All hail Shakib Al Hasan

[rtmohanlal]

37 minutes ago, Zero_Unit said:

isn't 5.5ish ish his usual eco rate? Either way, thats pretty decent for a spinner in ENG condition. What is your complain about exactly? You need quality bowlers from both end to put a stop at RR/Batsmen blasting away. Not just from one end, that too when it does not suite your condition.

His normal econ vs non minnows  is 4.7. From the other end Mehdi  has an econ: of 5.15 & Mossadek Hossain too has econ: of 6.2 .  So Mehdi & Mossadek combined has econ of lesser than that of Shakib in this world cup. Fizz though  has a bit larger econ  , was by far their successful bowler with  an avg: of  around 25   . Saifuddin too avg:Ed around  32. So  there were  basically 5 bowlers who were more or less of the same level of performance in  this world cup.

No complaint .... just that  what you told has no sense what so ever.

[Ajju]

And what BAN captain doing has been playing since ages but never seen his performance

[Gollum]

Also emphasizes how much easier it is to bat in top 3 in modern day ODIs. Shakib was merely decent at #4,# 5, #6 but at #3 he was next level. And here we have been so impatient with our #4 spot, possibly the toughest batting position, also with Jadhav who is much better than what he is being allowed to exhibit. 

[Zero_Unit]

14 minutes ago, rtmohanlal said:

His normal econ vs non minnows  is 4.7. From the other end Mehdi  has an econ: of 5.15 & Mossadek Hossain too has econ: of 6.2 .  So Mehdi & Mossadek combined has econ of lesser than that of Shakib in this world cup. Fizz though  has a bit larger econ  , was by far their successful bowler with  an avg: of  around 25   . Saifuddin too avg:Ed around  32. So  there were  basically 5 bowlers who were more or less of the same level of performance in  this world cup.

No complaint .... just that  what you told has no sense what so ever.

But that doens't paint the full picture. Shakib was used most of the time during the middle overs to contain the batsmen. Where as those guys mentioned got beat the crap out and picked up wickets in the death overs majority of the time. You should look up the avg of wickets BD picked up in the early innings/middle over vs late overs. I donno which WC you were watching but Fizz lost his fizz after the first IPL. He was bowling crap majority of this WC tournament.

[maniac]

54 minutes ago, I6MTW said:

I can see him playing in the 2023 World cup. That will be his last most probably. Thought, I doubt his form then will be anywhere close to the form he showed at this World Cup.

Next wc will be in SC where he is usually very good 

[maniac]

19 minutes ago, Ajju said:

And what BAN captain doing has been playing since ages but never seen his performance

He makes Dhoni and Gulbadan look more resourceful. That’s how useless he is

[Vijy]

11 hours ago, Gollum said:

What a WC !!!!! Easily cemented his status as ATG, IMO best ODI AR of this millennium and a sure shot HOFer.

 

 

606 runs, avg 87, SR 96, 2 100s 

11 wickets, avg 36, ER 5.4

 

 MOTM in all 3 matches BD won (RSA, WI, AFG) 

 

Most of Shakib's team mates failed, BD hopes rested on senior tiger who promptly stepped up, took responsibility and kept his side in the hunt, finishing the job himself more than once.

 

Massive massive respect to the Bangladeshi Bagh, surely must be among the greatest WC performances of all time? Where does he rank among the ATGs of this sport?

 

 

It was an outstanding performance but I rate it mostly for his superb batting. If we are honest, he was quite toothless with the ball against stronger teams - the 5-wkt haul against Afg is not all that good, since Afg has a better bowling than batting (where they kind of suck). I am not dismissing his achievement, but I feel that he did not do much with the ball against stronger teams that Bang needed to beat if they wanted to qualify. On the other hand, his batting was among the very best in WCs.

[Gollum]

3 hours ago, Zero_Unit said:

Watched as many WC matches as possible. Apart from the match vs aus, watched all their WC matches. Since their bowling sucked, players took less risk vs him and attacked other bowlers. This plays in for a major factor on why in some of the matches he went wicketless.

This. People who followed BD's matches will understand how Shakib was used, bowled mostly crucial overs or when his team was under the pump. His bowling stats don't do justice to how he went about his business and how much Mash relied on his overs, batsmen preferred to play him out eg the India match which I am sure all ICFers would have watched. IMO he bowled better than Chahal and with a bit of luck would have been among the top wicket takers as well. 

[Gollum]

6 minutes ago, Vijy said:

It was an outstanding performance but I rate it mostly for his superb batting. If we are honest, he was quite toothless with the ball against stronger teams - the 5-wkt haul against Afg is not all that good, since Afg has a better bowling than batting (where they kind of suck). I am not dismissing his achievement, but I feel that he did not do much with the ball against stronger teams that Bang needed to beat if they wanted to qualify. On the other hand, his batting was among the very best in WCs.

Don't go by numbers alone, his bowling wasn't toothless. Just that batsmen didn't take undue risks against him, rest of the bowlers were buffet. 

[Vijy]

7 minutes ago, Gollum said:

This. People who followed BD's matches will understand how Shakib was used, bowled mostly crucial overs or when his team was under the pump. His bowling stats don't do justice to how he went about his business and how much Mash relied on his overs, batsmen preferred to play him out eg the India match which I am sure all ICFers would have watched. IMO he bowled better than Chahal and with a bit of luck would have been among the top wicket takers as well. 

I think he was roughly on par with chahal, but I don't feel chahal bowled particularly well this WC (ditto kuldeep). As for batsmen playing him out, this happens to most players who carry the bowling solo like Murali, but the best bowlers still find a way of taking wkts. Of course, shakib is far lesser than murali (as a bowler), but I still believe that he slightly under-performed with the ball this WC. on the other hand, as I wrote in the above posts, he raised his game considerably with the bat and was magnificent.

 

If we had him in the Ind team, our balance would be perfect. Have Shakib at 4 and pandya at 6. Two ARs with contrasting roles.

Edited July 7, 2019 by Vijy

[rtmohanlal]

32 minutes ago, Zero_Unit said:

But that doens't paint the full picture. Shakib was used most of the time during the middle overs to contain the batsmen. Where as those guys mentioned got beat the crap out and picked up wickets in the death overs majority of the time. You should look up the avg of wickets BD picked up in the early innings/middle over vs late overs. I donno which WC you were watching but Fizz lost his fizz after the first IPL. He was bowling crap majority of this WC tournament.

cool down .... Shakib avg:s only 62 where Mehdi(51),Saifudin(32), Fizz(25) all avg:ed way better than him. BAN played 7 matches vs non minnows. That means 7*6 = 42 top order wickets(TOW). In all matches baring AUS(only  5 top order wkts fell)  all TOW fell. Baring  2 run outs, all TOW apart from 6, precisely  33 out of 39  were   taken by  bowlers other than Shakib.Even run outs can't be neglected as having not an effect because they too are wts any way.Also, 'a lot of wkts other than TOW' taken by other bowlers  too  can't be dismissed as pucca tailender wkts because  several of them like Grandhome,Fawad,Shadab, Courternile, Brathwhite etc etc avg:s in the 20s-30s with the bat.  So, all in all your claim does not make any sense

[Zero_Unit]

Just now, rtmohanlal said:

cool down .... Shakib avg:s only 62 where Mehdi(51),Saifudin(32), Fizz(25) all avg:ed way better than him. BAN played 7 matches vs non minnows. That means 7*6 = 42 top order wickets(TOW). In all matches baring AUS(only  5 top order wkts fell)  all TOW fell. Baring  2 run outs, all TOW apart from 6, precisely  33 out of 39  were   taken by  bowlers other than Shakib.Even run outs can't be neglected as having not an effect because they too are wts any way.Also, 'a lot of wkts other than TOW' taken by other bowlers  too  can't be dismissed as pucca tailender wkts because  several of them like Grandhome,Fawad,Shadab, Courternile, Brathwhite etc etc avg:s in the 20s-30s with the bat.  So, all in all your claim does not make any sense

Either you neglected to read my very first statement or just want to make noise for the sake of making noise. The fact that you think AVG = paints the full picture tells alot about how you view cricket. Gollum summed it up nicely. Read his comment. 

 

Its like saying NZ made it to SEMI and was actually the 4th best team in the tournament. But in reality, PAK pulled back after that horrible WI defeat and played better cricket than NZ in majority of the tournament. 

[rtmohanlal]

23 minutes ago, Zero_Unit said:

Either you neglected to read my very first statement or just want to make noise for the sake of making noise. The fact that you think AVG = paints the full picture tells alot about how you view cricket. Gollum summed it up nicely. Read his comment. 

 

Its like saying NZ made it to SEMI and was actually the 4th best team in the tournament. But in reality, PAK pulled back after that horrible WI defeat and played better cricket than NZ in majority of the tournament. 

'when 33 of the 41 TOW to fall'   were taken by 'bowlers other than Shakib' , I don't  need to look at all outside this  stats any way. Assuming that  basically 5 bowlers( 10 overs each )  are needed in a match, 33  TOW being   picked by  'other 4' means each of them on the  avg: could pick 33/4 = 8.25 TOW wkts & much more .Shakib could pick only 6 wkts  (agreed all of them TOW).

Edited July 7, 2019 by rtmohanlal

[Zero_Unit]

9 minutes ago, rtmohanlal said:

'when 33 of the 41 TOW to fall'   were taken by 'bowlers other than Shakib' , I don't  need to look at all outside this  stats any way. Assuming that  basically 5 bowlers( 10 overs each )  are needed in a match, 33  TOW being   picked by  'other 4' means each of them on the  avg: could pick 33/4 = 8.25 TOW wkts & much more .Shakib could pick only 6 wkts  (agreed all of them TOW).

I have to honestly ask, did you watch the match or just looked at the scorecards? If you looked at the scorecard solely, your statement would make sense. However, if you ended up watching the matches and understood the match situation, you would not make such claims.

[Vijy]

13 hours ago, Gollum said:

What a WC !!!!! Easily cemented his status as ATG, IMO best ODI AR of this millennium and a sure shot HOFer.

 

 

606 runs, avg 87, SR 96, 2 100s 

11 wickets, avg 36, ER 5.4

 

 MOTM in all 3 matches BD won (RSA, WI, AFG) 

 

Most of Shakib's team mates failed, BD hopes rested on senior tiger who promptly stepped up, took responsibility and kept his side in the hunt, finishing the job himself more than once.

 

Massive massive respect to the Bangladeshi Bagh, surely must be among the greatest WC performances of all time? Where does he rank among the ATGs of this sport?

 

 

P.S: We all know the greatest ever AR performance by anyone in a WC was Majid "God" Khan.

[Mariyam]

1 hour ago, Gollum said:

This. People who followed BD's matches will understand how Shakib was used, bowled mostly crucial overs or when his team was under the pump. His bowling stats don't do justice to how he went about his business and how much Mash relied on his overs, batsmen preferred to play him out eg the India match which I am sure all ICFers would have watched. IMO he bowled better than Chahal and with a bit of luck would have been among the top wicket takers as well. 

The said people are just like Spiderman, Superman and Iron Man.

 

Fictional.

[rtmohanlal]

16 minutes ago, Zero_Unit said:

I have to honestly ask, did you watch the match or just looked at the scorecards? If you looked at the scorecard solely, your statement would make sense. However, if you ended up watching the matches and understood the match situation, you would not make such claims.

that simply does not matter .You said Shakib was for containing in the middle  . But him having econ: 5.78 when

'Mehdi + Mosadek + Mortaza   combined'  has only a slightly poorer econ of 5.93  vs non minnows means  they were as important in containing as Shakib. Similarly ' Shakib avg:s only 62 where Mehdi(51),Saifudin(32), Fizz(25) all avg:ed way better than him ' +  ' 33  TOW being   picked by  basically  other 4 bowlers with each of them on the  avg: picking  33/4 = 8.25 TOW wkts & much more where as Shakib could pick only 6 wkts  (agreed all of them TOW)' means he was way inferior to each one of them in  bowl str: too. 

 

With these crystal clear facts in hand what is the need of even watching ??

[Adi BB]

All the pitches on which Bangladesh played were flat pancakes except the nzl one ,I rate his 70 odd in that match as his best knock 

[Zero_Unit]

18 minutes ago, rtmohanlal said:

that simply does not matter .You said Shakib was for containing in the middle  . But him having econ: 5.78 when

'Mehdi + Mosadek + Mortaza   combined'  has only a slightly poorer econ of 5.93  vs non minnows means  they were as important in containing as Shakib. Similarly ' Shakib avg:s only 62 where Mehdi(51),Saifudin(32), Fizz(25) all avg:ed way better than him ' +  ' 33  TOW being   picked by  basically  other 4 bowlers with each of them on the  avg: picking  33/4 = 8.25 TOW wkts & much more where as Shakib could pick only 6 wkts  (agreed all of them TOW)' means he was way inferior to each one of them in  bowl str: too. 

 

With these crystal clear facts in hand what is the need of even watching ??

clearly you did not watch the matches and acting like an idiot in public doesnt make you a genius or heard. you keep on repeating the same thing over and over again without a proper understanding of the context. i clealrly stated what i stated, so did gollum and clarified it even further. Atleast watch the matches before writting, not just the highlights ...

 

"With these crystal clear facts in hand what is the need of even watching ??" - this comment alone made you sound like a total nutbag

[rtmohanlal]

13 minutes ago, Zero_Unit said:

clearly you did not watch the matches and acting like an idiot in public doesnt make you a genius or heard. you keep on repeating the same thing over and over again without a proper understanding of the context. i clealrly stated what i stated, so did gollum and clarified it even further. Atleast watch the matches before writting, not just the highlights ...

 

"With these crystal clear facts in hand what is the need of even watching ??" - this comment alone made you sound like a total nutbag

this is what happens when  there is not much sensible answers to be given ....calling  other idiot etc etc . A bowler avg:ing just 62  when all  others averages far better, which ever way you look at it is  far off from being even a satisfactory avg: . You shall believe in what ever you want , I shall stick with mine.