Nightwatchman Debate: Was it wrong to send in Shahadat instead of Ash?

[Zeeshan]

I am still iffy about the decision to send in Shahadat as the nightwatchman because that put extra pressure on Tamim to shield his partner, forbidding him to play freely, which in turn may have resulted in his loss of concentration and thus the loss of his wicket. True, Zaheer was reversing the ball and TI was victim of it, but I still think if Ash came in instead of Shahadat, Tamim would have been more confident if not relieved and went on to score big. Steve Waugh was against it, Ricky Ponting brought the theory of NWM back, what do you guys think?

Here's the article that I found online where author points out that average score of 113 NWM has been a meagre 15.0, and the fact that he will be a walking wicket next day. Heck, Shahadat could've been a walking wicket the same day!

The Myth of the Nightwatchman

Call it tradition or habit, the use of a nightwatchman is well-entrenched as a tactic in first class and Test cricket. When a wicket falls shortly before the scheduled close of play, and a top-order batsman is listed to bat next, he will more often than not be substituted by a lower-order player, whose sole job will be to prevent further losses before stumps. The rationale seems to be that using a top-order batsman will place him in a no-win situation; he cannot achieve much in the short time available, but if he gets out the team’s fortunes are set back further.

Looking at Test history, it appears that, in spite of its popularity, the nightwatchman tactic has never really been evaluated or proven. Derek Lodge took a look at the question in his book Figures on the Green in 1982. He theorised that the tactic was illogical and did not work, but did not attempt to prove this quantitatively. This has now become easier to do, and we can compare the outcomes of innings in which the nightwatchman was used, against similar situations where it was not.


Firstly, we can look at the effect on the nightwatchmen themselves. Cricket watchers will probably be able to remember vividly examples of nightwatchmen made good; one (Tony Mann) has recorded a century, and Alex Tudor, without a first-class century to his credit, recently scored a match-winning 99 not out for England vs New Zealand. But how do nightwatchmen respond to the added responsibility? To examine this question, calculations have been made based on 113 examples since 1980 of nightwatchmen being employed, compared to 89 similar situations where they were not, selected according to the following criteria:

More...

Author concludes by saying that "the bigger the partnership, the bigger the next partnership is likely to be, and the chances of the next partnership failing declines significantly." We certainly had the advantage there of a huge partnership and if Ash came in and stuck around for a while not only he'd have provived a support but who knows the TI could've snowballed into a double century.

Convince me otherwise.

[Eshen]

When end of the day was approaching, Tamim should have restrained his strokeplay regardless who was his partner. He has no one to blame but himself that he could not carry on.

[amar11432]

Both Ashrafool and Shahdat are nightwatchman, so it doesn't really matter.

[capslock]

Milk, meet floor.

[al Furqaan]

Originally Posted by Eshen
When end of the day was approaching, Tamim should have restrained his strokeplay regardless who was his partner. He has no one to blame but himself that he could not carry on.

thats true...he should not have pushed at that ball...marvelous innings nonetheless, but it means that we may see a double ton soon.

[Zunaid]

Originally Posted by capslock
Milk, meet floor.

You mean water, under bridge

[AsifTheManRahman]

It was a difficult call really - the shot that got Tamim out I mean. Zaheer was reversing the ball and that one could have come in or left him. It was dropped at a perfect line and length for him to draw his front foot out and play at it. I'd say Zaheer got everything right with that delivery.

It's Zunaed who shouldn't have had a poke at the one that he nicked - that was pitched too full and wide of off stump for it to nip back enough to hit the stumps even if he had left it alone.

Sending the nightwatchman in was the right decision. Ashraful saw off the last couple of overs like a nightwatchman should, did a good job of handing the strike to the better batsman and made sure he didn't get out, which would render sending him in useless.

[capslock]

Originally Posted by AsifTheManRahman
It was a difficult call really - the shot that got Tamim out I mean. Zaheer was reversing the ball and that one could have come in or left him. It was dropped at a perfect line and length for him to draw his front foot out and play at it. I'd say Zaheer got everything right with that delivery.

It's Zunaed who shouldn't have had a poke at the one that he nicked - that was pitched too full and wide of off stump for it to nip back enough to hit the stumps even if he had left it alone.

Sending the nightwatchman in was the right decision. Ashraful saw off the last couple of overs like a nightwatchman should, did a good job of handing the strike to the better batsman and made sure he didn't get out, which would render sending him in useless.

Oi mia, Ashraful as nightwatchman is my joke. Copyright dao!

[wiseshah]

Lol
shahadat should play sensibly with night watchmen ashraful

this combo might click, ash will play with more responsibility like mahmudullah or mushfiq
taking more strike

Posted via BC Mobile Edition

[rahat90]

Originally Posted by capslock
Oi mia, Ashraful as nightwatchman is my joke. Copyright dao!

hahaa..like itt
everytime we say ash wil score big we jinx it...
so lets reverse jinx it..
I HOPE ASH GETS OUT ASAP!!

[tigerpain]

I Really like this one hahahahah ....Good one bro!!!

Originally Posted by amar11432
Both Ashrafool and Shahdat are nightwatchman, so it doesn't really matter.

[wiseshah]

So what will be ash and shahadat"s score

I guess 7, 13

Posted via BC Mobile Edition

[Zeeshan]

Originally Posted by capslock
Milk, meet floor.

It's recession.
++

Soo...no one agrees it was a bad decision?

[bangla-red]

Originally Posted by bangla-red
OK, our two nightwatchmen are in, hopefully they add a few, but more importantly, eat up some overs and see out Zaheer.

Tamim is a beast.

Ashraful NWM fan club?

[amar11432]

Originally Posted by wiseshah
So what will be ash and shahadat"s score

I guess 7, 13

Posted via BC Mobile Edition

Nope, Shahdat will get his double century while Ash is there is support him. Maybe if Shahdat grunts even harder when batting, he may get some extra propulsion on his bat to hit some sixes.

[bangla-red]

Originally Posted by amar11432
Nope, Shahdat will get his double century while Ash is there is support him. Maybe if Shahdat grunts even harder when batting, he may get some extra propulsion on his bat to hit some sixes.

You mean Ash will get his double century, mimicking GIllespie, while Shahadat will be the aggressor.

[amar11432]

Originally Posted by bangla-red
You mean Ash will get his double century, mimicking GIllespie, while Shahadat will be the aggressor.

Nah, I meant Shahdat cause I lost all hopes in Ashrafool.

[cricman]

Well I was going to Make a Thread on How India is going to Attack this Partnership.

1)They could basically do what Dhoni and Riad did and give Ash 4 balls and than bring the field in.

Just based on the 2 Yesterday, where Ash refused the single. I think Ashraful has confidence in Rajib (I do) and will gladly take Single by the 3rd ball the over would look like . . 1 . . . and let Rajib take care of himself. Also if the field is spread out Ash from the get go will go for the 2nd run. So We could have Overs like this 2 . 2 1 . . and get 5 runs with very little risk.

Or Ash Could Refuse the singles, and take the boundaries on the 5th and 6th Ball, and Rajib still Handles the Bat well enough to play out the next over ala Sachin in the 1st Test. (. . . . 4 4)

Or India could just set attacking fields for both of them, but a few boundaries by Ash might put Dhoni on the defensive and back to the other scenarios.

Rajib has been in some very good Stands, the one With Mashrafe in Chittagong comes to mind.

[Gowza]

this is actually a very interesting question and something i ws pondering at the time shahadat came out to bat. the fact of the matter is shahadat is a #11, he may not bat at 11 but that's where his skills are at. shahadat is not good enough to be a nightwatchman imo, i agree that he put added pressure on tamim, what you want in a nightwatchman is someone who has the capability to block out the remaing overs and who can protect the proper batsman, shahadat just doesn't have those skills to do in in a safe and consistent manner (if he does it it has a lot to do with luck).

unfortunately for BD they don't have someone who fits the position of a nightwatchman because down to #8 are all batsmen and then the rest are all #11's, probably would have been best to of sent ash or raqibul in instead of shahadat.

[Ashraf-FTP]

Any comments along the lines of 'Xxxxx player will make a century today' will result in an instant IP ban.

Ash will score a century today watch i will be correct

[Roni_uk]

Good article and interesting thought but I am very much in favour of a NWM as I would rather lose a tail than a top order. Whether Tamim would have been able to stay on if Ash was supporting him instead of Shahdat will remain a mystery but we for sure reduced the risk by using a NWM.

[LateCut]

Are you forgetting about what Jason Gillipsie did to us? He was the NWM who went on to score a double ton. I think Shahadat will do the same.

[Zeeshan]

Originally Posted by LateCut
Are you forgetting about what Jason Gillipsie did to us? He was the NWM who went on to score a double ton. I think Shahadat will do the same.

Those are always exceptions. I doubt Shahadat can hang around for too long today.

[aniksh1]

Lets not make too many excuses for Tamim now...

[Gowza]

Originally Posted by LateCut
Are you forgetting about what Jason Gillipsie did to us? He was the NWM who went on to score a double ton. I think Shahadat will do the same.

jason gillespie at that point was a much better batsman than shahadat hossain currently is, gillespie had enough skills to stay at the wicket for 100 days without giving a chance, he may not have been an aggressive batsman but he was very capable at holding up an end and if you stay their long enough you'll score some runs. gillespie has 3 FC centuries to his name and 10 half centuries so he was no mug with the bat, shahadat's highest FC score is only 37* in 75 innings, massive diffeence in their batting skills.