Should BD really be playing Test Cricket...

[Cricketics]

get your history rite @ kriterion we actually got our first test victory in 4 years and not 19 yrz why say 19 years??? from 1932 till 1947, pakistanis and banglastanis were part of India. from 1947, it was a fresh start to our cricket

amazing Kriterion forgot to reply to this FACT :hysterical:

[Predator_05]

go back and carefully read the post. he stuidied only the first innings margins of DRAWN tests...all 13 drawn tests, with one thrown out which equals your number of 12 drawn tests. at the time, india hadn't won any, so he didn't do cite that 1st inniings margin, and he didn't bother to check the 12 losses. i can dig that up if you wish, but it will take some time. and touche about the bucknor comments, though BD gets the worst umpires and decisions to make matters worse, regardless of BCCI's pre independence clout.

You can dig up whatever you like, man. You aren't exactly covering yourself in glory with these poorly thought out representations of Banglastani cricket's pitiful record. The premise of your friend's argument is flawed to begin with, so i don't know what more he can say. Either way, 12 draws in 25 is a FAR better record than 1 in 25. YOU WISH Banglastan had a record like that. You would swap your team's record for India's in a heart beat and you know it.

[King Tendulkar]

What kriterion does not realise is that these thrashings are not helping the development of bangla cricket. It is sending the development of your players backwards. Its like sending a lightweight boxer up against heavyweights. Does not help the lightweight develop as a boxer. They need to play against A teams. When they start competing against them then think about tests again

[Lord]

What kriterion does not realise is that these thrashings are not helping the development of bangla cricket. It is sending the development of your players backwards. Its like sending a lightweight boxer up against heavyweights. Does not help the lightweight develop as a boxer. They need to play against A teams. When they start competing against them then think about tests again

YA! THEY CAN PLAY ODIS,but not tests,instead they should play county cricket or domestic cricket in india.when icc thinks they have got to the test level,they can reintroduce them.

[Zap_Brannigan]

I've been saying it for years.....BD is not fit enough to play test cricket with the big boys. They dont just lose, they lose big. If every team who is better than BD got to play international test cricket, then we would have 50 domestic teams from India, Aus, Eng, SA, Pak and SL and even the 8 IPL teams should make the cut.

[Kriterion]

You can dig up whatever you like, man. You aren't exactly covering yourself in glory with these poorly thought out representations of Banglastani cricket's pitiful record. The premise of your friend's argument is flawed to begin with, so i don't know what more he can say. Either way, 12 draws in 25 is a FAR better record than 1 in 25. YOU WISH Banglastan had a record like that. You would swap your team's record for India's in a heart beat and you know it.

how is the premise flawed? show me... the premise is that drawn matches are AUTOMATICALLY more competitive than matches with a result. no better example than to show the current AUS-NZ test...this test will have a result. yet it is much more entertaining than one of those draw tests where a team racks up 600, opponent gets 450, team racks up 300 again --> match drawn. that draw is NOT more competitive than the current aus-NZ test, in which one team will lose. i am disputing that 12 draws in 25 is better than 1 in 25. but i am disputing the assumption that those draws were competitive. i am scrutinizing the nature of the draws beyond the fact that they are just draws. i have provided a list of the first innings defeats in the drawn tests, not the lost tests. do you feel that an average 1st innings deficit of 100+ is a mark of competitiveness? i don't. do you also agree that as the decades passed, india improved? i do. bottom line is, the stats i have shown indicate that india was thrashed even in drawn tests, and thrashed even worse in lost tests, without a win in the first 19 years. can you provide stats which show that these tests were competitive, that is a result could have reasonably gone either way? you can't just say that the stats don't prove it, you must show why.

[Kriterion]

kriterion...forget about BD team man' date=' just list the number of test match 100s against quality sides, the number of 5fers etc taken by BD players in their first 25 tests...are you avoiding my question...do that and compare it with Indian cricketers in the first 25 tests[/quote'] thats fine. i concede that point. but, you still have NOT shown how my stats are wrong...you still have not shown that those 12 drawn tests were competitive. are matches competitive just because they are drawn, without regard to actual scores?

[Lord]

thats fine. i concede that point. but, you still have NOT shown how my stats are wrong...you still have not shown that those 12 drawn tests were competitive. are matches competitive just because they are drawn, without regard to actual scores?

certainly,if it doesnt rain they r certainly competitive.i dont think it rained in all matches.as u said we coceded a 105 1st inning lead,but coming back from that,batting well in 2nd innings n drawing the match,we were certainly competitive.we were a blossoming team then,u cant expect us to be competitive right from the start,can u?

[Tapioca]

...you still have not shown that those 12 drawn tests were competitive. are matches competitive just because they are drawn' date=' without regard to actual scores?[/quote'] Expanded five of the eight drawn Test matches in which India conceded the lead. Please check the scores. Are you suggesting that India was outplayed in all these ? -156 runs -369 India 203 & 390/5 England 571/8 decl -124 -180 WI 631 India 454 (158 overs) & 220/6 (102) -350 WI 629/6 decl India 273 & 333/3 -80 WI 366 & 336/9 India 272 & 325/3 -90 WI 286 & 267 India 193 & 355/8 (361 to win, India might have won but for a supposedly "biased" umpire) -230 There are four more where India took first innings lead, including one against Bradman's Australians

[Mr. Wicket]

WI 286 & 267 India 193 & 355/8 (361 to win' date=' India might have won but for a supposedly "biased" umpire)[/quote'] Can you elaborate, please?

[Tapioca]

Can you elaborate' date=' please?[/quote'] Quoting a long piece from Mihir Bose (heavily edited) on the last two sessions, as it is an interesting writeup. India had been set 361 in 395 minutes :

By lunch on the fifth day, the West Indians were revising their opinions and beginning to feel nervous. Modi and Hazare were still together....India were well over 200 for 3 when Gomez,the vice captain took the matters in hand...Gomez, pushed by Headley, advised Goddard to bring back Jones and Gomez himself and the leg theory. Gomez recalls : "It looked as if the rate of scoring was getting out of hand. So we decided to pack the legside field. There were two men behind square, there was one on the deep backward boundary, a mid on, midwicket and one more on the leg side, six in all on the leg side...We bowled so that the batsmen could not drive, we bowled across the batsmen down the leg stump." Suddenly the runs dried up. Hazare thought of taking guard outside the lef stump to try to counterattack. Modi, after an excellent 86, fell trying to speed up the scoring. Hazare and Phadkar came together and Hazare reached his century. Not even the negative tactics would work, it seemed, but on 122 Hazare was hit by a short ball from Prior Jones. He could barely stand, but Phadkar called him for a quick single. A few balls later he was bowled. At tea, with a further 90 minutes play possible, India needed 72 to win with four wickets in hand. Two more wickets to fall - in effect one as Sen was unlikely to bat - and 40 runs to win. With 15 minutes left, 21 runs were wanted. The West Indies were now desperate. Even their negative tactics had not worked. The Laws permitted one drinks interval in every session. So with only fifteen minutes left, Goddard asked for a drinks. A few minutes saved. They had dominated india for so long that the thought of defeat seemed almost physically difficult to bear. .... What possible method could they use to thwart the Indians ? Walcott thought of one. He was keeping and when the ball went down to the fine leg boundary, he waddled after it to retrieve it and return it back to the bowler. Even then with two possible overs remaining,India required 11 runs to win. As Jones bowled, Stollmeyer recorded it in his diary. First ball down the leg side, no stroke possible. Second ball short on the leg stump. Phadkar steps back and hits through covers for four. Third ball on the pads again, pushed for a single, fourth ball another push to the on, a single possible but not taken. Fifth ball a bouncer, way over batsman's head. India now needed 6 runs to win from the last ball and one more over as the clock showed another minute and a half to go. But the sixth ball was never bowled. Not another over. In the excitement Joshi, the umpire, had miscounted and called over. With that he removed the bails and ended the Test. West Indian negative tactics and Indian incompetence had conspired to prevent an Indian victory. There is no guarantee that India would have won but they had the momentum as the desperate West Indian realised. Goddard and Walcot left the field to boos, cat-calls and jeers.

[amits]

bangladesh should not lose their test status. but they should still play in the next intercontinental cup alongwith zimbabwe & other associates. and bangladesh should not play any official tests in the next 1-2 years apart from against west indies & new zealand

[Kriterion]

Expanded five of the eight drawn Test matches in which India conceded the lead. Please check the scores. Are you suggesting that India was outplayed in all these ? -156 runs -369 India 203 & 390/5 England 571/8 decl -124 -180 WI 631 India 454 (158 overs) & 220/6 (102) -350 WI 629/6 decl India 273 & 333/3 -80 WI 366 & 336/9 India 272 & 325/3 -90 WI 286 & 267 India 193 & 355/8 (361 to win, India might have won but for a supposedly "biased" umpire) -230 There are four more where India took first innings lead, including one against Bradman's Australians

those are certainly decent performances, and under gambit's "20 wickets" scheme, yes they would be competitive. however in the "1st innings margin" scheme, not so. and in "overall runs scored" it would be closer for sure, but most likely still not too competitive given the other team didn't bat a 2nd time. its possible they would collapse, but its more likely they would build whatever lead they had to a pretty unchasable one. in my not so humble opinion, i feel a run-based criteria is superior to a wicket-preservation one simpyl because tests are won based on out-scoring one's opponents. not by out-wicketing them. i am not downplaying the tenacity of saving those matches, but in an era of 2.20 run rates, its quite a bit more likely. in short, i am ready to concede that bangladesh are the crappiest side to ever play test cricket. but i am not willing to accept that we are the only nation that struggled heavily in the first decades of their test era, simply because its not true. asides from maybe pakistan, no test nation avoided being dominated. india and new zealand were the minnows in their time, SL and zimbabwe in 80s and 90s. true, we are smallest minnow of all, but to assume that we were the only minnow is false.

[Tapioca]

in short' date=' i am ready to concede that bangladesh are the crappiest side to ever play test cricket. [/quote'] That honour would go to some early South African teams. But since they played a series every five years and several matches were given Test status retrospectively, it didn't matter. Bangladesh's misfortune has been that they debuted at a time when the media coverage of cricket is in the extreme and it doesn't allow them to improve quietly away from the intense limelight.

[Kriterion]

That honour would go to some early South African teams. But since they played a series every five years and several matches were given Test status retrospectively, it didn't matter. Bangladesh's misfortune has been that they debuted at a time when the media coverage of cricket is in the extreme and it doesn't allow them to improve quietly away from the intense limelight.

really? hmm...did not know that. thanks for the info. i think that one key to improvement is that BD should play more tests against NZ and WI sides. of course, playing tests and FC matches in SA and AUS are key, but it would help if we had NZ and WI for 3-4 tours per calendar year. one of the intersting things mentioned by an australia was that in the 1960s NZ tour of England, they played 2 tests, but 16 other first class matches. bangladesh plays 2 tests against south africa, 3 ODIs, and a meaningless 20-20. there should have been 3 FC matches along with it. even 3 2-day games would be better. in this regard, the BCB has really dropped the ball.

[King Tendulkar]

Is the reason bangladesh will never lose their test satus is that they vote for India in the ICC when ever we ask?

[King Tendulkar]

bangla 110-4 , junaid siddique 51 not out. Quite good by bangla standards

[Kriterion]

bangla 110-4 , junaid siddique 51 not out. Quite good by bangla standards

250 is pretty good by subcontinent standards on a green and bouncy pitch. during your last tour, you only had one score above 250 from 6 innings. and the one match you won, you had 249 in the first innings. not sure, but i would take a wild guess that pak and SL struggle just the same in SA recently. problem is our batting and bowling don't click at the same time...time will fix that...

[Kumar]

Well reasons saying no and yes. Why yes, because other nations make excuses why other teams are better, while actually they are against bangladesh ie a friend at uni and his theory on smiths knock against BD compared to sehwags against RSA. Why Yes? They have worked hard and deserve a place, minnows are very underestimated. REMEMBER WORLD CUP!!!!!!!!(even though it was ODI!):(( though they have talent in tests. Look atm they are doing well against RSA. might not perfrom well consistently but when they do they ar a good test team

[punjabi_khota]

Hahaha...another innings defeat. Of last 14 matches, BD has lost 12. The other 2 were affected by rain and were drawn. Of the 12 lost matches, 8 were LOST BY MORE THAN AN INNINGS MARGIN. I am not sure if BD's batting or bowling clicked here. Lol.