What ever happened to Rubel?

shakibrulz · #1 February 10, 2013, 03:19 AM

The guy had been bowling some terrific yorkers, now he's getting smashed around for fun and can't get one in the blockhole to save his life. I'm not talking of the last match (atrocious fielding cost him, but still bowled poorly) but his bowling in general offlate.

And his pace too has been much lower too lately.

**Zunaid** · #2 February 10, 2013, 03:27 AM

I guess he isn't back to full form after his surgery.

Maysun · #3 February 10, 2013, 04:09 AM

Was never a fan. Look at those stats, only in Bangladesh will he feature in the NT despite having "potential" but not the performance to back it up.

Courtesy: Cricinfo

**Zunaid** · #4 February 10, 2013, 04:28 AM

His ODI stats are not too bad relatively speaking.

**Zunaid** · #5 February 10, 2013, 04:29 AM

PS: enter Ian, stage left.

shakibrulz · #6 February 10, 2013, 04:59 AM

Stats without context = useless. And for a BD pacer, he's done fairly well I'd say, even with that stat.

Tiger444 · #7 February 10, 2013, 10:45 AM

He's coming off a major shoulder surgery. So it takes time to get back in to rhythm. Have to be patient with him and back him.

Also his stats are poor in the longer version but he's a pretty good LOI bowler. Lets take a deeper look at the stats. Against G8 teams, only he and Shafiul have SR's in the 30's out of all our bowlers. Also he's our 4th leading wicket taker in our matches won against the G8 teams. So he plays a big part in our wins against the big teams.

Here are the stats I'm talking about by the way

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/eng...s;type=bowling

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/eng...s;type=bowling

Jadukor · #8 February 10, 2013, 11:02 AM

We need to understand which bowler is suitable for which format. If you look at Rubel's first class average of 62 then you know in tests he will go for even more runs per wkt at the international level.
His stats suggest he is a decent limited overs bowler and should remain so. We need to identify the leading pacers in FC cricket because that is the better measure of how the bowler will perform in tests... Not BPL and not DPL but NCL. Who currently has better strike rate and average than Rubel in FC cricket? Lets make a list of those guys and isolate two promising ones. There has got to be someone who goes for less than 60 runs per wkt and takes less than 92 balls to get a wkt.

Tiger444 · #9 February 10, 2013, 11:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jadukor
We need to understand which bowler is suitable for which format. If you look at Rubel's first class average of 62 then you know in tests he will go for even more runs per wkt at the international level.
His stats suggest he is a decent limited overs bowler and should remain so. We need to identify the leading pacers in FC cricket because that is the better measure of how the bowler will perform in tests... Not BPL and not DPL but NCL. Who currently has better strike rate and average than Rubel in FC cricket? Lets make a list of those guys and isolate two promising ones. There has got to be someone who goes for less than 60 runs per wkt and takes less than 92 balls to get a wkt.

Taposh Baisya, Shahadat, and Robiul were the leading wicket takers from the BCL, from the NCL? Mohammad Sharif, Sajedul, and Farhad Reza made the top 15. Now how are those guys doing in the BPL against the best local and international players? Either they don't make the XI or they're getting smacked.

This is the problem we have. The quality of the NCL is just not good enough and these stats are often misleading. This is why in the end we have to work with players that have pure potential. There is a reason why Shafiul, Rubel, and Abul continue to make the national team. If we want to produce better pacers and not have to go through the painful process of seeing them develop through international cricket, then we need better organization and planning of our pacers

Equinox · #10 February 10, 2013, 11:33 AM

^Rubel would dream of having Tapash Baishya's stats in Test cricket. Tapash has 36 wickets off 29 innings. That's more than a wicket an innings. Rubel can't even manage that. He has 21 wickets in 26 innings and goes at over 4/over. No way should he be playing Tests. Even Steyn gets hammered often in T20 and ODI cricket. The three formats must not be conflated. It's a simple idea, if you can't get wickets in FC cricket then for sure you're not gonna get any in Test cricket. That's why for Tests I'd go with the guys performing in FC cricket. At the very least they won't concede more than 5/over every other innings like Rubel and Abul and can play a support role for the spinners.

To be fair to him, I thought he bowled ok in the last match except the last over. He is slowly regaining his rhythm and bowled well in the few games prior to the last one. Still I would not play him in Tests until he can prove that he can get wickets in FC cricket. He can still be a decent ODI bowler and I hope to see the pre-injury Rubel back soon.

Jadukor · #11 February 10, 2013, 11:36 AM

In IPL Steyn gets hammered and the same guy humiliates entire test teams in the longer format. Shorter format wkts are easy to earn because batsman are always going for it. We need an entirely different set of skills to get wkts when batsman are not prepared to chase deliveries. For test bowling we need guys who have decent amount of control and can bowl for long periods according to a particular field setting. We dont need pseudo fast bowlers with lethal grunts or bowler bowling fast but half way down the pitch. We have to accept that with our current resources, at best, the pace attack will provide a supporting role of letting the pressure build and help the spinners get their wkts. I would go with one medium pacer who could swing the new ball and shohag, enamul jr and elias sunny.

al Furqaan · #12 February 10, 2013, 01:23 PM

No one should be judged on T20 because its not cricket.

He's done quite well in ODIs the past few years and against all sides.

Gowza · #13 February 10, 2013, 03:51 PM

he's solid in ODIs and unlike most BD pacers he's actually improved in the 50 over game. as far as test cricket goes i reckon sajidul is worth another crack, dollar has good stats but i'm not sure on him...

Habib · #14 February 10, 2013, 03:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gowza
he's solid in ODIs and unlike most BD pacers he's actually improved in the 50 over game. as far as test cricket goes i reckon sajidul is worth another crack, dollar has good stats but i'm not sure on him...

I remember the last time I saw Sajidul. He looked unfit.
BTW does anyone know whatever happened to Mahmudul Alam Robin? He used to be one of our future prospects.

Gowza · #15 February 10, 2013, 05:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Habib
I remember the last time I saw Sajidul. He looked unfit.
BTW does anyone know whatever happened to Mahmudul Alam Robin? He used to be one of our future prospects.

yeah robin fell of the face of the earth it seems. after he got whacked around playing in national colours he seemed to fade away pretty quickly, i thought we had found ourselves a solid pacer in mahbubul alam. browsing over his cricinfo page and i see he played a t20 les than 2 weeks ago, his last FC matche was in november. actually it says he played a t20 2nd of feb, then the match before that was the FC match in november, then the last time he played before that was in november of 2011. so he's only played a couple of games in the last year and a bit.

btw haven't seen sajidul recently but he looked a good prospect when he reached the national team and he's done pretty well this season.

Eshen · #16 February 10, 2013, 05:35 PM

Robin bowled couple of overs in a BPL match. He looked totally venomless. Rubel-Shafiul are much much better than he is.

Tiger444 · #17 February 10, 2013, 05:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Equinox
^Rubel would dream of having Tapash Baishya's stats in Test cricket. Tapash has 36 wickets off 29 innings. That's more than a wicket an innings. Rubel can't even manage that. He has 21 wickets in 26 innings and goes at over 4/over. No way should he be playing Tests. Even Steyn gets hammered often in T20 and ODI cricket. The three formats must not be conflated. It's a simple idea, if you can't get wickets in FC cricket then for sure you're not gonna get any in Test cricket. That's why for Tests I'd go with the guys performing in FC cricket. At the very least they won't concede more than 5/over every other innings like Rubel and Abul and can play a support role for the spinners.

To be fair to him, I thought he bowled ok in the last match except the last over. He is slowly regaining his rhythm and bowled well in the few games prior to the last one. Still I would not play him in Tests until he can prove that he can get wickets in FC cricket. He can still be a decent ODI bowler and I hope to see the pre-injury Rubel back soon.

That was Taposh back in the day, and I agree at that time he was better than Rubel in Tests but if you saw him recently, he's not the bowler he once was IMO. He seems like a medium pacer with pretty poor control who'll get hammered at the international arena. Same can be said about Sharif, another guy who did very well in our FC competitions. That's why I'd rather go with Rubel, Shafiul, and Abul rather than the likes of Sharif, Taposh, Farhad and the rest of the domestic bullies because at least the formers have something to work with rather than the latters.

I understand the point that you guys bring up. Tests are a different ball game altogether and different formats bring up different requirements and that's a very valid point but from what I've seen from the domestic bullies in action, I see them getting hammered in Tests more so than the guys we have currently. I'm not judging that by pure statistics but rather my cricket instincts. If you guys want to judge by NCL stats, then fair enough, we'll agree to disagree.

Again I'm not saying Rubel, Shafiul, and Abul are superstars are anything but I believe they're the best we have. I feel that it's just a matter of time until Shafiul and Rubel start converting their forms from ODIs in to Tests. Too early to tell with Abul still. He needs a few more matches under his let until I start judging.

Eshen · #18 February 10, 2013, 05:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tiger444
I feel that it's just a matter of time until Shafiul and Rubel start converting their forms from ODIs in to Tests.

I agree with most of what you said except this part. With already so many chronic injury problems, I will be happy if Shafi-Rubel continue with their ODI careers. For Tests, we need to groom a set of fitter pacers.

Tiger444 · #19 February 10, 2013, 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eshen
I agree with most of what you said except this part. With already so many chronic injury problems, I will be happy if Shafi-Rubel continue with their ODI careers. For Tests, we need to groom a set of fitter pacers.

This is why we need to continue to rotate the pacers. I liked what the selectors did last series where they rested Rubel after 2 Tests. We can't expect them to play all formats in 1 trot. If we rest more and use a larger pool of pacers, then this injury bug won't be as much of an issue.

Equinox · #20 February 10, 2013, 06:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tiger444
That was Taposh back in the day, and I agree at that time he was better than Rubel in Tests but if you saw him recently, he's not the bowler he once was IMO. He seems like a medium pacer with pretty poor control who'll get hammered at the international arena. Same can be said about Sharif, another guy who did very well in our FC competitions. That's why I'd rather go with Rubel, Shafiul, and Abul rather than the likes of Sharif, Taposh, Farhad and the rest of the domestic bullies because at least the formers have something to work with rather than the latters.

I understand the point that you guys bring up. Tests are a different ball game altogether and different formats bring up different requirements and that's a very valid point but from what I've seen from the domestic bullies in action, I see them getting hammered in Tests more so than the guys we have currently. I'm not judging that by pure statistics but rather my cricket instincts. If you guys want to judge by NCL stats, then fair enough, we'll agree to disagree.

Again I'm not saying Rubel, Shafiul, and Abul are superstars are anything but I believe they're the best we have. I feel that it's just a matter of time until Shafiul and Rubel start converting their forms from ODIs in to Tests. Too early to tell with Abul still. He needs a few more matches under his let until I start judging.

Shafiul I don't have an issue with. He has a decent FC average and can keep things tight which Rubel and Abul are incapable of doing. I don't exactly want the likes of Tapash, Sharif and co back either. Maybe Tapash can play a few FC games for the A team. I think Nazmul should be given more opportunities in Tests. However, my main issue is with the likes of Rubel and Abul who have continuously failed in FC cricket being given chances after chances in Tests simply because they have pace or 'potential', which is pretty much the same thing according to the selectors.

Gowza · #21 February 10, 2013, 06:51 PM

honestly i think at current the pool of pacers for the national team should be mash, shafiul, rubel, nazmul, abul, sajidul, alauddin and taskin.

Eshen · #22 February 10, 2013, 06:53 PM

Judging by FC stats alone, Naz seems to do a better job in keeping things tight and take a wicket every now and then, than Rubel does.

Rubel's bowling averages

	Mat	Inns	Balls	Runs	Wkts	BBI	BBM	Ave	Econ	SR	4w	5w
Tests	14	26	2442	1657	21	5/166	5/210	78.90	4.07	116.2	0	1
ODIs	38	38	1753	1615	48	4/25	4/25	33.64	5.52	36.5	4	0
T20Is	6	6	122	205	5	2/63	2/63	41.00	10.08	24.4	0	0
First-class	29	52	4396	2985	48	5/60	6/85	62.18	4.07	91.5	0	2
List A	53	52	2483	2127	75	4/22	4/22	28.36	5.13	33.1	5	0
Twenty20	19	19	354	498	20	5/32	5/32	24.90	8.44	17.7	0	1

Nazmul's bowling averages

	Mat	Inns	Balls	Runs	Wkts	BBI	BBM	Ave	Econ	SR	4w	5w
Tests	2	3	329	194	5	2/61	3/80	38.80	3.53	65.8	0	0
ODIs	38	37	1649	1386	44	4/40	4/40	31.50	5.04	37.4	1	0
T20Is	4	4	42	67	1	1/15	1/15	67.00	9.57	42.0	0	0
First-class	37		4796	2234	80	5/30		27.92	2.79	59.9	0	2
List A	62		2669	2129	69	4/40	4/40	30.85	4.78	38.6	1	0
Twenty20	15	15	240	365	10	2/21	2/21	36.50	9.12	24.0	0	0

Tiger444 · #23 February 10, 2013, 06:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Equinox
Shafiul I don't have an issue with. He has a decent FC average and can keep things tight which Rubel and Abul are incapable of doing. I don't exactly want the likes of Tapash, Sharif and co back either. Maybe Tapash can play a few FC games for the A team. I think Nazmul should be given more opportunities in Tests. However, my main issue is with the likes of Rubel and Abul who have continuously failed in FC cricket being given chances after chances in Tests simply because they have pace or 'potential', which is pretty much the same thing according to the selectors.

Not the most ideal situation is it? I agree that the ideal system is to pick players who performed the best in domestics. That's the system in places like England and Australia. Problem is in BD, our system isn't set up like other countries. This is why we end up having to pick players with pure potential from not only pacers but batsmen as well. Until and unless we make our FC system more competitive, we'll continue to see players being picked on pure potential.

Gowza · #24 February 10, 2013, 06:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tiger444
Not the most ideal situation is it? I agree that the ideal system is to pick players who performed the best in domestics. That's the system in places like England and Australia. Problem is in BD, our system isn't set up like other countries. This is why we end up having to pick players with pure potential from not only pacers but batsmen as well. Until and unless we make our FC system more competitive, we'll continue to see players being picked on pure potential.

this is true, even moreso with pacers than any other type of cricketer. there are a good number of BD pacers with amazing domestic FC stats but when they're given ago in the test arena they fall very short. the batting is starting to come about, we can start to trust domestic batting performances more than we use to be able to, but for pacers it's still not there yet.

Tiger444 · #25 February 10, 2013, 06:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gowza
this is true, even moreso with pacers than any other type of cricketer. there are a good number of BD pacers with amazing domestic FC stats but when they're given ago in the test arena they fall very short. the batting is starting to come about, we can start to trust domestic batting performances more than we use to be able to, but for pacers it's still not there yet.

Yes and that's exactly the point I've been trying to make. Thanks Gowza