Cricket Player Manager
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 31 to 37 of 37

Thread: WI v Bangladesh

  1. #31
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by Swervy
    i do agree that bangladesh were given test status early..but you have to remember NZ started tests in 1929..they didnt win a test until 1955/56 (45th test)..before which they averaged 24 runs per wicket and conceded 42 runs per wicket taken..and when they beat the WI in the 1979/80 series, that was only their 11th test win of all time.

    Sri Lanka only won 1 test in their first 5 years of being a test playing team..and even after 10 years were still a very poor team.

    These things do take time..I am sure that in 20 years time we will look back and wonder how we could have ever doubted it was the right choice to let them in..because I think they may well be right up there with the better teams by then.
    Things were rather different in those days!
    Cricket has changed - you need far, far, far, far, far, far more gradual introduction now than you did even in the 80s.
    I'm sure Bangladesh must have played far, far more Test-cricket than New Zealand did. Let alone a massive amount more ODI-cricket without looking like becoming a force.
    RD
    Appreciating cricket's greatest legend ever - HD Bird...............Funniest post (intentionally) ever.....Runner-up.....Third.....Fourth
    (Accidental) founder of Twenty20 Is Boring Society. Click and post to sign-up.
    chris.hinton: h
    FRAZ: Arshad's are a long gone stories
    RIP Fardin Qayyumi (AKA "cricket player"; "Bob"), 1/11/1990-15/4/2006

  2. #32
    International Captain Swervy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    An Aussie with a Lancashire accent living in Keighley,West Yorks
    Posts
    7,360
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard
    Things were rather different in those days!
    Cricket has changed - you need far, far, far, far, far, far more gradual introduction now than you did even in the 80s.
    I'm sure Bangladesh must have played far, far more Test-cricket than New Zealand did. Let alone a massive amount more ODI-cricket without looking like becoming a force.
    you might be right!!!
    but why does a team need a more gradual introduction now compared to the 80's?
    rave down, hit the ground


    MSN: djjacksono@hotmail.com

  3. #33
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Cricket is more scientific (!), professional, ordered and technical now than it was even just 20 years ago.
    Sri Lanka's case shows this IMO. They didn't take too long to become worth their salt.

  4. #34
    International Captain Swervy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    An Aussie with a Lancashire accent living in Keighley,West Yorks
    Posts
    7,360
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard
    Cricket is more scientific (!), professional, ordered and technical now than it was even just 20 years ago.
    Sri Lanka's case shows this IMO. They didn't take too long to become worth their salt.
    thats a fair point...but i dont know how Sri lanka fits into that, they were pretty damned poor for a long long time..


  5. #35
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    They had Brendon Kurappu (a wicketkeeper with no particular brilliance with the bat) scoring a 200 (in the days when this was still a really special achievement) within about 6 or 7 years of their elevation.
    Albeit they only really looked like they could beat anybody (at home) with the emergence of Murali.

  6. #36
    International Captain Swervy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    An Aussie with a Lancashire accent living in Keighley,West Yorks
    Posts
    7,360
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard
    They had Brendon Kurappu (a wicketkeeper with no particular brilliance with the bat) scoring a 200 (in the days when this was still a really special achievement) within about 6 or 7 years of their elevation.
    Albeit they only really looked like they could beat anybody (at home) with the emergence of Murali.
    they had much better batsmen than Kangaroopoo...Sidath Wettimuny and Roy Dias...and Duleep Mendis was a great hitter...it was the bowling though that on the whole was very very poor until as you say Murali came along

  7. #37
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Exactly - that Kurappu wasn't their best player says something!

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Bangladesh Cricketer Dies
    By Dark Hunter in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 21-06-2004, 04:22 AM
  2. *Official* Bangladesh in Namibia and Zimbabwe
    By Pratters in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 124
    Last Post: 15-03-2004, 01:58 PM
  3. Bangladesh Finally Won A Match !!!!
    By Legglancer in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: 14-03-2004, 09:52 AM
  4. *Official* Bangladesh vs Australia Series
    By age_master in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 255
    Last Post: 06-08-2003, 02:59 AM
  5. Waugh on Bangladesh
    By Tim in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 16-05-2003, 08:47 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •