facebook Twitter RSS Feed YouTube StumbleUpon

Home | Forum | Chat | Tours | Articles | Pictures | News | Tools | History | Tourism | Search

 
 


Go Back   BanglaCricket Forum > Cricket > Cricket

Cricket Join fellow Tigers fans to discuss all things Cricket

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old February 24, 2011, 08:26 AM
aosaif aosaif is offline
Test Cricketer
 
Join Date: July 20, 2004
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1,200
Default Shahriar Nafees vs. Ashraful for lower-order position?

I think suspcions are rife concerning either Mahmudullah Riyadh and Naeem Islam's position. You may not agree but I know some share the opinion that both these guys are similar in the role they play for the team. Essentially one is playing to back up the other if he fails. On the back of several dubious performances including the last match.....who should come in?

A) Shuvo? - i believe he plays a similar role as Mullah and Naeem

B) Ashraful? - has played lower-order before. Batting position is not a factor for him, we all know its his form that must click. He's in the team so you HAVE to consider him as an option. Ian Pont spoke of his match-winning capabilities and I believe a world cup winning team should have this.

C) Shahriar Nafees? - I'm throwing this one from left field! I don't know but it could be great strategy!! Loves to play shots.....presumably in better form than Ashraful but perhaps not by much. Probability-wise he certainly has a better chance of "clicking" than Ashraful. A more accomplished batsman than either Mullah or Naeem. Powerplay with him around could be fun!

I'm going with C!!! I can't find a place for Shahriar Nafees higher up the order but our failure in the powerplays demands a more accomplished type of batsman. And honestly, would we really be missing the spin bowling qualities of either Mullah or Naeem if one is dropped?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old February 24, 2011, 10:08 AM
lamisa's Avatar
lamisa lamisa is offline
Cricket Legend
 
Join Date: December 18, 2007
Location: Dhaka
Favorite Player: tamim,shafiul,mushy
Posts: 6,743

that just goes to show how desperate we rae,considering playing SN at lower order who is currently the best choice of the 3 in my eyes!!!shuvo,no way?he NEVER performed with the bat in int'l cricket.and i wouldn't even bet a penny on ashraful anymore
__________________
haruk ba jituk,i am always there with BDcricket!!!!
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old February 24, 2011, 10:59 AM
shakibrulz's Avatar
shakibrulz shakibrulz is offline
Cricket Legend
 
Join Date: June 10, 2010
Favorite Player: Shakib Al Hasan
Posts: 4,327

C. Either that or Nafees at three and Junaid at 6/7.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old February 24, 2011, 11:04 AM
rinathq's Avatar
rinathq rinathq is offline
Cricket Legend
 
Join Date: January 1, 2010
Location: Toronto, ON
Favorite Player: Mash, Shak, Enam, Riyad
Posts: 2,794

Shahriar Nafees… He is orginally openors who is used to batting against best pace attack of a team and playing in Batting PP.

Posted via BC Mobile Edition
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old February 24, 2011, 11:05 AM
riajul riajul is offline
Test Cricketer
 
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Dhaka
Posts: 1,444

Quote:
Originally Posted by shakibrulz
C. Either that or Nafees at three and Junaid at 6/7.
right. Junaid is one of best hitter.

Posted via BC Mobile Edition
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old February 24, 2011, 11:06 AM
aosaif aosaif is offline
Test Cricketer
 
Join Date: July 20, 2004
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1,200

Apologies, did not see a related thread "Give Shahriar Nafees a game"

Perhaps mods could just append this thread to that one?
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old February 24, 2011, 11:15 AM
Brit-boy Brit-boy is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: December 1, 2010
Location: United Kingdom
Favorite Player: Mortaza,Kapali,Tendulkar.
Posts: 191

Quote:
Originally Posted by shakibrulz
C. Either that or Nafees at three and Junaid at 6/7.
I was thinking same Siddiqui should bat down the order, and Nafees at number-3, cause Siddiquis technic is not good for at number-3, but he can play shots stright away, he has shown it in the India game he came in and hit a 6 stright away, he has shown it in the past he can score quickly; he has the ability to do that. Yes he has been slow in recent series mybe he was in two minds : wether to play innings like how dravid kind of did or wether to play his natural game.

Last edited by Brit-boy; February 24, 2011 at 11:29 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old February 24, 2011, 11:18 AM
Naimul_Hd's Avatar
Naimul_Hd Naimul_Hd is offline
Cricket Guru
 
Join Date: October 18, 2008
Location: Global City of Australia
Favorite Player: Shakib, Mashrafe
Posts: 13,325

so, what exactly SN / Ash would do during PP ?? Blind hitting !! Lagle chokka...na lagle Macca !?
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old February 24, 2011, 11:22 AM
Akib's Avatar
Akib Akib is offline
Cricket Legend
 
Join Date: February 27, 2005
Location: Toronto, Canada
Favorite Player: Graeme Smith
Posts: 5,856

I'd say Shuvo is a better bowler than Riyad and Naeem, though the latter are better batsmen.

Ashraful has that matching winning capabilities (he hasn't done it this year has he??? its DUE!!!), but Nafees is more consistant.

Personally I have no idea which of Ash or Nafees would be best....
__________________
Photography Gallery
http://akib99.deviantart.com/gallery/
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old February 24, 2011, 11:32 AM
Brit-boy Brit-boy is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: December 1, 2010
Location: United Kingdom
Favorite Player: Mortaza,Kapali,Tendulkar.
Posts: 191

Same here. I think Shuvo is slightly, technical better bowler the Mahmudullah and Naeem Islam. I'd have Shuvo in for Naeem.

Posted via BC Mobile Edition (1)
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old February 24, 2011, 11:35 AM
aosaif aosaif is offline
Test Cricketer
 
Join Date: July 20, 2004
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1,200

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brit-boy
I was thinking same Siddiqui should bat down the order, and Nafees at number-3, cause Siddiquis technic is not good for at number-3, but he can play shots stright away, he has shown it in the India game he came in and hit a 6 stright away, he has shown it in the past he can score quickly; he has the ability to do that. Yes he has been slow in recent series mybe he was in two minds : wether to play innings like how dravid kind of did or wether to play his natural game.
There's lots of ways we could tamper with the batting but I for one am against shaking things up when they work.

If you look at it from the perspective of fixing what was wrong from the last game.....then i would say our lower-order batting and our overall bowling perfromance need fixing. I don't think the top order batting is something that needs fixing after scoring the majority of the 283 runs against India.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old February 24, 2011, 11:38 AM
aosaif aosaif is offline
Test Cricketer
 
Join Date: July 20, 2004
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1,200

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brit-boy
Same here. I think Shuvo is slightly, technical better bowler the Mahmudullah and Naeem Islam. I'd have Shuvo in for Naeem.

Posted via BC Mobile Edition (1)
Can we all agree that Shuvo, Mullah and Naeem essentially play the same roles?

If we can.....my next quesiton is, should we really have two out of the three of them playing in the team? Or should we go with a better batsman? (or a better bowler!)?

I think that's the trick to solving our dilemma
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old February 24, 2011, 11:40 AM
Akib's Avatar
Akib Akib is offline
Cricket Legend
 
Join Date: February 27, 2005
Location: Toronto, Canada
Favorite Player: Graeme Smith
Posts: 5,856

Quote:
Originally Posted by aosaif
Can we all agree that Shuvo, Mullah and Naeem essentially play the same roles?

If we can.....my next quesiton is, should we really have two out of the three of them playing in the team? Or should we go with a better batsman? (or a better bowler!)?

I think that's the trick to solving our dilemma
I think a better batsman and a better bowler, would be preferable to 2 mediocre allrounders.

That is why I prefer Ash/Nafees + Shuvo to Riyad/Naeem.

Just wondering, what other options do we have for bowlers, instead of Shuvo?
__________________
Photography Gallery
http://akib99.deviantart.com/gallery/
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old February 24, 2011, 11:51 AM
aosaif aosaif is offline
Test Cricketer
 
Join Date: July 20, 2004
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1,200

I agree with you Akib,

If you look at the interview of Nazim Shirazi, he emphasises the importance of playing pure bowlers (in the context of a powerful batting team like India of course).

It just made me think that perhaps we should focus on picking better batsmen and bowlers instead of these bits-and-pieces allrounders. I know it would be a big change in concept of picking a team but in our case, apart from Shakib we have no genuine international-quality allrounders. Hence, my preferences are:

Kick Mullah and Naeem out!

Bring in Shahriar Nafees and Nazmul Hossain (who Coach Pont seems to rate highly)!!!!
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old February 24, 2011, 12:02 PM
Fazal's Avatar
Fazal Fazal is offline
Cricket Sage
 
Join Date: September 16, 2004
Posts: 15,718

To me we lost the game when gave up 370 Runs. There is no way we could have won the game regardless whoever you bring as PP slogger. So for that game there was only one problem, i.e. our bowling (for some reason) didn't worked, more or less top to bottom in the bowling order.

Now to solved our PP issue, which was not the cause of our defeat against india, we are suggesting further weakening our bowling attack by a) removing a specialied bowler thus playing with 3 specialized bowler and two part timers; b) Unbalance bolwing by only including one FB.

This doesn't make sense at all. Yes we want to fill the holes, but not at the cost of creating bigger holes elsewhere.



Now for the sake of argument if we solely concentrate on batting:

It is not only at the end of the innings where we failed to chase the total 370. Naeem & Razzak wasted 13 balls to score 3. But not too many balls waisted. mahmudullah had a SR 100 facing 6 balls. So they played a part but that was not the whole story why we couldn't chased 370. There was other part in the game where we played for "shomman Jonok score" and we never realistically chased the score.

For example, Tamim faced 86 balls to score 70. That means the rest of the players need to score 300 runs in 230 balls i.e. at the rate of SR 133 all through the innings. When out best attacking batsman can barely make a SR of 81, how is it possible for the rest of the team to maintain an average SR of 133?

Yes tamim sat the platform for a goos score, but with low SR was not good enough platform to chase 370 runs.
__________________
Stop that “chudurbudur”
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old February 24, 2011, 12:11 PM
simon's Avatar
simon simon is offline
Cricket Sage
 
Join Date: February 20, 2008
Favorite Player: Tam,Sak,Nasa,Mash
Posts: 19,457

Junaid has been scoring consistently,so it wld be a mistake to put him down to the lower order,
to me both Ash & SN are good options in the lower order,giving Ryad another chance but replacing Naeem with SN if not Ash is what I stand for.
__________________
Tea20 is just not our cup of tea.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old February 24, 2011, 12:44 PM
aosaif aosaif is offline
Test Cricketer
 
Join Date: July 20, 2004
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1,200

Quote:
Originally Posted by simon
Junaid has been scoring consistently,so it wld be a mistake to put him down to the lower order,
to me both Ash & SN are good options in the lower order,giving Ryad another chance but replacing Naeem with SN if not Ash is what I stand for.
I agree that I have taken the more extreme view of kicking both Riad and Naeem out. Your proposition is a more level-headed approach for sure. Probably best to keep an extra spinning option in any case against the non-subcontinent teams.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old February 24, 2011, 12:54 PM
aosaif aosaif is offline
Test Cricketer
 
Join Date: July 20, 2004
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1,200

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fazal
To me we lost the game when gave up 370 Runs. There is no way we could have won the game regardless whoever you bring as PP slogger. So for that game there was only one problem, i.e. our bowling (for some reason) didn't worked, more or less top to bottom in the bowling order.

Now to solved our PP issue, which was not the cause of our defeat against india, we are suggesting further weakening our bowling attack by a) removing a specialied bowler thus playing with 3 specialized bowler and two part timers; b) Unbalance bolwing by only including one FB.

This doesn't make sense at all. Yes we want to fill the holes, but not at the cost of creating bigger holes elsewhere.



Now for the sake of argument if we solely concentrate on batting:

It is not only at the end of the innings where we failed to chase the total 370. Naeem & Razzak wasted 13 balls to score 3. But not too many balls waisted. mahmudullah had a SR 100 facing 6 balls. So they played a part but that was not the whole story why we couldn't chased 370. There was other part in the game where we played for "shomman Jonok score" and we never realistically chased the score.

For example, Tamim faced 86 balls to score 70. That means the rest of the players need to score 300 runs in 230 balls i.e. at the rate of SR 133 all through the innings. When out best attacking batsman can barely make a SR of 81, how is it possible for the rest of the team to maintain an average SR of 133?

Yes tamim sat the platform for a goos score, but with low SR was not good enough platform to chase 370 runs.
Fazal,

If you are not milking 50 runs out of the PPs....your team has a problem!

Your argument is unclear. I have not proposed removing any specialized bowlers at all!!! I proposed kicking out Mullah and Naeem - part-time spinners, for ONE specialized batsman (SN) and ONE specialized bowler (Nazmul).

That means we would have four specialized bowlers (shafiul, rubel, nazul and razzaq). Shakib is a genuine allrounder and will act as the fifth bowling option. As for the Tamim debate, well that's for another thread really, but you can't expect him to perform in every game. You need others to step up and I believe we have others who can step up.

Finally, I would suggest focusing on articulating your argument rather than bolding and underling everything to make your point.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old February 24, 2011, 01:16 PM
Fazal's Avatar
Fazal Fazal is offline
Cricket Sage
 
Join Date: September 16, 2004
Posts: 15,718

Quote:
Originally Posted by aosaif
Fazal,

If you are not milking 50 runs out of the PPs....your team has a problem!
In general term yes. but against India, it was not the main issue.
For WC, the team is not build to address this issue as its a well known issue for a while. We cannot address this issue with the cureent team of 15.

The game is played for 50 overs, there are other phases in the game we can milk more runs to make up some of our deficiencies in PP.




Quote:
Originally Posted by aosaif
Your argument is unclear. I have not proposed removing any specialized bowlers at all!!! I proposed kicking out Mullah and Naeem - part-time spinners, for ONE specialized batsman (SN) and ONE specialized bowler (Nazmul).
That means we would have four specialized bowlers (shafiul, rubel, nazul and razzaq). Shakib is a genuine allrounder and will act as the fifth bowling option.
With young and inconsistent bolwers like Rubel, Shafiul, and bolwer with limited capability like Nazmul, we cannot effort to have 5 bolwers. That means we are taking additional risk of giving opponent 15/30 more extra runs (or even more).




Quote:
Originally Posted by aosaif
As for the Tamim debate, well that's for another thread really, but you can't expect him to perform in every game. You need others to step up and I believe we have others who can step up.
Sure. But when we are chasing 370, and when player X plays 70 runs in 87 balls, basically there is no chance for win for team like bangladesh. Even if you fill the rest with couple of tamims and couple of Ashrafuls. At that point, oppotunity is lost. Thats the reality of chasing big score like 370s.

Now somebody can say we didn't have chance any way againt India chasing 370, that's I agree. I am not Blaming Tamim here, but I am saying realistically there was no chance for us chasing 370 and talking about PP failure in that particular game is mute. And 70 runs 87 balls made it even harder.



Quote:
Originally Posted by aosaif
Finally, I would suggest focusing on articulating your argument rather than bolding and underling everything to make your point.
Everybody is not as articulate as you wish, so you have to be patient with rest of us, the less articulate one.

And btw I didn't bolding and underling everything, please don't mis-represent fact, that will reduce your own credibility in other's eye.

See advice is cheap, and we can all give free advice; and can all all learn from each other if we wish.
__________________
Stop that “chudurbudur”

Last edited by Fazal; February 24, 2011 at 01:43 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old February 24, 2011, 06:34 PM
al Furqaan's Avatar
al Furqaan al Furqaan is offline
Cricket Sage
 
Join Date: February 18, 2004
Location: New York City
Favorite Player: Mominul, Nasir, Taskin
Posts: 20,316

we were never in the hunt for 370 after the 11th over (at that time we were well within the asking rate at 77-1). but the issue is that in a multi team tournament there is a "win within a win". the net run rate. every run we scored would add 0.02 to our net run rate, if i calculated that correctly. jut one upset, and even if we take care of our business, qualification would rest on the NRR. we can't afford to build a lineup around just tamim and shakib, one of those guys could always have an off day. ANY other team, even zimbabwe would have reached 300 given the platform we had. we scored 20 odd runs from the last 5 overs and thats unacceptable. and its not a bad-day at the office. its been a chronic issue of the past 12 months, vs minnow attacks or F9 teams, same story. part of the fault is with Shakib not taking the PP at the wise time. part of it is having the wrong personel in the wrong places. all this talk of making up the runs elsewhere is wishfully sweeping things under the rug, IMHO, because the PP exists for the sole reason of scoring some runs. we're at a disadvantage here, and we will already likely be going against 13 men every time we take the field (thank god for UDRS).
__________________
Bangladesh is a stronger team with Shakib al Hasan.
Bangladesh is a stronger team without Shakib al Hasan.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old February 25, 2011, 05:44 AM
Rabz's Avatar
Rabz Rabz is offline
BanglaCricket Staff
BC - Bangladesh Representative
 
Join Date: February 28, 2005
Location: Here
Favorite Player: Father of BD Cricket
Posts: 20,464

SN at no 7 would be nothing short of a crime.
After Zunaid's beautiful show today, I hope SN makes a comeback at No 3 against the WI.

If anyone, Ash fits in at No 7, but it still remains to be seen today.
__________________
Verily, in the remembrance of Allah do hearts find rest [Al-Qur'an,13:28]
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old February 25, 2011, 06:19 AM
ammark's Avatar
ammark ammark is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 17, 2005
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 6,070

^^^ exactly I'm not at all impressed with Zunaed Siddiqui. He cant rotate the strike, hogs the crease, wastes time.

SN is more versatile as a player, and in the long run SN trumps ZS anyday.

Ash was irresponsible as always, but all the players deserve blame. True the pitch is very slow and the ball wasnt coming on to the bat. But the batsmen have to adapt no matter what.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old February 25, 2011, 07:21 AM
Fazal's Avatar
Fazal Fazal is offline
Cricket Sage
 
Join Date: September 16, 2004
Posts: 15,718

Yes Ash with 3 ball 4 runs in warm-up followed by 6 ball 1 run will not solve our power-play problem but will also solve our batting weakness.
__________________
Stop that “chudurbudur”
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old February 25, 2011, 07:27 AM
rinathq's Avatar
rinathq rinathq is offline
Cricket Legend
 
Join Date: January 1, 2010
Location: Toronto, ON
Favorite Player: Mash, Shak, Enam, Riyad
Posts: 2,794

Yea?? Where are the Ash fans and Nafees hatred???

Posted via BC Mobile Edition
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old February 25, 2011, 07:33 AM
Baundule's Avatar
Baundule Baundule is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: November 5, 2004
Favorite Player: Lara
Posts: 5,902

In some 10 years back SN played in the ICL, so he is not eligible for being in the team in the first place. Ash should be an automatic choice.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:51 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
BanglaCricket.com
 

About Us | Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Partner Sites | Useful Links | Banners |

© BanglaCricket