DHONI183
A departed friend who will live in our memories fo
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2007
- Runs
- 24,842
- Post of the Week
- 8
Although it hardly matters in the grand scheme of things, and even Mahmudullah would hardly have been thinking about, but in what terms was his century/innings any lesser than Shakib? I know the latter effected a run out too, but you can´t be telling me that that was the tiebreaker in deciding the award? Also, neither was Shakib´s bowling performance (52 for none in 10 overs) anything to write home about!
Again, it may hardly matter, but the accolade is there for a reason and the scorecard of any past or current match reflects one standout performer through that. Both should´ve been rewarded for such an unbelievable partnership, given especially the fact that they both played an equal role and had an equal share of the partnership at similar strike-rates.
Not only yesterday, it´s something that has been an issue even in the past. The World Cup final 2011 comes to my mind, which should´ve been split between Gambhir and Dhoni.
As I raised the point in another thread some time ago, another problem with these awards is that they heavily favour batsmen, especially a century-maker. Often, instead of recognising the hard-work of a bowler who´s taken three or four wickets on a bowlers´ graveyard, a batsman making a century on a batting paradise is preferred. Occasionally at least they could think of splitting it between the two.
Regardless, wow, just wow Bangladesh! I love the fighting spirit of the tigers and love their supporters too. Their amongst my favourite teams right now. On a tough-ish pitch and with so many wickets lost earlier on, many of the top teams would´ve crumbled under pressure, but it was one hell of a fightback, and one of the greatest partnerships ever in ODIs. Watching the match live, with 60-70 still to get, I told my father that Shakib may play a false shot and throw it away, Mahmudullah won´t. He was a big culprit for what happened in Bangalore a year ago and he would´ve learnt his lesson, and so it happened. Although, neither did Shakib throw it away as by then the match had been won, almost.
Nasser Hussain´s "The mighty Bangladesh" comment is etched on my memory forever.
Again, it may hardly matter, but the accolade is there for a reason and the scorecard of any past or current match reflects one standout performer through that. Both should´ve been rewarded for such an unbelievable partnership, given especially the fact that they both played an equal role and had an equal share of the partnership at similar strike-rates.
Not only yesterday, it´s something that has been an issue even in the past. The World Cup final 2011 comes to my mind, which should´ve been split between Gambhir and Dhoni.
As I raised the point in another thread some time ago, another problem with these awards is that they heavily favour batsmen, especially a century-maker. Often, instead of recognising the hard-work of a bowler who´s taken three or four wickets on a bowlers´ graveyard, a batsman making a century on a batting paradise is preferred. Occasionally at least they could think of splitting it between the two.
Regardless, wow, just wow Bangladesh! I love the fighting spirit of the tigers and love their supporters too. Their amongst my favourite teams right now. On a tough-ish pitch and with so many wickets lost earlier on, many of the top teams would´ve crumbled under pressure, but it was one hell of a fightback, and one of the greatest partnerships ever in ODIs. Watching the match live, with 60-70 still to get, I told my father that Shakib may play a false shot and throw it away, Mahmudullah won´t. He was a big culprit for what happened in Bangalore a year ago and he would´ve learnt his lesson, and so it happened. Although, neither did Shakib throw it away as by then the match had been won, almost.
Nasser Hussain´s "The mighty Bangladesh" comment is etched on my memory forever.
. It´s like saying that Ellyse Perry can´t field at third-man because the position is for a man 
. It´d be literally idiotic if they don´t split it based on the linguistic value of the phrase.
, don't know why they dont do it anymore.
