BD Squad Announced ...........

nasifkhan · #1 October 17, 2003, 07:33 AM

Bangladesh squad: Khaled Mahmood (capt), Javed Omar, Rajin Saleh, Aftab Ahmed, Hannan Sarkar, Mushfiqur Rahmar, Habibul Bashar, Alok Kapali, Mohammad Rafique, Tapash Baisya, Khaled Mashud (wkt), Mashrafe Mortzaza, Enamul Haque Jr.

Aftab Ahmed and Enamul Haque is the new face in the squad....

rafiq · #2 October 17, 2003, 07:37 AM

A sound decision!!

Enamul is the only new spinner who looked good (Arafat didn't do better) and has been knocking for a while.

Aftab must be surprised to get the call ahead of Nafees, but I really think this is a strategic move - Nafees is needed for the U-19 team and his time will most surely come. Don't forget how you guys were gushing over Aftab's technique after the last match.

Still curious why they couldn't wait another day - what are the players going to fight for on the third day?

rafiq · #3 October 17, 2003, 07:40 AM

I just realized Mushfiq is in there - oh well he has many "get out of jail free" passes - the next Rokon? Why couldn't Alamgir have been included in the squad even if they didn't play him? 14 would have been fine. Selector should have rewarded him for a good effort against Eng.

Hasib · #4 October 17, 2003, 08:09 AM

I think they plan to keep him in the u-19 until he is 19. He is turning 19 in March.

cricket_er · #5 October 17, 2003, 08:38 AM

Rafig is right, still the selectors couldn't wait for another day. You know what, I am going to ask this question to Athar Ali through some one and see what the response is.

Optimist · #6 October 17, 2003, 08:49 AM

Selectors did a great job. I am sure Mushfique is going to sit out. Enamul Jr. is likely to carry the drinks. Presence of Mushfique is just a reminder to Mahmud that he needs to perform. I do agree with all of you that neither Mahmud nor Mushfique are test material. But can't agree with the assertion that Alamgir should have been selected. He bowled well.....congratulations! But selection should not be the reward of one good performance. Same goes to Nafis. He is good but not as consistent as Aftab. Moniruzzaman would have been selected if he were fit and played in either of the two matches.

AGC · #7 October 17, 2003, 08:57 AM

Mahmud can still get some late wickets and a double figure when batting, but Rahman has nothing behind him. I don't understand why he's been picked.

bhobishshot · #8 October 17, 2003, 09:33 AM

Quote:

I think they plan to keep him in the u-19 until he is 19. He is turning 19 in March.

Who is turning 19, Alamgir Kabir?

[Edited on 17-10-2003 by bhobishshot]

rafiq · #9 October 17, 2003, 09:44 AM

I think you may be right that Nafees is not consistent and Aftab may be the better choice. But I haven't seen either play so am just going by general reports. It is hard to ignore Nafees' century so had he been picked no one would have been too upset. Still think he will make an appearance in the ODI series if his form continues in pakistan.

On Alamgir, he had 2 good matches and the brain trust had said good performances in the warm up matches would be rewarded. plus alamgir has been on the team although he did not impress on the previous tour.

in any case, as long as they either take aftab or enamul instead of mushfiq, I am happy and cannot ask for more at this point. let the Test begin!

fwullah · #10 October 17, 2003, 09:51 AM

I agree with you that both Enamul Junior and Aftab are better off playing in either of the test teams and Mushfique just sitting in the bench.

But I also think that Mushfique is occupying a place i.e., Sujon is occupying a position which position at this moment belongs to Nafees Iqbal - even if that means to be the 12th man.

Anyway, I hope that Aftab is in the team ahead of Nafees because of whatever that Faruque had seen in Rajin - the same thing is in Aftab - more than in Nafees.

**Mahmood** · #11 October 17, 2003, 10:01 AM

Except Mushfiq, the rest is good selection.

Aftab has proven over time he is good. Enamul is also a good choice if the wicket is spin friendly.

I do hope Aftab goes in the 6th position, not Mushfiq.

Optimist · #12 October 17, 2003, 10:02 AM

Dear Rafiq
I agree that it would not have been a surprise if Nafis had been picked. There is not much to choose between Nafis or Aftab. But we needed a middle order and Aftab is just that. Our openers did a commendable job (not great!) in the tests so why put pressure on them by selecting another opener for the tests. But I agree completely with you about Nafis's chance in the one-day internationals. He has lots of shots and we don't have a settled opening pair for the limited over matches.......He fits the bill just right.

About Alamgir, He surely has potential. I did not voice my concern like many others when he was picked for the Pakistan tour. Faroque had a good look on him and he thought he has potential....He got a chance.......did not perform. I am not saying he should be dumped.......He knows that the selectors are keeping an eye on him.........selecting him in a 14 man squad would have made little differrence......He is not better than either Taposh or Masrafee. He needs to improve and Keeping the carrot away from him for the time being is good for him and also good for other bowlers (Tarek, Talha) I guess. But it is only my humble opinion and you might disagree and you might be right as well. Most of the time I like your opinions and I do have lot of respect for the way you express your mind

Sami · #13 October 17, 2003, 10:15 AM

Except Mushfiq its a god selection... I guess the captain issue is still not to be resolved... that was evident... Nafees is needed for U-19 team in the Paki tour... good oppurtunity for him to show what he is made of... Enamul Jr... played well and deserved the call and so did Aftab... Overall good team I must say... I hope they keep Mushfiq as the 13th man.... that way no worries...

Sham · #14 October 17, 2003, 01:21 PM

Boy was I happy to see this squad. We all wanted a sixth specialist batsman. I am surprised its not Nafees but I have no complaints. I think Aftab will do fine, now he just needs to get picked in the XI.

Of course, they can still screw it up by playing Mushfiq at 6 and putting in the second spinner. Anyway, so far so good. I am glad Aftab is in the squad. I hope it means that they are gonna play him!

Optimist · #15 October 17, 2003, 08:22 PM

Sham, Do you think England will go into the match with 2 pacers, two spinners and Collingwood? I think it would make a very ordinary attack. What do you think?

BangladeshCricket · #16 October 17, 2003, 08:42 PM

Patience is the key for performance in test team and even sometimes in one days. Nafees's innings was obviously appreciable, but he is young and needs to keep on playing to turn out to be an assest may be after Omar. But as we need a good player and a good performance we are seeking for the best...i think we should give a chance to golla if he fails then we can call Nafis next test cuz we playing in home ground and we can change players any time. But I am getting concern about Threscothik, Von, Naser, Thorpe and even the tail enders who scored 80+ and 50+ who could be threatening. Remember, we had four lbws given to us....who knows if it were in Pakistan's last tour matches lolz...we never would have goten any appeals for us.

BangladeshCricket · #17 October 17, 2003, 08:50 PM

Don't think English bowling attack is that weak...remember they might not have shoaib or lee but there bowlers are consistent ....some hoew last two matches if u look at our batsmen only few's contribution resulted that score so far. Like Nafis, and aftab did good so far others were that much impressive...so we still have to be careful and approach in such a way to fight against them...who knows if English team is just applying any new tactics to fool us??

Optimist · #18 October 17, 2003, 09:00 PM

BangladeshCricket, your appreciation of English batting and bowling is surely based on sound knowledge. They have surely done well in Srilanka and Pakistan. But if you carefully analyze those tests then you will understand a lot of those performances were due to attritional qualities and was abetted by poor umpiring decisions and lack of application from the opponents. Their attack is as you said "consistent". So they will test the patience and judgement of our batsmen, I think we have improved a lot in these two departments. In the past even Grant Flower and Sayeed Anwar (as a bowler believe me!) troubled our batsmen. I think we are past those days.

BangladeshCricket · #19 October 17, 2003, 09:27 PM

thanks Optimist...I agree our days have changed but still individual improvements and its contribution to the team as a whole didn't change that much...we still sometimes play like we played in 80's and 90's...but i am happy for our performance so far

Sham · #20 October 17, 2003, 10:36 PM

Optimist,

I think England will go into the match with two seamers and two pacers + Clark. Looks like Harmison is set to partner Hoggard, and the two spinners are of course Giles ang Batty. I don't think thats an ordinary attack. I think its a pretty good attack, except the third seamer, who is quite ordinary. The thing about the attack is, they have variety. Hoggard is a workhorse, very disciplined, very accurate and very patient. Harmison has raw pace. Giles is a left-arm orthodox and Batty is an off-spinner. So no two bowlers are alike in that line-up.

However, I don't think its a killer attack either. If Flintoff was there, batting at six and bowling pace, it would have been much better of course, and thats where England are going to lose out. If the pitch doesn't take much spin, especially in the first 2 or 3 days, and Harmison and Hoggard are tired or have a bad day, there is no real cover. I don't think Clarke will trouble our batters too much.

Two years ago, against Pakistan and Sri Lanka, they had a much better attack. England had Gough and Caddick opening the bowling with Giles and Salisbury (in Pakistan) and Croft (in Sri Lanka). And to provide cover to the pacers, there was Craig White, who was scoring a lot of runs as well, especially in Pakistan. This line-up doesn't compare with that, but I dont think its ordinary.