New Front Page Article: Bangladesh in England: Test report card

[Zunaid]

by Asif Saleh

With the much awaited Test series between Bangladesh-England ending disappointingly for Bangladesh, it is time to evaluate the individual performances. Coming back from a series victory, Bangladesh crashed down to earth with some less than stellar performances. On a scale of 1 through10, here is how I would rate the individual performances. They are, of course, subjective and were done based on three criteria: what we expected of them, how they actually performed, and their Test temperament. Feel free to debate my evaluations in the forums.

>>>> Read Article <<<<

[shovon13]

didn't like the article. way too pessimistic....deliberately picks out the negatives out of the series. it was, of course, based on the subjective opinion of the author.....its just that i differ with him on a number of parts of it.

Edited on, June 8, 2005, 7:07 PM GMT, by shovon13.

[Spitfire_x86]

Lowest score only 4 and 5?

[Zunaid]

Originally posted by Spitfire_x86
Lowest score only 4 and 5?

Any lower and that may just have been way too pessimistic

I would have given Ash a 2 or even a 1

And if we were doing letter grades, an F

Javed Omar: A+

Khaled Mashud: B+

Mashrafe Mortaza: B-
Mushfiqur Rahim: B-
Aftab Ahmed: B-

Nafis Iqbal: C

Tapas Baisya: D
Mohammad Rafique: D
Rajin Saleh: D
Anwar Hossain Monir: D-

Shahadat Hossain: F
Mohammad Ashraful: F

[shovon13]

yeah the numbers that the players were rated weren't negative at all, instead i thought they were pretty generous. but the explanation for the grading that came with it wasn't consistent with the grade itself.

i also dont think JO's performance wasn't good enough to earn him an A+. he scored only one half century in the whole series, he surely could've done better. but in context of the team, he was the best player and therefore the grade is justified in that sense. same with rahim's grade, it was a generous one. i guess his grade was solely based on the guts he showed, because a score of 19 shouldn't be good enough.

similarly, thought it was harsh on shahadat to get him an F. he played only one test, which happened to be his debut test at Lord's. even then, he produced a few really good deliveries that should've gotten him a wicket. i thought it was a bit lucky on his part for him to go wicketless. he did give away WAY too many runs, then again, english batsmen were in a killer mood and shahadat is a debut pacer with much less control than masri. perhams masri deserved a better grade too, for holding up the bd bowling all by himself. he, also, should've gotten more wickets. if JO gets an 8/A+ for the fact he carried our batting (for the first 3 innings), then same should apply to masri. in fact, JO had a partner in the form of pilot. masri actually fought alone. and its really hard for you to keep up the pressure and get wickets when all the other bowlers in the team are giving away runs and are ineffective.

Edited on, June 8, 2005, 7:32 PM GMT, by shovon13.

[mahbubH]

As we lost both the tests within seven sessions, none of our players should be graded as high as C.

[khelarum]

Here's the team report card:

In 2 tests combined England scored 162.5 runs per wicket lost. Bangladesh scored 17. 2 runs per wicket. That's the real difference. An occassional 50 from couple of players may make us feel good - but i don't think it meets the standards of test cricket.

So the team score is absolutely F.

I think some of the responsibility should go to coach Dav Whatmore also. The batting order in the last innings should have been the order all the way from the beginning. He should have sent the guys who can stay at the crease longer to bat first. This way the shine is out of the new ball, the opposition is a bit tired, we can establish an innings, and then send players like Habibul, Aftab and Ashraful. These 3 (and few more) are not anything like a test batsman. They are breed to be one dayers, and to have them play test cricket you have to use them carefully.

Score on coach: D-

[Spitfire_x86]

My ratings (out of 10):

(pass)
Javed Omar: 8
Pilot: 7
Mashrafee: 6
Aftab: 6
Habibul Bashar: 5
Mushfiqur Rahim: 5
Nafees Iqbal: 4

(fail)
Rafique: 3
Taposh: 3
Rajin: 3
Monir: 2
Shahadat: 2
Ashraful: 1

[Fazal]

Originally posted by Spitfire_x86
My ratings (out of 10):

(pass)
Javed Omar: 8
Pilot: 7
Mashrafee: 6
Aftab: 6
Habibul Bashar: 5
Mushfiqur Rahim: 5
Nafees Iqbal: 4

(fail)
Rafique: 3
Taposh: 3
Rajin: 3
Monir: 2
Shahadat: 2
Ashraful: 1

More or less agree with you. If you consider expectation factor may be I would rank Mushfiqur (5+) higher than bashar (5-).

Same goes for Monir (3) and Rajin (2). Both were non contributers. But the expectation for Rajin was higher. Moreover Monir may helped more than Rajin with his bat.

Also I would have ranked Aftab (7+) ahead of Mashrafee (7-).

But over all I agree more with you than Asif Saleh.

Edited on, June 8, 2005, 7:49 PM GMT, by Fazal.

[sraabon]

I do understand where you are coming from. If I strictly had rated based on standard performances of other team, no one would have gotten more than 5. But that wouldn't be very positive. In stead, I tried to look at the comparison from a relative standpoint with Omar, Pilot on the high end and Ash, Shahadat at the lower end. With that in mind, I did the relative rating for the rest in the middle.

[al Furqaan]

ash was a 2...rajin was better a 3 at least he didnt do dumb stuff.

rajib was a 2, monir was a 3, tapash was 4 or a 5. masri was a 6-7. rafique was a 5.

bashar - 3 (due to dum knocks)
javed - 9 (who would have thought him to do well in this conditions)
aftab - 6 (we may have to accept that he will play test matches as ODI, if he can average 40 i won't complain)
pilot - 7-8
rahim - 6-7

[Bat-PadTogether]

Javed-9
Nafees-2
Bashar-3
Ash & Rajin-1
Pilot-8
Rahim-5
Aftab-6
Anwar-4

[esteban_loaiza]

JO and Mashud should get 10 out 10 for their effort considering the situation

[oracle]

On the whole,as Srabon has pointed out, the benchmark is JO +K Masud, so in that case the relative scores are reasonable.

But I kind of feel sorry for the Kindergartners such as
Shahadat and Rahim bringing home a report card to mommy?

[Mahir]

sure Aftab might not have developed the temperament suitable for Test matches yet, but I still think he's being underrated in this so-called report card analysis.

[FaltuRidwanBhai]

aftab clearly deserves and 8. because he was the only batsman with whom the english media was actually impressed with.

[insideedge]

giving 8 + for a half century in 4 innings? Little wonder the batsmen see no reasons to perform. I guess they will get 20 out of 10 from the fans if they batted like Bell or Trescothick.

Edited on, June 9, 2005, 7:34 AM GMT, by insideedge.

[Spitfire_x86]

Originally posted by oracle
On the whole,as Srabon has pointed out, the benchmark is JO +K Masud, so in that case the relative scores are reasonable.

No, it's still not. How can Ashraful get 4 when Javed gets 8?

[Flipper]

Sorry, but this doesn't make any sense to me at all. Anyways, This is just my opinion.

Mohammed Ashraful, and Mohammed Rafique both score a 4. How?

(Yes, Rafique didn't perform with the bat, but he bowled in tandam with mash at Lords. He got one wicket, was dropped twice (once by Bashar, once by Himself), and once denied by Hariharan).

I am really trying hard not to rip my hair off here

[Flipper]

Originally posted by Spitfire_x86

No, it's still not. How can Ashraful get 4 when Javed gets 8?

JO with 155 runs scores 8 (not to mention JO is the highest scorer in a consistant manner)
Ash with 23 runs scores 4

If 4 x 2 = 8 then, 23 x 2= 155?

if you take expectations from the series into account, what was expected from JO, and what from Ash?