Shakib Al Hasan vs The Great All Rounders

[Zinzan]

I don't claim to have watched the tests where Shakib got those 5fers in SA, but a cursory glance at the scorecard shows that:

- in one of the tests, Shakib took 6/99. This included a spell where he took the wickets of Kallis, Amla and de Villiers in the space of 4 overs to reduce SA to 134/5. At this point, SA still trailed Bangladesh's first innings by 120. This is the complete opposite of a useless spell.

2nd Test: South Africa v Bangladesh at Centurion, Nov 26-28, 2008 | Cricket | ESPN Cricinfo

- The other one had him take 5-130 in the first innings. SA were 352-3 and eventually ended up 441 allout, with Shakib basically single handedly responsible for SA losing 7 wickets for 85.

1st Test: South Africa v Bangladesh at Bloemfontein, Nov 19-22, 2008 | Cricket | ESPN Cricinfo

That Bangladesh are a **** team and could only get like 150 in their innings that followed doesn't render his spell useless from a performance standpoint. It wasn't a spell in the second innings where the opposition are going for declaration runs. It's in the first innings when the match is still alive. If he'd got all his wickets after SA were 500+, I'd agree but here he clearly kept the game alive when SA could easily have stomped their way to 600.

Again, I didn't watch the matches and I don't have any idea how well Shakib actually bowled but even a brief look at the scorecard makes it clear his two 5fers weren't anywhere close to being written off as "useless". You wanted context, there it is.

I'll grant you the big 3 wickets to reduce them to 130/5 at a glance, but not from 352/4 to be all at for nearly 450, doesn't sound all that impressive and could have been some reckless batting for quick runs.... but as you say we need to know more. While you're right it's not Shakib's fault Bangers overall batting was useless, all I really see at a high level about those two returns is SA got 400+ in both matches, which regardless of which way you dice it does take the gloss off a 5-fer, as I said I'd say exactly the same if it was Murali you were citing for those performances.

 

[honestbharani]

I'll grant you the big 3 wickets to reduce them to 130/5 at a glance, but not from 352/4 to be all at for nearly 450, doesn't sound all that impressive and could have been some reckless batting for quick runs.... but as you say we need to know more. While you're right it's not Shakib's fault Bangers overall batting was useless, all I really see at a high level about those two returns is SA got 400+ in both matches, which regardless of which way you dice it does take the gloss off a 5-fer, as I said I'd say exactly the same if it was Murali you were citing for those performances.

Issue is, people who have seen those performances do rate it high. And I think the second instance is a bit like Jadeja's effort at Ranchi in the first innings. If Karun Nair was not a **** and not dropped a simple catch and a couple of umpire's calls went this way, it would have been a match winning spell. Never under rate a spell that ensure opposition make 450 or lesser on a 500 par kinda pitch.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Can someone dig up the match report then? Can't do it on mobile because the site is a cluster****.

 

[Zinzan]

Issue is, people who have seen those performances do rate it high. And I think the second instance is a bit like Jadeja's effort at Ranchi in the first innings. If Karun Nair was not a **** and not dropped a simple catch and a couple of umpire's calls went this way, it would have been a match winning spell. Never under rate a spell that ensure opposition make 450 or lesser on a 500 par kinda pitch.

I'll have to take your word for it, it was a decade ago now when he first started. As I said to TH a page back, the good news is he's due to play 4-5 tests against the toughest opposition for a SC player in the next 12 months, so those of us with reservations how he'll go against the top sides outside of those mud-heaps in Bangers will find out very soon.

 

[cnerd123]

Wait, why is cricket happening in the future needed to clear your reservations of what he has done in the past?

You have eyewitness accounts of people who watched his spells in the past + analysis of the scorecard from OS showing the value of his performance. You had reservations just based off scorecards, were given evidence to support that his spells were infact good, and respond to that saying you still have reservations but it's 'good news' that he has an opportunity to clear those in the future?

I don't understand you.

 

[OverratedSanity]

SA are an excellent team and Shakib clearly had an excellent tour there by any standard, on the bowling front atleast.

There have been precious few spinners who have gone to SA and had even a decent tour in recent times.

 

[viriya]

Zinzan you are being way too nitpicky here.

 

[honestbharani]

I'll have to take your word for it, it was a decade ago now when he first started. As I said to TH a page back, the good news is he's due to play 4-5 tests against the toughest opposition for a SC player in the next 12 months, so those of us with reservations how he'll go against the top sides outside of those mud-heaps in Bangers will find out very soon.

But see, there are a number of spinners who have not performed in those said mud heaps. Case in point - Shane Keith Warne.

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

When was the last time he was man of the series? Isn't that a good yardstick?

 

[Zinzan]

Wait, why is cricket happening in the future needed to clear your reservations of what he has done in the past?

You have eyewitness accounts of people who watched his spells in the past + analysis of the scorecard from OS showing the value of his performance. You had reservations just based off scorecards, were given evidence to support that his spells were infact good, and respond to that saying you still have reservations but it's 'good news' that he has an opportunity to clear those in the future?

I don't understand you.

Because it's a tiny sample set, and as I've repeated, SA scored 400+ in both those innings, which for the 100th time, does take gloss off 5-fers when the opposition score big, especially when team in question are so far ahead of the opposition that it could be that they start playing recklessly.

What's the big deal that I have reservations based on the only evidence being those two tests from 2008? Perhaps I am underrating him, I certainly thing he's a fine cricketer, just don't think he should be compared with ATG allrounders at this stage, and certainly don't think he should be at the 2.5 tier as someone suggested.

Excellent performances against those 2 sides in particular in the next 12 months might change my view of where he ranks.

 

[Zinzan]

Zinzan you are being way too nitpicky here.

Nitpicky about what? Not calling him Sobers and Miller mark II? Read the thread, I'm not the only one who doesn't think he's as high as tier 2-3 in the ATG status.

 

[AndyZaltzHair]

Honest question :

What's a bigger challenge? Facing the England attack at home or facing Herath in Sri Lanka? Shakib just won a match for his country doing the latter,yet if he'd scored runs against England at home that would somehow prove more? How? Someone is going to have to explain that to me.

I'm fine with people saying he hasn't played against the best teams enough, but there doesn't seem to be enough appreciation for him having owned Herath in his own conditions, which is about as big a challenge in cricket right now as any other.

Its going to be dismissed as flat track.

Re Shakib's double. Santner dropped a dolly early on and although I watched the innings with some intervals, it looked ok to me. His problem started after that innings iirc and looked hack ish

 

[thierry henry]

Here's the good news; we'll very soon find out since barring injury he will face both those sides in their backyard in the not too distance future, hence why I'm reserving my judgement before comparing him to players who consistently faced the tops sides of their eras.

But you won't find out, because 1-2 series doesn't and shouldn't define his career. How many tests total will he be playing on those tours?

The guy has been playing test cricket for a DECADE ffs. The idea that we evaluate the value of that decade through the lens of whatever he happens to do in 4 or 5 tests one summer against our chosen opponents is just total crap.

 

[Burgey]

There's no doubt he's a good cricketer. It is hard to rank him given the opposition he's played against, though as ***** said that's hardly his fault. Hopefully he plays in all sorts of conditions against all sorts of sides before the inevitable decline and we can get a good appreciation of where he stands.

Worst part of all this is agreeing with *****.

 

[Burgey]

But you won't find out, because 1-2 series doesn't and shouldn't define his career. How many tests total will he be playing on those tours?

The guy has been playing test cricket for a DECADE ffs. The idea that we evaluate the value of that decade through the lens of whatever he happens to do in 4 or 5 tests one summer against our chosen opponents is just total crap.

Yeah but against whom, for the most part? Come on.

 

[Athlai]

Yeah but against whom, for the most part? Come on.

All-round records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

Goes alright

 

[Burgey]

Jesus Christ that list has Moeen Ali, Shane Watson and Ravi Ashwin on it. FMD it's slim pickings in the all rounder stakes these days since Mr Temazepam retired.

 

[Athlai]

You probably don't like the same music as kids these days either.

 

[Bijed]

All-round records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

Noted test all-rounder Peter Siddle.

 

[Burgey]

Nah I like a lot of it actually. Have to listen to a fair bit of it given I have teenage twins. There's just some pretty ordinary players in that list of "all rounders". Then again I grew up in the 80s and at that time we were spoilt for them at historic levels.