Quite shocking neglect on my part to fail to mention that.SJS said:Yes, the same is not true for Zimbabwe. I dont thinmk they were granted test status earlier than they deserved. They have become minnows !!
Did'nt this Young Bangladesh Team beat the Mighty Indian Team with pants down in the 2nd ODI? How could Ganguly's Team lost to this weak (according to your assessment) Team?SJS said:There has been a lot of talk on this forum of how the other teams were equally weak when they got test status as bangladesh are proving to be today. This is totally incorrect and disproved by facts. To look at the win and how many years it took for a win to come is shortsidedness.
1) Much fewer matches were played in those days.
- For example, India played only 24 tests in the twenty years that they took to register their first win.
2) While they may not have won many tests, but they competed very well and had some world class individual performance.
- For example, India had, before their first testvictory, 19 test centurions and 11 five for hauls(in 23 tests !!)
- Three of their batsmen had test averages in the fifties and another 6 in the forties !! I can quote similar performances from other sides like New Zealand and South Africa.
3) While they did not win, they drew many games and put the top sides under pressure many times. Look at their stats before they won the first test...
COUNTRY......TESTS......LOST.......DRAWN.....Loss %
NZLAND...........44..........22............22................50
INDIA..............24...........12............12...............50
SRI LANKA.......13............8..............5........ ......61
ZIMBABWE.......10............4.................6.............40
B DESH..........33...........31...............3.......... 90+
Note: South Africa lost 10 out of their first 11 tests but then went on to win 4 of the next five !!
So clearly Bangla Desh are out of their league and were brought into the test fold much earlier than they deserved if being able to compete with the other test sides was a criteria. as it was for the others.
I remember, we used to have unofficial tests between India and Ceylon (now Sri Lanka) before they were granted test status, and they gave us a bloody good fight. I still remember some excelent players like Michael Tissera who would have walked in to the Indian side, Tennakoon and others.
Similar unofficial tests were played , before even I was born !!) before India was granted test status and so good were these England sides and so creditably did the Indians perform that when discussing the great Indian all time cricketers I have often heard people saying that those cricketers must also be included since their performances in these 'unofficial' tests were no lesser.
Where was that caliber and that testing by fire done for Bangla Desh.
Yes, the same is not true for Zimbabwe. I dont thinmk they were granted test status earlier than they deserved. They have become minnows !! Because of their rascist selection policies. If their best teams were selected, they were probably the fastest improving test side in the world and were already giving a very tough fight to the older nations.
In fact, Bangla Desh's win would have taken much longer to come but for the 'dishonourable' Mr Mughabe.
one swallow does not make a summer....one day match form is extremely fickle and they had also beaten pakistan in the world cup so what? does it prove that they are as good as india and pakistan? not by a loooooong shot, it doesn't. do their victories over a woefully depleted zimbabwe side prove that they have finally arrived on the world scene? no it doesn't. when they stop getting thrashed consistently on the test arena(forget winning, i will take competing on a consistent basis) by the good teams, then they would've begun their arrival....till then all that "new dawn" talk is just another false dawn...cisco-guy said:Did'nt this Young Bangladesh Team beat the Mighty Indian Team with pants down in the 2nd ODI? How could Ganguly's Team lost to this weak (according to your assessment) Team?
Did'nt the 20 yrs old Mohammad Ashraful beat the crap out of every Indian Bowlers with his unbeaten 156 runs? What do you have to say about that?
You like it or not, a new dawn has begun for the BD Cricket and only future will tell where we stand.
Nobody is saying that. Read my lines and stop barking!!!Anil said:one swallow does not make a summer....one day match form is extremely fickle and they had also beaten pakistan in the world cup so what? does it prove that they are as good as india and pakistan? .....
chaminda_00 said:BD have improved and they probably would of beat a full strength ZIM team. People do forget they do have 4 centurions to their name. But i still believe they would improve more by playing teams like Scotland, Kenya and the 'A' Teams, rather then the Test Sides. I don't think test cricket is the place fro teams to grow, InterCont. Cup and ICC Trophy are, but their isn't enough games played in those cups and their not frequent enough.
I don't think there is a perfect situation, u drop them from Test Cricket they play no games. But if u keep them in Test Cricket they wouldn't improve as much, and the teams below them will not improve as much. ICC have to find a second level of cricket for the emerging nations, were they play frequently, this current situation doesn't work for emerging nations or establisted countries.
crickmate said:this is what I would say a good constructive comment.
While I agree with most of the part of Chaminda, But I would like to mention one thing, if the current system worked for India ,Srilanka, newzealand, why not Bangladesh. They have been playing competitive cricket for last two years. Give them some time.
QUOTE]
It could work of BD but u have to remember back when the others were developing the standard below was so bad, they needed to play Test Cricket to improve. Whereas now BD can still improve without playing Test Cricket as the other emerging nations are also strong, to a certain degree. Could u imagine how the other emerging nations would improve if give regular games aganist BD and ZIM.
crickmate said:this is what I would say a good constructive comment.
While I agree with most of the part of Chaminda, But I would like to mention one thing, if the current system worked for India ,Srilanka, newzealand, why not Bangladesh. They have been playing competitive cricket for last two years. Give them some time.
Bangladesh has better cricket infrustructure than Zimbabwe. And believe me many more youngstars like Enamul, Mortaza, Ashraful are on the pipeline. The current board and selection commitee working more on A team and under 19 team to get the quality player out of them. They just had a speed hunt program and selected 7 fastest pace bowlers from the whole country. Now they will undergo training on differenct countries.
The enthusiasm and love Bangladeshi people have towards cricket will have them stand out of all other team. Just wait 3 years(who knows, maybe less).
Maybe 2011 their side is many between the ages of 19 to 23, most players don't reach their peak until their late 20sdudeurfriend said:Bangladesh are gelling well together as a team and by 2007 worldcup they would be a very good team.........
So does Scotland but does that mean their going to be competitive in the next world cup, probably not. It would be a while after the next world cup that the BD players do reach their potenial, they will still be quite young at the next world cupdudeurfriend said:Bangladesh have a line up with lot of talented players..... They can perhaps be a good side when they get more experienced..... Consistency is really what Bangladesh lacks...... Bangladesh for sure will be a competitive team atleast by 2007.....