even at their best, how much damage can our pacers do to players like Gayle, Pollard, Samuels, Bravo and others? I would say at MOST, an upset.... thats all

Unless we play on a completely bouncy, green surface, i see no point of playing our pacers... Specially at home. Playing an extra spinner can save at least 20-30 runs and bring 1 wicket... this is usually the difference between Bangladesh winning a game or not.

I am speaking for the shorter formats ofcourse. Even though out longer format situation is worse, you can't expect to win a test match without a pace attack unless its a complete mine field.

How does this squad look like for ODIs?

Tamim
Jahirul
Mominul
Shakib
Mushfiq
Nasir
Riyad
Mash
Raj
Sunny
Enamul

Stanby: Zia, Gazi, Nazmul, Anamul

We have Mash... good or bad, form or of-form, he will be there.. I don't think there is any need to play any other pacers. If Mash gets injured, than bring in Nazmul ( I know its never gonna happen ). If by any chance, Zia gets a chance... there you go. You just earned yourself 3-4 overs of slow medium bowling... Good enough

With Raj, Sunny, Enamul, Shakib.... How much can the opponent score? Over 250? I dont see how

Think it this way,
Abul > Sunny?
Shafiul > Enamul?

Please dont say "you are comparing apples with oranges, IOS with Android bla bla bla"
Think who can save more runs, get more wickets.... the basic principle of bowling
thoughts guys...

I m totally not with u......gazi and zia should be in the xi

[jeesh]

Originally Posted by BANFAN
They had to discard that approach because that was not doing anything good for them....do you really like to adopt a failed approach?

Guys with more pace and accuracy should be the way to go. A little effort can make them more accurate. Shafiul and Rubel bowled well, but Rubel needs to learn keeping his brain cool under pressure. So we have Shafi, Rubel, Shahadat, Mash to chose from. Zia certainly can be in ODIs, due to his Allrounder ability.

Pace is an attack when they have pace, slow mediums even deteriorates effectiveness of our spin attack... Because facing them isn't any significant change for the batsman....so you don't unsettle any batsman while you change between pace and SLA/spin.

Thats better than giving away 20-30 run overs buddy. Think about the way Zia bowled, didnt give anything. He didnt have the pace, but was always pitching on good line and length. Mashrafee has adopted this approach recently. Nazmul has always been doing this. Instead we always go for bowlers who are wayward thinking their extra pace will make a difference. It doesnt, it just makes it easier to clobber them around. Until and unless we find a quick with genuine pace/bounce or skill, our best hope in pace bowling are guys like Mashrafee and Nazmul who have good basics and can bowl line and length. We keep bowling others, we ll end up disappointed every time.

[Jadukor]

Originally Posted by jeesh
Thats better than giving away 20-30 run overs buddy. Think about the way Zia bowled, didnt give anything. He didnt have the pace, but was always pitching on good line and length. Mashrafee has adopted this approach recently. Nazmul has always been doing this. Instead we always go for bowlers who are wayward thinking their extra pace will make a difference. It doesnt, it just makes it easier to clobber them around. Until and unless we find a quick with genuine pace/bounce or skill, our best hope in pace bowling are guys like Mashrafee and Nazmul who have good basics and can bowl line and length. We keep bowling others, we ll end up disappointed every time.

yep had the same opinion for a long time

[BANFAN]

Originally Posted by jeesh
Thats better than giving away 20-30 run overs buddy. Think about the way Zia bowled, didnt give anything. He didnt have the pace, but was always pitching on good line and length. Mashrafee has adopted this approach recently. Nazmul has always been doing this. Instead we always go for bowlers who are wayward thinking their extra pace will make a difference. It doesnt, it just makes it easier to clobber them around. Until and unless we find a quick with genuine pace/bounce or skill, our best hope in pace bowling are guys like Mashrafee and Nazmul who have good basics and can bowl line and length. We keep bowling others, we ll end up disappointed every time.

That's what bowlers do in T20s and in death overs of ODIs to not to allow the batsman take advantage of the pace....since they swing at everything..... But you can't do that or the major part of ODI and Test cricket....

If you have real pacers, they can reduce pace when necessary....but a slow medium is limited he can't increase pace when necessary...and when a paver cuts down pace he will look as accurate as the limited pace guys....you decide what is advantageous...

[Jadukor]

Originally Posted by BANFAN
That's what bowlers do in T20s and in death overs of ODIs to not to allow the batsman take advantage of the pace....since they swing at everything..... But you can't do that or the major part of ODI and Test cricket....

If you have real pacers, they can reduce pace when necessary....but a slow medium is limited he can't increase pace when necessary...and when a paver cuts down pace he will look as accurate as the limited pace guys....you decide what is advantageous...

If we had good fast bowlers then it would be an obvious choice isn't it!

what Jeesh is saying is that when we have crap fast bowlers it's better to go with medium pacers who at least have control over line and length and can bowl to a game plan.

You sound as if no medium pacers have had success in ODIs and Test cricket. To succeed in the longer formats the line and length is more important than pace (even though having pace always helps and is preferred). Mcgrath, Pollock didn't blast people out with pace... they did it through bowling consistent channels

[jeesh]

Thank you for elucidating my point jadukor. I am not saying we should unearth a Saleem Malik, Gavin Larsen or Chris Harris. Rather opt for pacers with good basics. For instance the step son of Bangladeshi cricket Nazmul Hossain. Maybe he doesnt have the pace of Abul Hasan, maybe he doesnt have the aggression of Shahadat. But there are very few BD bowlers who can bowl so accurately like him. Sri Lanka has many quick bowling options. But why do they opt for Kulasekera (Who has much less pace than our front line seamers)? Because he doesnt give anything away-he wont bowl too short, he wont give width. He ll guarantee 10 miserly overs-will be a perfect foil for a more attacking bowler. Chaminda Vaas is another example. In the latter part of his career he was bowling between 115-125 kph. He would never give any room for the batsman. When playing against such a bowler, a batsman has to come out of his comfort zone and attack.