Andrew Miller's article on Series summary - factual error?

[cluster11]

I find this dissapointing.
" ..
Bangladesh's record in one-day internationals is pitiful - this form of the game is supposedly a lottery, and yet they have won just twice against senior opposition in 20 years of trying.
.."

This is just plain insulting and wrong. Bangladesh only got one-day international status 6-7 years ago and since then we have beaten Pakistan, India, Kenya and Zimbabwe in one-day international games. Plus close call with New Zeland and West Indies on several occassion. So I don't understand the "2 wins in 20 years" comment. We are not doing well in one-day series but certainly nowhere not as bad as the test situation. I remember Srilanka used to lose all the time 13-14 yrs back and Zimbabwe used to be everybody's punching bag through out the '90s. We dont' have to accept wrong information about BD to boost up British morale.

The full article is at:
http://content.cricinfo.com/engvban/...ry/210549.html

[Fazal]

Andrew,... you naughty ... naughty boy... you should have your fact straight.

Your intrigity is at stake here.

[TheWatcher]

Andrew Miller is an old friend of Bangladesh Cricket and a respected member of this board. But, just like so many BD fans, he seems to be very frustrated by our team's performence at this point.

Edited on, June 6, 2005, 8:51 PM GMT, by TheWatcher.
Reason: Typo

[nihi]

Originally posted by cluster11
I find this dissapointing.
" ..
Bangladesh's record in one-day internationals is pitiful - this form of the game is supposedly a lottery, and yet they have won just twice against senior opposition in 20 years of trying.
.."

This is just plain insulting and wrong. Bangladesh only got one-day international status 6-7 years ago and since then we have beaten Pakistan, India, Kenya and Zimbabwe in one-day international games. Plus close call with New Zeland and West Indies on several occassion. So I don't understand the "2 wins in 20 years" comment. We are not doing well in one-day series but certainly nowhere not as bad as the test situation. I remember Srilanka used to lose all the time 13-14 yrs back and Zimbabwe used to be everybody's punching bag through out the '90s. We dont' have to accept wrong information about BD to boost up British morale.

The full article is at:
http://content.cricinfo.com/engvban/...ry/210549.html

There is no 'factual' error!

For the first one: you don't have to have ODI status for playing an ODI. As far as I know, Bangladesh first played an ODI against Pakistan on 31st March 1986 (ODI# 375).

As for the second one: of all the teams that Bangladesh has defeated, Andrew considered Pakistan and India to be 'senior' teams. That makes it 2 wins. Whether Zim is (or was) a senior team or not is very objective, so there is no factuality attached with that.

[chinaman]

Instead of spilling adrenaline all over, can any of you guys post the stats together with the time when we first played the one day internationals?

Typos, mistakes and errors do happen but that doesn't mean we have to jump all over it. Thanks.

[paco]

Originally posted by chinaman
Instead of spilling adrenaline all over, can any of you guys post the stats together with the time when we first played the one day internationals?

Typos, mistakes and errors do happen but that doesn't mean we have to jump all over it. Thanks.

Chinaman - there is a factual error in the your post - the original author didn't mention any "typos"

[nihi]

Originally posted by chinaman
Instead of spilling adrenaline all over, can any of you guys post the stats together with the time when we first played the one day internationals?

ODI# 375 is the first ODI that Bangladesh played, according to Cricinfo.

[chinaman]

Originally posted by nihi
ODI# 375 is the first ODI that Bangladesh played, according to Cricinfo.

Yeah, here's the cricinfo link for yearly tally >>

Well, the key word in the article is "senior". Definition is in the pen of the writer

[cricman]

Rawalpindi thriller we lost that by one ball

http://usa.cricinfo.com/link_to_data...18SEP2003.html