Bangladesh goes missing

With the second round of the 10^th edition of the world cup being over, it is just fascinating to see that all three teams from the sub-continent have qualified to the semi-finals of the tournament. This has happened for the first time and teams had come close to doing so in the 1987 world cup where Pakistan and India had qualified for the semi-finals with Sri Lanka being just as good as today's Bangladesh and Bangladesh being absent from world cups. Perhaps! Had Bangladesh been a little decent, may be New Zealand would have missed out from entering the semi-finals.

If one can take pains to go to the recent past, Bangladesh have beaten whitewashed the Kiwis 4-0 on their recent tour to the sub-continent nation. They managed wins against Ireland and England when all odds were against them all these in addition to a win that was guaranteed against Holland. Bangladesh had equal number of wins as had West Indies with three wins each. It would not have been a mismatch had they won against the Caribbean country, with both teams standing an equal chance to come out victorious. May be that was the reason for the fans' anger which resulted in them pelting stones on the team bus.

With the match against West Indies being played on home soil, Bangladesh should have made that one count but which was however not the case whatsoever. Moreover, Bangladesh rather than winning the contest against the West Indies, made it look half dead with the home team losing all ten wickets for 58 runs on the board. Bangladesh managed to pile up 283 runs in the opening encounter against India when they were chasing 371 to win and didn't end up losing all ten wickets. This proves the Bangladeshis caliber not to panic under pressure. Neither was their performance any bad against the remaining teams barring RSA.

The debacle against South Africa can well be understood but not the one against West Indies. Now, the remaining three teams from the sub-continent qualifying to the quarter-finals, it would have been a delight to see Bangladesh as well in the contest. Of course, Bangladesh would not have made it to the semis with either Pakistan or Bangladesh having to quit after the quarter-finals. Previously, in the 1996 world cup, all three teams from the sub-continent had qualified to the quarter-finals and two among them went to the semi-finals. Bangladesh were yet to make their international appearance and even if they did, their dreams would not have been beyond the league stages.

Should this mean that I should look out for some jophilsuperman stuff? Not at all.

Bad grouping of teams evident from the quarter final line up

Well keeping in mind the quarter finals of the world cup, this just seems to be a mismatch with Pakistan not only having an upper hand against the Caribbean but also the West Indies might never ever be able to regroup once the quarter finals against Pakistan be over in the next 8 hours to come. Also the other side would be Sri Lanka who are scheduled to face England on Saturday. No doubt that both these teams would enter with minimum or no effort into the semi-finals of the world cup. But, is this right on the part of the ICC is a million dollar question.

There is no particular team like the Aussies in the past two world cups to have a birthright on the world cup. And neither have Bangladesh and Zimbabwe been underdogs as they have been expected. But, if things are given a close look at, it looks that group A is gifted with weaker teams compared to group B. Group A has two teams from the sub-continent namely Sri Lanka and Pakistan who always have an upper hand being the hosts and enjoying home like conditions. I all blame it on Australia to have deceived the ICC who came out with such grouping of teams.

In group B, only India is a team worth having anyone's bet into. Though South Africa have emerged on the top of the table, it was India who gifted them with a victory by losing 9 wickets for 28 runs with all odds predicting a 350+ total at the end of the Indian innings. Added to that, there were mismatches in England's games against Ireland and Bangladesh which reduced England's chances that in turn favored South Africa to end as the top team. Had England won against Ireland and Bangladesh, they would have been on the top and not the Proteas.

Teams like Zimbabwe, Kenya, Canada and Holland never made their presence felt. However, Ireland and Bangladesh did. Both Ireland and Bangladesh were far superior compared to Kenya, Canada and Zimbabwe in group A. One has to take a deeper look to Explore reality. West Indies on the other hand proved a 2^nd chance for teams like England and India. In group A, All four teams played to their potential with minnows aside. Pakistan beat Australia which in turn beat New Zealand. If I was in place of Lorgat, I'd have put Australia in group B and South Africa in group B and Bangladesh in group A while Zimbabwe would have been in group B.

England play a spoilsport

Any random blog can now tel you where the English team now stands in the ongoing ICC world cup after losing to first Ireland and then yesterday to Bangladesh. I just had a bet that the West Indies might just flatter against Bangladesh for they were facing Bangladesh on their home soil and then the team is an outdated one after Brian Lara retired 4 years earlier. No one needs to feel sorry for England not being able to make it to the quarter finals in case they fail to do so. One can realize the fate of the team in earlier matches as well.

If one can take pains to go through the 2007 world cup, England's major win was only against the West Indies where they chased down 302 in the super eights. England failed in the games against Australia, Sri Lanka, New Zealand and South Africa. A win against Bangladesh and Ireland cannot be given such a preference which I suppose you will agree to. Of course, even West Indies' major triumph was against Pakistan in the league stages which was followed by a series of losses against Sri Lanka, Australia, England, New Zealand and South Africa. Now, England has a game only against West Indies to prove their myth.

I just cannot believe that England has secured a win against South Africa and a tie against India after seeing their performances against Ireland and Bangladesh. If Ireland comes in for all praises for coming back from being 111/5 at one stage to chasing down successfully 326, other finger points to the reckless bowling of the English bowlers who couldn't make the match theirs. If one could go through the match against Holland, England narrowly missed a defeat first after allowing them to pile up close to 300 runs and then failing initially during the chase. Did South Africa and India fare badly or did England play better cricket?

This has never been the case in the past where a team fares well against strong oppositions and goes for selfdestruction in the games against weaker teams. It would not come as a surprise if England fail to reach the quarter finals in case they lose to the West Indies because, West Indies is a weaker opposition like say Bangladesh and Ireland. A match against will always be considered a tie and not a win for England. Bangladesh now has three wins against England, Netherlands and Ireland which makes them eligible to qualify for the quarter finals. England on the other hand have only two wins and at a lesser run rate.

A bad format

I should have written this post long before the world cup began and my sincere apologies for not having done that earlier. I was just going through the fixtures of the world cup when something else struck my mind. Of course, it was nothing related to Balitang Kalye but was all related to the world cup itself and more precisely speaking the time table of the same. It is no doubt that the world cup has started well on time with the season being perfect for the mega event with chances of rain being comparatively less. But the same is not true regarding its fixtures.

As it has been the case since the 1996 edition (barring the 2007 edition), this time as well the teams have been divided into two groups with 7 countries in each group. Needless to be said, four from each group will advance to the quarter finals of the tournament. And that is where the problem starts which shows that the format is a lot unfair like it happened in the 1996 world cup. Unlike in the last three editions of the world cup, this time there are three knock out stages unlike it being two in the last three editions.

One can imagine the world cup held in the sub continent with the quarter finals in place. All teams from one group namely India, Sri Lanka, Australia and the West Indies qualified to the semi finals with none from group B advancing. Pakistan, South Africa, New Zealand and England had to end their world cup dreams there itself. Despite winning all five matches in the league stages, South Africa were forced to return home after losing to the West Indies who were outplayed by Kenya a couple of weeks earlier. So was the case with Pakistan who had lost only one game to South Africa before India shattered their dreams.

Finally the world cup was won by a team who didn't lose a single match en route to the finals. But, at the same time, Sri Lanka didn't play matches against the West Indies, Australia (in the league stage), Pakistan, South Africa and New Zealand. Doubts definitely would arise whether Sri Lanka would have emerged victorious had they played the aforementioned teams. The only major victories for Sri Lanka in that trophy was twice against India- one in the league stages and the other in the semis and the quarter finals against England and the finals against Australia. This also reduces the number of matches with most of the major encounters missing out.

Vacancy for a coach filled by Bangladesh

Well until now, the problem with Bangladesh cricket was that it could not find decent cricketers and now, even the vacancy for a coach has been a far from reality for the Bangladesh cricket Board. Nevermind that Bangladesh have been able to get a decent coach in Dav Whatmore who was the coach of the Sri Lankan team that won the world cup in 1996. Not only did Sri Lanka win the world cup in 1996, but also the Sri Lankan team ended up their world cup campaign without losing a single match in that edition. of course, there were two matches against Australia and West Indies which were forfeited.

Anyways, with that being a different issue altogether, coming to the subject of Bangladesh coach, all that can be concluded is that Bangladesh have successfully filled the void rather than looking out for a successful coach. At the same time, Bangladesh cricket board have made the name of the Essex fast bowler - Ian Pont be known to the entire world which was until then known only to England or may be only to Essex. This should not be a problem for players like Andy Flower and Tom Moody have been seen coaching the England and Sri Lankan team despite one coming from Zimbabwe and the other a lesser known Aussie.

However, Bangladesh deserve not to have a coach for, they were seen showing off their ego when they turned down the offer by the former West Indian fast bowler Colin Croft for his lack of experience as a coach. One has to check out the caliber of the present Bangladeshi coach - Ian Pont as to how successful has he been as a coach. Adding to that, Andrew Caddick was also not offered the job, but this time for better reasons that Andy had business interests at home. Likewise, Venkatesh Prasad was also in the line for the job but didn't happen to be so for reasons best known to him alone.

Now, the million dollar question is that can Bangladesh team benefit from the Essex player who will henceforth be coaching the national side? This is no real estate blog to define the returns but, as a cricket blogger, it would be worth citing the advance of Bangladesh team to the super eights of the world cup in 2007 though it would be more precise to say that India helped Bangladesh to advance further. And, the Kenyan team made it to the semis in 2003 once again at the cost of New Zealand when the Kenyan coach happened to be Sandip Patil - the one who coached India in 1996 world cup.

About Lance Klusner

Well a funny news has broken in the midst of all the ones covering the spot fixing controversies surrounding mainly the players from Pakistan that the former South African all rounder Lance Klusner has said "no" to the role of a Bangladesh coach. Very rarely does one come across the South African player who once upon a time gave it everything he could to the South African side way back in the 1999 world cup in England. Anyways, putting the past firmly behind, the current news which deals his rejection to the offer to be the Bangladesh coach should be a good move by Klusner.

Lance Klusner was offered the job which was done by a Sri Lanka in Champaka Ramanayake, the name which is being heard for the first time by most cricket followers. Champaka Ramanayake was forced to quit as the Bangladeshi coach owing to illness. It would have been an injustice and an insult to Lance Klusner, had he agreed to coach the Bangladeshi team for, that is the team which is placed in the bottom of the points table in all three formats of the game. And then, the BCB had approached Klusner not before approaching England's Andy Caddick, India's Venkatesh Prasad and West Indian Colin Croft.

Colin Croft was denied the job due to the fact that he was not experienced as a coach though the entire world has seen him as a fast bowler of the devastating West Indian team of the early 80s. He was the strike bowler of the then West Indies team that included the likes of Joel Garner, Andy Roberts, Michael Holding and Malcom Marshall. With such a bowler not being given the job to coach the team that as mentioned falls in the bottom of the ICC points table, having Klusner do the job should be out of the BCB's way.

Lance Klusner should have been approached first before Caddick and Croft if anyone would ask me. I had my InMailBox saying a dozen things about his denial but, the right thing to do was to see another option for Klusner with the ICL closing the gates permanently not only for Klusner but for itself some two years back. Klusner was not included in the South African squad for mare than 6 years in tests and ODIs despite being the front runner in the 1999 world cup. Klusner is the only player till date to have been awarded the man of the series in a world cup despite his team not being able to make it to the finals of the same.

Pakistan misses hattrick

Well it is not a big task for any team or a player can make it to the headlines of a cricket site or a cricket magazine but, it is the reasons for which the player or the team that has made news which takes precedence. And, needless to be said, Pakistan has made it to the headlines for the wrong reasons yesterday when they lost all their ten wickets for yet another score of less than 100. The score was one run less than 75 to be exact. And, this is the third time in the series out of eight innings Pakistan has played that it has been bowled out for a score less than hundred.

Not even Bangladesh or Zimbabwe have been able to do this no matter against which team they have played. Of course, I remember the West indies losing all their ten wickets for 47 on one occasion and 94 on the other during their tour of England 2004 which is famous for Brian Lara's epic knock of unbeaten 400 at Antigua in the fourth test. Even England last year against the West Indies lost al their ten wickets for a score of 51 to hand the West Indies a rare victory. This bought in some change, not to the West Indies who are at most time at the receiving end but to the viewers who would have gone sick watching West Indies lose.

Now, Pakistan have gone even further when they were bowled out for a score less than 100 on the fourth occasion in the last two months or so. They were bowled out for a score of 80 in the 1^st test against England at Nottingham and 72 in the 2^nd test at Birmingham which Pakistan lost by 9 wickets. Now, as if that were not enough, Pakistan have yet against been bowled out for 74 yesterday at London. Only three players from Pakistan were able to cross the double digit and thanks to the extras which did not score than the Pakistani batsmen.

Otherwise, it would be fascinating to see the extras having a hand in the top scorer of the match. As I had written in yesterday's post about Stuart Broad's innings with the bat despite coming in at number, now it is to be highlighted that Broad's score of 169 was more than twice of what the entire Pakistani batsmen could score that includes the extras as well. Stuart Broad played 297 ball that constituted close to 50 overs which was close to 17 overs more than what the entire Pakistani innings lasted. This was not even achieved by Bangladesh when they toured England recently. Instead of watching Pakistan play, I'd recommend you to Download Free e-books,games,movies,music(videos),softwares,tv shows,wallpapers from The Rapidshare Links World.

Is Pakistan making a home in England?

Well if the followers of cricket over the world are concerned, it is no surprise that the ongoing test series between England and Pakistan was supposed to be played in Pakistan with England touring the trouble torn country. And, in case that had happened, then obviously Pakistan would have had an upper hand compared to England with the home team advantage being well with Pakistan. Pakistan are no Bangladesh or West Indies to let go that advantage so easily and effortless. Pakistan have always been a tough opponent to beat on home conditions which is more so the case when it comes to test cricket.

Of course, this is true for all test playing nations barring Bangladesh and West Indies where home team may be more worse than the tour. And this time, Pakistan have proved England to be their new home when they did exactly not what was expected from them but what a home team is found doing- make life tough or even impossible for the opposition. And this cannot be a better opportunity than the ongoing ones against Australia and England. In fact, England being the home team were found in shambles in the third test against Pakistan a couple of weeks back.

Pakistan won the second test against Australia almost a month back and not only that, they were successful in dismissing the opposition for a score of 88 which speaks for Pakistan. That was also a test tour which was supposed to be played in Pakistan but thanks to the insecure situation there which forced the ICC to move the tournament out of the country. In fact, Pakistan won 3 out of the four matches that were scheduled in England against Australia during that tour. Pakistan won the two T20 games that were played prior to the two tests that followed.

Following this, though Pakistan lost the first two tests to England, it is an undisputed fact that England were hosting Pakistan and enjoys the home team advantage. England did bowl out the Pakistani side for a score less than 100 on two occasions when they (Pakistan) were found returning back to the pavilion with the scoreboard reading 72 on one occasion and 80 on the other. Then, Pakistan came back strongly in the third test and best England to atleast be alive in the series. Now, Pakistan have shown a better performance in the 4^th and final test to see them level the series.

If this happens, then England will be a home for both the teams and Pakistan can also avoid their homesickness when they've found a new home in England. They can now celebrate their new found home like the one mentioned in Pretty in Pink. Just for fun.

My prediction turns true

Well as most of us might have predicted, India won the Asia cup after beating Sri Lanka and that too in Sri Lanka which was their yet again boring encounter between the two nations. As all of you might have known by now, this was the third time destiny has had India face Sri Lanka in the finals of an Asia cup for the third consecutive time since 2004 after it was reintroduced since 2000 which was won by Pakistan. But, unlike in the previous editions of the Asia cup, Sri Lanka never managed to do a U turn against India.

In the editions of the Asia cup in 2004 and 2008, India had beaten Sri Lanka in the league stages of the tournament prior to the finals and eventually lost their ground when it mattered in the big stage. But this time, India lost to Sri Lanka in the league stages of the tournament by 7 wickets but made it count in the match which would make a difference. Another interesting feat of the Asia cup final between the two nations is that the team that batted first won the match in all three editions since 2004 which brings out a similarity in the contest.

It would be worthless to go back to the editions of the Asia cup prior to 2004 with not much competition involved. Another thing to be noticed is that India has never hosted an Asia cup in this decade with the other three participants namely Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh having had their share of the tournament. Though Bangladesh has never been the favorites to win the cup let alone winning it, they have hosted the tournament in 2000 which was won by Pakistan. And, Sri Lanka have hosted the tournament twice in 2004 and this time in 2010 surprisingly.

Though any nation in today's cricket world thinks about a million times before touring Pakistan, Pakistan has had its share of hosting the multi team starer Asia cup in 2008. But, India as mentioned are yet to host one and no news of that happening even in the forthcoming editions is hinted. Despite rains prevailing most parts of the year in Sri Lanka, it comes as a surprise that Sri Lanka has hosted the tournament successfully twice as mentioned earlier. Well, it should not matter for a cricket lover wherever a tournament is hosted as long as the excitement lives. This can be true with Information Technology, Gadgets, IT news as well.

Malings speaks

Very rarely does someone like Lasith Malinga is found throwing out his words when he recently comments on the floodlights to be a nightmare for the team batting second. Whatever, this makes bloggers like me to pen more about the issue in the form of critics and opinions. However, Lasith Malinga partly has something when he says the above statement supporting the team batting second. Mosyt of the time it has been the team batting first that wins the game but, one has to definitely make it sure that it is not only because of the reason cited by Malinga.

History says that India won the finals of the Natwest series against England in 2002 by chasing a mammoth total of 326 under lights and so was India's successful run chase against the West Indies later the same year when they chased down 324 against the same. At the same time, the other three highest successful run chases by South Africa and twice by New Zealand happened to be under day light. Here, Malinga's words have an upperhand. Whatsoever, pressure does exist with the team batting second no matter whether it is under lights or not. And this was yet again proved when Pakistan failed to get past 243 runs.

Most of the captains choose to bat after they win the toss rather than to bowl. The one undue advantage that the team batting first gets is that they have two options in hand, out of which they can choose to do one which will see them through that game. When they bat first, either they can put up a decent score for the opposition to chase failing which will see the team batting first win the game. And, in case they fail to do that, they can either get the opposition out or restrict the opposition from crossing the barrier.

Whereas, for the team batting second, the only thing left is to chase down the total imposed by the team batting first and there can be nothing like restricting the team batting first for a less score. If course, totals less than 200 are tough to defend but, the team batting second always has the task of overhauling the score put up by the team batting first. The team batting 2^nd will have to overhaul the score set by the team batting first. However, in the past 8 - 9 years or so, there have been many cases of 300+ scores being chased unlike the three occasions in the 90s which included India & Australia over Pakistan and Sri Lanka over Zimbabwe.

One thing that would be worth mentioning here would be the fact that Malinga comes from the team where once the world cup winning captain Arjuna Ranatunga wins the toss and elects to field first in the finals of the 1996 world cup and still ends up winning the trophy.

A good decision by SLC

Well the Sri Lanka Cricket is found to make two major decision regarding the selection for the upcoming Asia cup. One the Sri Lankan selection committee has dropped the veteran opener but exhausted as well at the same time and then also has excluded Ajantha Mendis who, two years ago played a massive part in Sri Lanka's thumping win over India to win as well as retain the Asia cup which was held in Karachi a couple of years back. Of course, even Sanath Jayasuriya's role and contribution was not too less in the last two editions of the Asia cup.

Sanath Jayasuriya scored two hundreds in the Asia cups, both in 2004 and 2008 as well. Coincidentally, Jayasuriya's hundreds in both the editions mentioned came against Bangladesh and India in the second stage of the tournament. Sanath Jayasuriya scored one of the fastest hundreds of that time when he scored a 54 ball century against Bangladesh as mentioned above. However, I personally don't recommend Sanath Jayasuriya's name to be included in this year's Asia cup for reasons best known. One, Jayasuriya who is now aged 40 is not only old but is also too exhausted to be part of the squad.

And secondly, Jayasuriya not only has been off from his blasting days of glory in recent times but was also dropped by the selectors and the captain. Sanath Jayasuriya was dropped for major part of the Indian Premier League earlier this year may be regarding his trouble over his age by Sachin Tendulkar who himself had forgotten that his age was also moving towards dawn by time. That apart, in the world T20 held at the Caribbean, none of the scores Jayasuriya put forwards could prove his myth as a hard hitting batsman that he was some 4 years back.

Finally, Jayasuriya was dropped for the triangular series recently involving India and Zimbabwe in Zimbabwe which Sri Lanka won at the cost of a depleted Indian team led by Suresh Raina. Sanath Jayasuriya now holds the record for two out of the top ten fastest hundreds in one day internationals but still deserves to relax with his wife and kids. He holds the world record for hitting the maximum number of sixes in ODI but is made to sit at a place where the ball lands when it is hit for a six. He holds the record for 2^nd highest run getter and 3^rd highest scorer and 2nd highest number of ODIs played. But......time is up.

Too early for Saurabh Tiwary

Well, he has just crossed 20 years of age and his name is finalized for the upcoming Asia cup that involves Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh in addition to India. And, the fact that Saurabh Tiwary is chosen by resting Sachin Tendulkar should no doubt make him feel even more great. One need not question the dropping of Yuvraj Singh and resting Sachin Tendulkar for one of the most important series - the Asia cup. This is the cup that will term the strongest team in the subcontinent and luckily, the ICC is found to have made it a regular affair like the Ashes.

This is the fourth Asia cup since 2000 and as mentioned, one can hope this to be a regular event in the ICC's international calender that would take place once in two years. This was not the case previously, when there was one such event in 2000 and another in 2004 and the next in 2008 with a gap of 4 years inbetween. And this one in 2010 has happened after a gap of two years. However, that apart, coming to the inclusion of Saurabh Tiwary, one has to think whether that was a decent choice or not, for the lad has got a long way still.

For the sake, one has to recall the way Parthiv Patel was bought into the international arena which also saw him make it to the world cup in 2003 held in South Africa where India had their 2^nd final. But Parthiv Patel was not the part of the playing eleven despite there being no regular wicket keeper with Rahul Dravid doing the job for his team despite his lack of expertise in that field. And today, one can hardly recall who Parthiv Patel is. The only cricket that he plays is in the Indian Premier League where he has signed up for the Chennai Superkings. Still, one has to notice that Parthiv Patel is not made to keep wickets unless Dhoni goes off.

And, more than calling it a possibility, it is more than certain that Saurabh Tiwary will not be made to feature in the playing eleven. Similar cases have been seen regarding other players like Sourav Ganguly who made his international debut in 1992 only to become the permanent member of the Indian team in 1996 after the world cup. However, the lone player who can be kept out of the list is Sachin Tendulkar who despite making his debut at the age of 16 is still daring the bowlers and may be goes on for another world cup or so.

Was the resting of players justified?

I can still remember the way India lost the second one dayer to Bangladesh in 2005 when the then captain Rahul Dravid decided to rest most of the experienced players by underestimating the Bangladeshi players and paid the price for the same by losing the match by 11 runs. In fact that was India's first ever defeat at the hands of Bangladesh. And now once again, the Indian selectors did the same mistake by resting all the players who are experienced thinking that it can bring out the best out of the youngsters. As a result of this, once again India paid the price.

India not only lost their final match against Sri Lanka but also lost two matches rather unexpectedly to Zimbabwe, the team against which a victory was assumed before hand by the Indians and failed to make it to the finals of the tri nation tournament. Until now, team India was ill fated when they used to enter the finals of a multi nation tournament and lose there. But now, they have failed to get past the league stage itself. All thanks to the selectors who not only gave the youngsters a chance but also gave Zimbabwe a chance to enter the finals of the tri nation tournament which it rarely deserves.

Despite not deserving to be there, Zimbabwe was seen in the super sixes of two world cups in 1999 and 2003. Anyways, with that being secondary, the matter of the hour is that the BCCI did nothing good by resting the seniors starting from Sachin Tendulkar to Mahendra Singh Dhoni. The team should have seen atleast a few of the experienced lads making it to the squad like yuvraj Singh, who would be making it to the playing XI after a long time snce he has battled injuries off late. So would have been the case with Gautam Gambhir and Virender Sehwag for whom this could have been a refresher series after their absence recently.

Following the series under discussion, there is a mega event scheduled with India taking on Pakistan and Sri Lanka in the Asia cup which happens once in every two years since it was decided in 2008. With the BCCI resting the experienced players, there is every possibility that the Asia cup may turn a nightmare for both the players as well as the BCCI in case India lose to either if the strong teams or not to be surprised, even Bangladesh. Added to this would be the T20 world cup ghost that would continue to haunt the Indian team wherever they go until they find a breakthrough.

Should this be believed?

Before starting, I would like to ask you what would be your reaction in case some anonymous person comes in and calls the Bangladeshi captain to under perform which no doubt is match fixing? Well, this made me laugh like anything and everything funny on earth. Why should one go and approach a Bangladeshi captain to under perform when Bangladesh are rated below in the ICC points table since their entry into international cricket? Of course, their performance against Ireland can be considered to be above average. But, still, who would go in to book a Bangladeshi captain to fix a match?

This is true if at all the news on the world's leading cricket website is anything to go by. The Bangladeshi captain Shakib-Al-Hasan was offered a sponsorship in case he under performs in a 3 match one day series against Ireland. The person does not approach any Australian player to under perform despite there being millions out there who would bet on Australia to win a match against any opposition. And, when Australia loses a match, there would be a large number of people who might end up losing their money which they would have bet favoring Australia. But that doesn't happen.

Of course, it is to be believed that Bangladesh are no longer the team they were which is more so since the past 5-6 years when they defeated India on their home ground. And Ireland will have surely been at the receiving end of the Bangladeshi ire when they tour under. Bangladesh would surely have an upperhand when they face Ireland on their home ground. But, should that attract a booker to pay some shit to a Bangladeshi captain to under perform? One has to think whether there are any taker to watch the match between Ireland and Bangladesh be it either at home or in stadiums?

And as it happens in all walks of life, the Bangladeshi captain Shakib-Al-Hasan bring this incident to light after two long years. Is this to see himself in the news or is he trying to attract everyone's attention to show that he is a dedicated and an honest cricketer? Like there are some players from Australia and our own Sreesanth who makes news by having an onfield slaught with his opponents. I wonder whether anybody outside Bangladesh knows of a match between the two countries mentioned. There'd be hardly any viewers when Bangladesh plays say Australia or South Africa irrespective of the venue.

With the huge cricket fan following, may be Indians might have a watch out for a tie with Bangladesh. Or else, Shakib-Al-Hasan is hardly been heard of or talked about.

Two sub-continent clashes on same day

Yesterday, may be for the first time in the history of the game the world saw four countries from the subcontinent battling it out there on the cricket field. There was a match between India and Afghanistan on one side with Pakistan taking on Bangladesh on the other side. This has so far not been the case either in the world T20 that happens once in two years or the world cup that happens once in 4 years. Much to anyone 's excitement, this has not happened even in the ICC Champions Trophy that takes place once in two years.

The only instance where there can be sub continent teams battling it out would be the Asia cup that consists no other teams but the ones from the sub continent. Until the entry of Afghanistan to the international arena, there were four teams namely Bangladesh, India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka but so far none of the four teams have played or qualified to the second round of any of the major ICC tournaments together. There is atleast two of the four teams missing out from the list. Most of the time, it would be Bangladesh who would crash out in the initial phase of the tournament.

And, despite deserving to qualify, atleast one from either Sri Lanka, Pakistan or India are found missing from the super sixes or the super eights - whichever is relevant. It was only in the world cup 1996 that all the three teams namely India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka qualified to the quarter finals of the tournament. But, sadly there was no encounter between Sri Lanka and Pakistan. Similarly in 1999 world cup, Sri Lanka failed to make it to the super sixes and in 2003 world cup Pakistan failed to go past the round robin stage. And in 2007, both India & Pakistan failed to make it to the super eights but surprisingly Bangladesh made it there.

With the format of the world T20 being so and also with grouping of teams, there can never be a possibility of all three or four subcontinent teams clashing with each other bound to happen. But, one thing that is to be noticed is that there will be atleast two games between two subcontinent teams like in world cups 1999 and 2003 India played both Sri Lanka and Pakistan. In 2007, India played both Sri Lanka and Bangladesh. In 1996, India played both Sri Lanka and Pakistan with Bangladesh not playing then. In both the T20 world cups, India, Sri Lanka and Pakistan have been qualifying to the super eights but with the group theory being followed, all three nations from the subcontinent can never think of playing each other.

England makes much of the last option

Finally, the Alistair Cook led England team could now breathe free with his team eventually grabbing a victory from the hosts - Bangladesh when they beat the same by 9 wickets at Dhaka yesterday. This was a sure victory for England no matter how bad the players fared. But, rather than calling this a victory for England, this can be referred to as a Bangladesh's loss or a lot of compromise from the English side which saw them settle for a 9 wicket victory when they should have won both the matches by an innings. However, this victory has to be a welcome one for they didn't lose or settle with just a draw.

England had won the first test at Chittagong by 181 runs which should have alerted them for taking the hosts for granted in case they did so. That was the match where Alistair Cook had to opt to bat once again despite having a lead of more than 300 runs in the first innings. This was the moment when Alistair Cook made it to the record books for the wrong reasons when he became the first captain not to have imposed a follow on upon Bangladesh despite having a chance to do so. Even that match should have been won by England by an innings and not by few runs as was the case.

Anyways, that apart, coming to the Dhaka test, if not for the 9 wicket victory, England had nothing else to take home. The other fact that England would be happy is that their spinner Graeme Swann leaped to the second position in the latest ICC test rankings for bowlers, no matter how he achieved this. Luckily, he was also awarded the man of the series when there were likes of Tamim Iqbal and Shakib Al Hasan. The man of the match was awarded to Shakib Al Hasan for his 4 wicket haul in the first innings which is needless to be said.

In the beginning, it was clear on the first day's play itself that there would be a fourth innings when Bangladesh put up a massive total as per their standards when they piled up 330 runs on the first day which went on to become 419 when the tenth Bangladeshi wicket fell. And then, there was some face saving work done by the English batsmen when they surpassed the 419 runs when they piled up 77 runs more than what the hosts could afford. Atleast then, England should have come back strongly upon the Bangladeshi batsmen which still was not the case when the Bangladeshi batsmen in their second innings also scored a total of 285 runs which was far ahead of their standard.

Finally, atleast a 10 wicket victory should have been made possible which still didn't happen. And, the last option was just to win in whatever way they could which they eventually did. Well England, Ashes are due in less than a year from now onwards.

Bangladesh betters England

Well finally, yesterday England come out victorious after beating Bangladesh by just 45 runs when the expected margin would have surely been more than a hundred runs. It is no big task for England to defeat or even whitewash some Bangladeshi team which is a known fact. But, at the same time, a strong team of the caliber like that of England would be expected to take the game totally away from Bangladesh with the standard of cricket in England given a closer look at. But, with England gasping for win in every match, some scrutiny is required I suppose before coming to conclusions.

In the 1^st one dayer at Dhaka, England did well to successfully chase down the target of 229 runs imposed by Bangladesh but not before the Bangladeshi opener Tamim Iqbal notched up a hundred and as a result was also awarded the man of the match. This was not before the England captain Alistair Cook bought in 7 of his bowlers to contain the Bangladeshi batsmen when just 3 to 4 bowlers of a strong team could have got the job done. Perhaps, had England taken the Bangladesh team lightly, they shouldn't have committed the same mistake yet again in the games that followed.

But, that never seemed so in the 2^nd as well as the 3^rd one dayers at Mirpur and Chittagong respectively. The games that followed the first one dayer happened to be worse than the one mentioned above. The second one dayer was the worst of them all when England won the match by just 2 wickets First of all the target of 260 that the Bangladesh team imposed on England was too much considering the status of both the teams. And then, winning the match by a small margin with just 7 balls to spare is another blunder which points fingers towards the English team.

There has been teams before as well who have been imposed a target of 250+ by Bangladesh, with the recent such instance being in the tri nation tournament that happened in January involving SL, India and Bangladesh where Bangladesh had 2 scores above 250. But, in both the cases the opposition also belted the Bangladeshi bowlers at will and took the game away from them in a one sided fashion. And in the 3^rd ODI, England could not even get all ten Bangladeshi wickets though they won the game by 45 runs. Scorecard suggests the involvement of almost all Bangladeshi batsmen enroute to their total of 239 at the end of the innings.

How a series against Bangladesh can count..

If the recently concluded one day series between Bangladesh and New Zealand is taken into consideration, scorecards of the matches suggests the way the performance of the New Zealand team has been deteriorating as the series progressed. In the first ODI at Napier, New Zealand were found playing the game with full excitement, when they beat the opposition by 146 after imposing a target of 339 to win and the Bangladeshi batsmen could hardly cross 200 runs on board. Then comes the 2^nd ODI at Dunedin where New Zealand reach the target of 185 in over 27 overs losing 5 wickets.

Then, in the 3rd ODI played at Christchurch, New Zealand as expected did beat Bangladesh by a margin which was in no means satisfactory. New Zealand lost 7 wickets en-route to their run chase of 244 runs for victory. In the first ODI, New Zealand did everything possible on earth to contain the Bangladeshi batsmen first to put up a mammoth score of 336 on the board and then bowl out Bangladesh for 190. Then, in the 2^nd ODI, the performance of the New Zealand team was comparatively below par. Though they won the game to take an unbeatable lead in the series, New Zealand should have bowled out the Bangladeshi batsmen all out; instead, Bangladesh played their full quota of 50 overs.

On the otherhand, New Zealand should have not lost 5 wickets to chase a target which was below 200. Finally, in the 3^rd ODI at Christchurch, New Zealand lost 7 wickets during their successful run chase of 241. For the first time in the tournament, Bangladesh could manage a total of more than 200. And, New Zealand had their worst win in the series when they lost 7 wickets. It is not an unknown fact that playing Bangladesh is just a formality and nothing else atleast as far as the New Zealand team is considered. But, now it is also a curse to play Bangladesh I suppose.

Hardly any team would take Bangladesh as a noted opposition though they are granted test status in international cricket. It is no big thing for any team to win or crush a team like Bangladesh. But, a loss against the same can make headlines. But, now a days, teams take a casual route to beat Bangladesh which at times are mistaken to be a tough fight imposed by Bangladesh which would not be the case actually. Teams have now started thinking wise when facing Bangladesh, with the batsmen thinking of playing some distinct shots against the Bangladeshi bowlers and the bowlers tossing the ball in a different manner to the Bangladeshi batsmen.

Teams rather than resting some of their key players have took to this sort of technique while facing Bangladesh. And, this could be more than a warm up game when New Zealand are set to face the Aussies next month.

Bangladesh touring just formally

If the ICC's tours table is given a close look at, one can see the way the minnows are sidelined. Nevermind that they can hardly draw crowds to the stadiums or provoke people to leave their jobs and watch them play on their television sets. However, if the first and the only T20 international between Bangladesh and New Zealand are considered, the series consists of just one T20 match that is followed by three one dayers and 2 test matches. Likewise, tours involving stronger teams would include 3 test matches five one day games and 2 T20 games off late.

Even if the recent past is considered, there have been series' between South Africa & England, Australia & Pakistan, India & Sri Lanka which consisted of 4 tests+5 ODIs+2 T20s, 3 tests+ 5ODIs+1T20 and 3 tests+5ODIs+2T20 games respectively. And Bangladesh were scheduled to play only 2 test matches against India on their home tour recently. Previous to that, Bangladesh played 5 one dayers against Zimbabwe, the result of which is not the million dollar question of the day whatsoever. Is it because Zimbabwe and Bangladesh stand at the same level in international that ICC plans schedules for Bangladesh in such a way?

It is an undisputed fact that Bangladesh are best suited for teams like Zimbabwe, Kenya etc who can make the Bangladeshis confident about their cricket. But, if that is the case, why did the ICC grant Bangladesh a test status when they hardly have been displaying some decent knocks even in T20 cricket. If the first and the only T20 game that was held at Hamilton yesterday is considered, as expected, Bangladesh could not win. That is not the issue here but, imagine a run rate of 4.45 in a T20 game. T20 game I suppose is the same for all teams including Bangladesh.

Bangladesh should have atleast played their full quota of 20 overs. Bangladesh are found to play better one day and test cricket compared to their test cricket. They have been able to defeat West Indies in the inaugural edition of the T20 world cup held at South Africa to enter the super eights. But in the next edition, they couldn't even pull a win against Ireland. They had to face the depleted West Indies team to register their first test series win other than the one against Zimbabwe. So was the case in their one day series' as well. This can be concluded that Bangladesh just want to keep playing cricket and win only when the opposition is weak.

Bangladesh comfortable against India

In the past one month or so, there have been three test series' namely the ones between South Africa & England, Australia & Pakistan and India & Bangladesh offlate. As expected, the winners were South Africa(morally), Australia and India respectively. Coincidentally, the three winners mentioned belong to the top three positions in ICC's test cricket ratings. However, the performance of the three winning teams do the opposite of what the ratings has to say. The top rated India have a last gasp victory against Bangladesh, the Proteas who are rated at the second position were better than India, first for coming close to winning matches on 2 occasions and winning the fourth test rather convincingly.

And Australia, who are placed at number 3 finished off their test series victory in style by (needless to be said) a 3-0 margin against Pakistan, with the second test victory being the highlight of them all. South Africa and Australia were hosting their opponents and India to be different was hosted by Bangladesh, which need not be highlighted specially. The 3^rd test between Australia & Pakistan and the 4^th test between South Africa & England ended in just 4 days while the one between India & Bangladesh went until the fifth and last day. All expectations turning upside down.

All would have kept their finger crossed regarding the series' between South Africa & England and Australia & Pakistan regarding the days the respective teams would emerge victorious. But, regarding India & Bangladesh, expectations regarding India drawing off a win well before 5^th day, which went on till the end of the 4^th day (which still was less than 5 days though). South Africa beat England by an innings and so would have Australia had Ponting imposed a follow-on. But, that was not-to-be regarding India. India should have beaten Bangladesh by an innings. Luckily, atleast India went on to win by 10- wickets.

India needed the efforts of the age old Sachin and Dravid to post a big total against a team which should have seen Dhoni resting the seniors and playing some younger talent. On the bowling part, a 10 year experienced Zaheer khan had to bail out India in the second innings, which should have been done by some Murali Vijay. Top scorer of the match turned out to be Bangladesh's Tamim Iqbal who scored 151 compared to Sachin's 143. Dhoni was forced to hand the ball to Sehwag & Yuvraj who were less an option in tests. One has to wonder as to what would have been the situation had India faced some stronger teams like Pakistan or England? And what if Dravid, Sachin & Zaheer not been in place?

One side of the coin also suggests that India might have taken the Bangladeshis lightly for which they had to compromise with a 10 wicket victory, which would have otherwise been an innings win. Also, Laxman and Sreesanth had to make a return trip sooner than their team mates that disturbed the combination. But, since the start of the tri series, one thing that is to be noticed is that Bangladesh have been comfortable facing India than any other team (Sri Lanka in this case).