What's new

Murali Vijay or Tamim Iqbal - who is the best Asian Test opener?

Shaz and Nil bhai have made a tag team partnership in this thread and are single handedly taking everyone out like a royal rumble. [MENTION=46929]shaz619[/MENTION] [MENTION=142481]Nil Dhumrojal[/MENTION]
 
Hasan123 said:
Vijay doesn't need to buy me fish and chips, I have my own eyes to judge a player. From what I have seen Vijay is a better test player than Tahim. Tahim is still a very good test player just not better than Vijay. It's unfair that Bangladesh don't play more overseas tests so we can get a bigger sample size.

<b>Yes there is pressure on Tahim, but he isn't under pressure to win the game as he is playing for a lower ranked nation. Even if Bangladesh lose no one will be suprised and if they get thrashed it won't be the end of the world for them.</b> Vijay is playing for a top test team where him seeing of the new ball is vital and making sure that Indian middle order is.not put in vs the new ball.

Steven Finn wasn't at his peak loool, he was still conceding runs but just picking up wickets. English commentators at the time were saying exactly that. It was a good English attack but I think current English attack is much better other than Swaan being significantly better than Moen.
Click to expand...

So, are you saying that Bangladeshi players do not go to ground with any intention of winning just because they are not a strong test team? Extremely bizarre logic!
 
The_Odd_One said:
So, are you saying that Bangladeshi players do not go to ground with any intention of winning just because they are not a strong test team? Extremely bizarre logic!
Click to expand...

Not a bizarre logic to be honest. BD was playing with 2-3 bowlers on super flat tracks before this Eng series. Entire intention was to some how draw the game. Look at the team composition and you will agree.
 
Buffet said:
Not a bizarre logic to be honest. BD was playing with 2-3 bowlers on super flat tracks before this Eng series. Entire intention was to some how draw the game. Look at the team composition and you will agree.
Click to expand...

Drawing a test is different from losing. The only thing it shows is that Bangladesh was willing to do anything to draw (or not to lose) the test. It puts the same amount of pressure on batsmen to perform. Besides, when do batsmen win test matches?
 
Hasan123 said:
No biased though bro. Vijay is going through a difficult patch. Azhar hasn't had as bad a patch as this and Azhar has played more pressure knocks. Just needs more overseas to clearly surpass him it's still close now with Azhar just ahead.
Click to expand...

Bro, you should stop discussing anything related to India or it's players with Shaz619. He doesn't believe what he says, just trolls Kohli, Ashwin, Vijay and anyone who does well for us. It's ok, fortunately PP doesn't have too many of his kind :)
 
Buffet said:
Not a bizarre logic to be honest. BD was playing with 2-3 bowlers on super flat tracks before this Eng series. Entire intention was to some how draw the game. Look at the team composition and you will agree.
Click to expand...

We do play with 3 bowlers at time but we have the service of Shakib who is a genuine allrounder. That means we always have 4 specialist bowler always at our disposal.
 
AamchiMumbaikar said:
Bro, you should stop discussing anything related to India or it's players with Shaz619. He doesn't believe what he says, just trolls Kohli, Ashwin, Vijay and anyone who does well for us. It's ok, fortunately PP doesn't have too many of his kind :)
Click to expand...

What a garbage post, but if that helps you sleep at night then sure never mind how motivated I am to expose the fallacies in the opppsing arguments with an intricate analysis
 
The_Odd_One said:
Drawing a test is different from losing. The only thing it shows is that Bangladesh was willing to do anything to draw (or not to lose) the test. It puts the same amount of pressure on batsmen to perform. Besides, when do batsmen win test matches?
Click to expand...

I was only commenting on no intention to win by BD team. Drawing at any cost is simply equivalent of no intention to win.
 
Buffet said:
Not a bizarre logic to be honest. BD was playing with 2-3 bowlers on super flat tracks before this Eng series. Entire intention was to some how draw the game. Look at the team composition and you will agree.
Click to expand...

Absolute nonsense - either you haven't checked your data or taking a chance that no one'll bother to cross check.

Bangladesh did try to draw games & absolutely nothing wrong in that – it has been the case for every team in their early days. A little bit of studying the history will help you realize that. For a growing Test team, it's quite logical to approach the game by steps - taking the game to longer period, then compete at home, then compete away & finally try to win - starting from home & then gradually away. Therefore, I am quite OK, if anyone thinks that our intension was only to draw – that time the team was like that a draw is like win. From day 1, we are playing 5 Day & 450 overs Test – you can check history of cricket – how many Tests emerging teams had drawn in their first 20-25 years even in 3 Day Tests. Playing on belters is not a fault either - unless you don't check the Test matches in South Asia between 1970s to 2000s.

Coming to the second part of your post - you are completely wrong. One of our main strength is that two of the key players actually makes the team on batting merit - Sakib & WK Mushfique, hence the batting line up always looks longer. Second thing is, in that team, there are always couple of players who covers the 5th bowlers spot - now Mahmudullah (who has 37 wickets in 29 Tests, at one point 35 of 23 - in fact, he started his career as bowling all-rounder, batting at 8), Hom (who has 108 wickets in 60 FC matches, 8 in 8 Test) & Sabbir; previously Mahmudullah, Mominul & Nasir; may be in future Mosaddek – each and every of these players barring Momin actually plays as 4th or 5th bowler of their FC team & often bowls full quota in List A matches. In that regard, you can also say that ENG plays 2/3 bowlers & Moeen, Stokes - who are basically batsman.

Coming to your false statement (I am a bit harsh here, because this is quite few times you have mentioned this same thing, which is utter rubbish) – before this ENG tour, let's check the last 12 Series that BD played (I am excluding the last ZIM Series at home) - that's about 7 years of history.

Those Series are - SAF (H), IND (H), PAK (H), WI (A), NZ (H), SRL (H), ZIM (A), WI (H), SRL (A), WI (H), ZIM (A), ENG (A). Let's check the team combination by every Test, in terms of bowlers

SAF (H): 2015
1st Test - Mustafiz, Taijul, Sakib, Shahid, Zubair + Mahmood = 5 bowlers + a batting all-rounder
2nd Test - Mustafiz, Shahid, Jubair, Sakib + Nasir & Mahmood = 4 bowlers & 2 batting all-rounders

IND (H): 2015
Only Test - Shahid, Taijul, Sakib, Zubair + Hom, Mahmood = 4 bowlers + 2 batting all-rounders

PAK (H): 2014-15
1st Test: Rubel, Shahid, Taijul, Sakib + Hom, Mahmood = 4 bowlers + 2 batting all-rounders
2nd Test: Shahadat, Shahid, Taijul, Sakib + Hom, Mahmood = 4 bowlers + 2 batting all-rounders

WI (A): 2014 (Sakib didn’t tour)
1st Test: Al-Amin, Rubel, Taijul + Hom & Nasir = 3 bowlers + 2 batting all-rounders (& couple of part-timers)
2nd Test: Al-Amin, Shafiul, Rabiul, Taijul + Nasir & Mahmood = 4 bowlers + 2 batting all-rounders

NZL (H): 2013-14
1st Test: Rabiul, Rubel, Razzak, Shohag Gazi, Sakib + Nasir = 5 bowlers + 1 batting all-rounder
2nd Test: Al-Amin, Rubel, Razzak, Shohag Gazi, Sakib + Nasir = 5 bowlers + 1 batting all-rounder

SRL (H): 2013-14
1st Test: Rabiul, Al-Amin, Rubel, Shohag Gazi, Sakib + Nasir = 5 bowlers + 1 batting all-rounder
2nd Test: Al-Amin, Razzak, Shohag Gazi, Sakib + Nasir, Mahmood = 4 bowlers + 2 batting all-rounders

ZIM (A): 2013
1st Test: Rabiul, Rubel, Enamul Jr., Shohag Gazi, Sakib + Nasir, Mahmood = 5 bowlers + 2 batting all-rounders
2nd Test: Rabiul, Sajedur, Shohag Gazi, Sakib, Ziaur = 5 bowlers

WI (H): 2012-13
1st Test: Shahadat, Rubel, Shohag Gazi, Sakib + Naeem, Nasir, Mahmood = 4 bowlers + 3 batting all-rounders
2nd Test: Rubel, Abul Hasan, Shohag Gazi, Sakib + Naeem, Mahmood, Nasir = 4 bowlers + 3 batting all-rounders

SRL (A): 2012 (Sakib didn’t play)
1st Test: Shahdat, Abul, Shohag Gazi, Sunny + Mahmud, Nasir = 4 bowlers + 1 bowling all-rounder + Nasir
2nd Test: Rabiul, Rubel, Abul, Shohag Gazi, + Mahmud, Nasir = 4 bowlers + 1 bowling all-rounder + Nasir

WI (H): 2011-12
1st Test: Shahadat, Rubel, Sunny, Sakib + Nasir, Naeem = 4 bowlers + 2 bowling all-rounders
2nd Test: Shahadat, Rubel, Sakib, Shuvo + Naeem, Nasir = 4 bowlers + 2 bowling all-rounders

ZIM (A): 2011
Only Test: Shafiul, Rabiul, Rubel, Sakib, Razzak + Mahmud = 5 bowlers + 1 bowling all-rounder

ENG (A): 2010
1st Test: Shahadat, Rabiul, Rubel, Sakib + Mahmud = 4 bowlers + 1 bowling all-rounder
2nd Test: Shahadat, Shafiul, Sakib, Razzak + Mahmud = 4 bowlers + 1 bowling all-rounder


One thing is true that the skill level of our specialist bowlers (Pacers) than the batting all-rounders are not that superior, hence after 100-120 overs, often Captains do tend to use several bowlers to share the work load, which indicates that there are many multi-skilled players (but not good specialists) but it’s not that we go to a Test match with 2/3 bowlers. This is mainly because, the core of BD team was List A cricket, hence, most of the batters actually do bowl quite lot in domestics. But things are changing – now, almost every FC team plays at least 3 players on absolute bowling merit & there are quite a few number of bowlers, who has improved their batting skills for the 4th & 5th bowling spots.

I have spent an hour to work out this – I hope you’ll respond on this. Bangladesh is not the standard, neither world beaters, but don’t take chances with such statements. You can always close with one liner – “Vijay is better” – that’s your personal statement, who cares. But, these are the comments, which will not go unattended.
 
Tamim is better than most of our openers just like Shakib is better than any of our current allrounders.
 
First time I saw BD series in the last few years involving Pakistan, India and SA and impression was clear to me about what BD was trying to do in those series. Try to draw the game by packing it with batsmen.

Take for example from your list.

IND (H): 2015 Only Test - Shahid, Taijul, Sakib, Zubair + Hom, Mahmood = 4 bowlers + 2 batting all-rounders


PAK (H): 2014-15

1st Test: Rubel, Shahid, Taijul, Sakib + Hom, Mahmood = 4 bowlers + 2 batting all-rounders

2nd Test: Shahadat, Shahid, Taijul, Sakib + Hom, Mahmood = 4 bowlers + 2 batting all-rounders



In your above example, you have 3 pure bowlers and one all rounder in Sakib. You may have taken offence in me pointing out that BD was mainly playing for draw rather than win. Let's ignore my post, here is ESPN write up by a BDeshi ( I am assuming he is from BD) writer.


--------------

Bangladesh's mindset behind one-man pace attack

Picking the single pace bowler is yet another message from Test captain Mushfiqur Rahim and coach Chandika Hathurusingha that an attacking bowling line-up in their team is low on their list of priorities. They have spoken repeatedly about trying to win by taking 20 wickets but their preference for securing the batting line-up leads to a lop-sided bowling attack.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/bangladesh-v-india-2015/content/story/886007.html

-----------------------

Let's put it this way. If you have one all rounder in Sakib. Then you pick 3 bowlers. So basically, you are packing the side with batsmen to draw the game. ESPN report says the same thing.

If SA was picking 3 bowlers and Kallis then it won't be wrong to say that batting is getting extended at expense of bowling. Same way, if you are picking 3 bowlers and one all rounder in Sakib then you are simply you are trying to extend the batting line up. Listing batsmen who can bowl some overs is not the same as having bowlers at your disposal.

It was not just my observation or ESPN article. Same sentiments were shared by many PPers during those series and even by some BD posters.

Yah, I do think Vijay is better and it's called difference in opinion. You don't have to mention that here if you simply want to talk about BD strategy for playing tests before this Eng series. If you think BD had enough bowlers to win tests then we simply have to agree to disagree here. Side packed with batsmen and nature of pitch tells the story. You are free to see it differently.
 
AamchiMumbaikar said:
Bro, you should stop discussing anything related to India or it's players with Shaz619. He doesn't believe what he says, just trolls Kohli, Ashwin, Vijay and anyone who does well for us. It's ok, fortunately PP doesn't have too many of his kind :)
Click to expand...

I don't mind people disagreeing with me I only post my opinion
 
The_Odd_One said:
So, are you saying that Bangladeshi players do not go to ground with any intention of winning just because they are not a strong test team? Extremely bizarre logic!
Click to expand...

I'm trying to say Bangladesh aren't the favourites in tests they play.
 
Buffet said:
First time I saw BD series in the last few years involving Pakistan, India and SA and impression was clear to me about what BD was trying to do in those series. Try to draw the game by packing it with batsmen.

Take for example from your list.

IND (H): 2015 Only Test - Shahid, Taijul, Sakib, Zubair + Hom, Mahmood = 4 bowlers + 2 batting all-rounders


PAK (H): 2014-15

1st Test: Rubel, Shahid, Taijul, Sakib + Hom, Mahmood = 4 bowlers + 2 batting all-rounders

2nd Test: Shahadat, Shahid, Taijul, Sakib + Hom, Mahmood = 4 bowlers + 2 batting all-rounders



In your above example, you have 3 pure bowlers and one all rounder in Sakib. You may have taken offence in me pointing out that BD was mainly playing for draw rather than win. Let's ignore my post, here is ESPN write up by a BDeshi ( I am assuming he is from BD) writer.


--------------

Bangladesh's mindset behind one-man pace attack

Picking the single pace bowler is yet another message from Test captain Mushfiqur Rahim and coach Chandika Hathurusingha that an attacking bowling line-up in their team is low on their list of priorities. They have spoken repeatedly about trying to win by taking 20 wickets but their preference for securing the batting line-up leads to a lop-sided bowling attack.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/bangladesh-v-india-2015/content/story/886007.html

-----------------------

Let's put it this way. If you have one all rounder in Sakib. Then you pick 3 bowlers. So basically, you are packing the side with batsmen to draw the game. ESPN report says the same thing.

If SA was picking 3 bowlers and Kallis then it won't be wrong to say that batting is getting extended at expense of bowling. Same way, if you are picking 3 bowlers and one all rounder in Sakib then you are simply you are trying to extend the batting line up. Listing batsmen who can bowl some overs is not the same as having bowlers at your disposal.

It was not just my observation or ESPN article. Same sentiments were shared by many PPers during those series and even by some BD posters.

Yah, I do think Vijay is better and it's called difference in opinion. You don't have to mention that here if you simply want to talk about BD strategy for playing tests before this Eng series. If you think BD had enough bowlers to win tests then we simply have to agree to disagree here. Side packed with batsmen and nature of pitch tells the story. You are free to see it differently.
Click to expand...



I don't agree with ESPN comments - you pick your team based on the wicket & based on the players you have. There is no point picking 2 pacers for the sake of it; neither to pick the inferior batsman just because he is a specialist bowler. Recently, SRL played Test against AUS with 1 specialist pacer (Lakmal in 1 Test) & in other 2 Test basically picked a medium pace all-rounder, to roll arm for few overs. And, SRL played just 3 specialist bowlers & all-rounders like Dhananjaya. For that matter, it's not Moeen's fault that he is better batsman than Batty, or should England drop him for Batty to satisfy ESPN analyst? I can say the same for Woakes & Finn. In recent times, IND is trying to play 5 bowlers, otherwise a year back, sometimes their 5th bowler (2nd pacer) was Binney.

There are many matches where we have played 4 specialist bowlers & Sakib + an all-rounder, but you picked the example where Sakib was picked as the 4th bowler as it fits your bill. Bangladesh doesn't have enough quality bowlers to win a Test - it's not about numbers of bowlers. Dropping couple of batsmen & playing 6 specialist bowler doesn't show intention to win. That nonsense writing in ESPN didn't bother to do the exercise I did, neither he has the guts to point that IND played with 3 spinners & 1 pacer + Binney for a better combination.

Normally teams with 2 spinners on spin friendly wicket goes with 2+2 combination, may be with a batting all-rounder. Bangladesh has played 4 bowlers & 2 all-rounders in most cases. It's not our fault that Sakib makes the team on bowling merit & then averages highest in the team with bat. For the Test against India, it was a close call between a pacer & Hom - but looking at the wicket, at last minute they went for Hom. As I listed, only Test where BD played with less than 4 specialist bowlers was against WI in WI (that too, just 1 Test), when last minute withdrawal of Sakib imbalanced the combination. Here you are talking about only 2/3 bowlers, which is not correct - accept that, end of story.

For the sake of argument, I can't take your explanation regarding the flat wicket theory, if you say that in last few years you have seen only 2015 Tests of Bangladesh. Out of those 5 Tests, only the Khulna one was drawn after 5 days play - rest 3 were drawn because almost 10 days out of 15 were complete wash-out. Otherwise, each & every Test were played on confirm result wicket. You are an intelligent guy - why should you swallow everything that is vomited to you - go & check the scorecards. After that, do you think that without rain those 3 Tests against IND & SAF would have ended in draw or those wickets were made for batting bonanza?

I am not sure who are the posters in PP thinks like you - but I have given a list in previous post - if anyone still thinks such after that, I do request to have a healthy discussion on that. All that glitters isn't gold - I am sure before thinking such again, this time, they will recall this thread, even Bangladeshis.

Regarding Khulna wicket - I have read lots of rubbish here, because it was Bangladesh & batsman was Tamim. You have no idea what it takes to save a Test after 300 deficit & 2 days to bat out. Scoreboard pressure is something that takes wicket out of equation. That was a wonderful rear guard innings by Tamim on a Day 4 & 5 wicket against quite a good PAK attack - we would have read epics, had it not been Tamim.

There is actually no flat wicket in Test - it's about handling pressure. SAF lost by innings to AUS's 600+/4 dec @ J'burg; ENG lost by innings against SAF's 600+/2d (Amla's triple match), PAK lost by innings to ZIM's 644/4D; AUS lost by innings to IND's 650/5D score, IND lost by innings to SRL 650/5D score - I haven't checked CricInfo, so these are tentative scores, but the point is, when you are in a hopeless situation with days to play out & 300+ behind, you have to bat well. Learn to appreciate that Tamim innings, instead of questioning the wicket. Just check, recently what PAK batting did facing a deficit of 56.

Coming to intention of Bangladesh, you are defaming the effort of our team. And, if you try to say that, your judgement is based on the Tests in 2015 with a quote from ESPN, I have to say that you are trying to bully - won't work here; why, I think I have explained earlier. No team plays to lose the game - in most matches, our best chance is to fight out a draw. It's not about playing with an intention to draw, rather it's about fighting out to avoid defeat. The team is overall weak, therefore very few chances they get to compete, they do try to salvage a draw - it's not intention, it's obligation, playing 7 bowlers won't win a Test for us, whatever ESPN pundit (& few in PP) might think - unfortunately, we are not that good, what those pundits think of us.

For that matter, don't tell me that SAF tried to win the Delhi Test with scoring 200 in 161 overs, or FaF was trying to win the Adelaide Test, or Amla went after the win at Colombo :).
 
MMHS said:
I don't agree with ESPN comments .....

For that matter, don't tell me that SAF tried to win the Delhi Test with scoring 200 in 161 overs, or FaF was trying to win the Adelaide Test, or Amla went after the win at Colombo :).
Click to expand...

Off course you don't agree with ESPN comment and it's obvious. As I said earlier, folks can have different views and you don't have to agree with ESPN, me or anyone else. Everyone is free to make to make up their own mind.

I also never criticize anyone for fighting out for a draw. I was only criticizing the intention to draw the game even before it started. That's different than fighting out to draw the game. Also, my harshest criticism is normally reserved for players and teams I want to see improving. First time I felt that BD tried to win the game before it started by putting turning tracks against Eng and having bowlers to exploit it. I loved that.

As far as SA goes, I have criticized them whenever they tried to simply draw when they could have gone for a win. I harshly criticized Smith for not trying to win the game against India due to fear of losing. My comment was not meant to be offensive to BD team or fans. I am one of the huge supporter of BD and want to see BD improve in the test format. Anyway, if you feel BD was always had intention to win test matches then I respectfully disagree.
 
Buffet said:
Off course you don't agree with ESPN comment and it's obvious. As I said earlier, folks can have different views and you don't have to agree with ESPN, me or anyone else. Everyone is free to make to make up their own mind.

I also never criticize anyone for fighting out for a draw. I was only criticizing the intention to draw the game even before it started. That's different than fighting out to draw the game. Also, my harshest criticism is normally reserved for players and teams I want to see improving. First time I felt that BD tried to win the game before it started by putting turning tracks against Eng and having bowlers to exploit it. I loved that.

As far as SA goes, I have criticized them whenever they tried to simply draw when they could have gone for a win. I harshly criticized Smith for not trying to win the game against India due to fear of losing. My comment was not meant to be offensive to BD team or fans. I am one of the huge supporter of BD and want to see BD improve in the test format. Anyway, if you feel BD was always had intention to win test matches then I respectfully disagree.
Click to expand...

Actually, I mentioned that ESPN comments because it was a flawed analysis, which you used to justify something non existent. Why, let me explain - Bangladesh used exactly same combination, in fact a bit more defensive one, in the Test that we won - Sakib, Miraj, Taijul + Hom & a dummy pacer. It's a bit more defensive, because against IND, we used a leggi instead. Different opponent, different toss & a bit different wicket, hence his logic goes through the window. In fact, as I wrote on Day 1 of CTG Test - we picked a wrong combination, just for the sake of playing 2 pacers with ZERO batting skills on that wicket. Instead of those 2 dummies, had we played Hom & Mosaddek/Soumya - a result of 22 runs gap, should have been different. There is nothing wrong to pick bowlers for a particular wicket & it's even better if couple of the bowlers can contribute with bat. For 2 decades, IND opened bowling with Pataudi, Desahi, Surti, Solker & played 4 spinners, 2 of them are Durani, Jaisima, Borde, Nadkarni. In 60s, PAK opened bowling with Mazid Khan & Asif Iqbal - this game has a glorious history of 150 years, study that, a lot of myths will be busted. We are limited in bowling resources, that's the ultimate obligation, intention is harnessed by the length of our jump.

I also don't like teams that start a Test match from ball one with an intention to draw, by packing XI with 2/3 bowlers & few batsmen who can bowl. I do agree with you, in this regard - and you should also agree that you had a bit "misconception" about the Test combination used by Bangladesh - as I have given the list of "Team combination" since 2010. Strategy of loading the playing XI with 2/3 bowlers & few batting all-rounders must be criticized for their intention & thank God that I could prove Bangladesh, despite limited resources, isn't one of those.

I do disagree with you, respectfully for the last part - we always had the intention to win every Test, unfortunately reality had beaten most times than SAF, hence we had hardly any Delhi, Colombo or Adelaide to be proud of.
 
Tamim is definitely more talented than Vijay but the later is better as far as temprament is concerned and slightly more clutch.Tamim is just lazy but has a much higher cieling.Both have underachieved.Tamim made his test debut at 19 whereas VJ left home at 17, so VJ was a late starter.Again VJ had to face massive massive competition to get into that Indian test team which had the greatest batting line up of the modern era.So that should count for something as well.Not Tamim's fault mind you.I am sure he had his own share of problems.
 
On today's Hobart pitch, Vijay would have survived and Tamim would have got dismissed after hitting few boundaries.
 
AamchiMumbaikar said:
On today's Hobart pitch, Vijay would have survived and Tamim would have got dismissed after hitting few boundaries.
Click to expand...

I don't mind if it's after 102 or 108 like he did against England in the month of May, 6 year back against the then English new ball attack.
 
Tamim in the recent series vs England, he was the highest run scorer by a fair margin. Scored nearly as many runs as the entire English top order in the entire series. Goes to show he is exceptional against spin as well.

Definitely one of the better openers in the SC if not the best
 
Tamim Iqbal is the greatest Bangladeshi Batsman who ever lived
 
Murali vijay is a very underrated batsmen in our line up and is the best opener among all the asian teams in all conditions. Still remember vividly how he nullified a rampaging steyn in sa, his ability to judge deliveries outside the offstump is a real hallmark.

Tamim Iqbal is also a good batsman but he's temperamentally not at par with Murali Vijay.
 
The_Odd_One said:
How do you rate Habib ul Bashar?
Click to expand...

Habibul Bashar retired before I really started to understand the game really well.

However, from what I have seen, Bashar was a decent player with limited skills. A good batsman in tests, scored many 50s for the side. A few hundreds. Perhaps the only decent batsman we had between 2001-2006. We had Ashraful, Aftab, Mashud who weren't bad but hardly consistent.
 
Executioner said:
Habibul Bashar retired before I really started to understand the game really well.

However, from what I have seen, Bashar was a decent player with limited skills. A good batsman in tests, scored many 50s for the side. A few hundreds. Perhaps the only decent batsman we had between 2001-2006. We had Ashraful, Aftab, Mashud who weren't bad but hardly consistent.
Click to expand...

I remember he scored heavily in a test series in Pakistan.
 
Dios said:
Vijay's average falls below 40 again. 39.15 now.
Click to expand...

would like to reply you on your own tune which you used for pakistan

"""Should we wait till Ban vs Nz test series is over than we will see who is better at the moment Murali is very good in away test"""""
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Hitman
Tamim Iqbal discharged from hospital after cardiac arrest [UPDATE@ POST#95]
2
Replies
94
Views
2K
BouncerGuy
BouncerGuy
Unbiased-Fan
Bangladesh All Time Test XI
Replies
10
Views
892
BouncerGuy
BouncerGuy
BouncerGuy
“We requested Babar Azam to come in at number three however, he was keen to play an opener”: Salman Iqbal (Owner of Karachi Kings)
Replies
74
Views
2K
shariqnoor
shariqnoor
Savak
  • Poll Poll
Who is a more mentally tough and resilient cricketer? Babar Azam or Mohammad Rizwan?
Replies
62
Views
2K
Greenstorm
Greenstorm
T
Imran Khan vs Curtly Ambrose vs Dale Steyn vs Wasim Akram – Who is the better Test bowler?
Replies
20
Views
911
Fanboy375
Fanboy375
Back
Top