³ÉÈËÂÛ̳

So basically the main thing to emerge from this is that England are at a similar test cricket level to Bangladesh.

"So basically the main thing to emerge from this is that England are at a similar test cricket level to Bangladesh."

I don't see why. It's still a comprehensive victory, it just took a while because of the flat pitch and playing four frontline bowlers.

"So basically the main thing to emerge from this is that England are at a similar test cricket level to Bangladesh."

--------------------------------------

It says this in the same way that Man U vs Fulham ending 3-3 for the year means that the two teams are equal.

England, on an incredibly flat pitch and without several of their top players, beat a spirited Bangladeshi team by nearly 200 runs. Two inexperienced bowlers who, despite my feelings that neither are ready/good enough for test level, managed to create a decent impression in the game.

There are plenty of issues to debate from the game, but the lack of a gulf in class between the two teams is definitely not one of those issues. England, with a sub-standard team and a rookie captain who admits to being conservative, outclassed Bangladesh in all but 4 (at most, arguably) sessions of the test. Would the same England team be able to compete against the top nations? - surely not. Are the likes of Carberry and Trott truly Test class? - quite probably not. Is Alistair Cook ready to captain a Test team? - almost certainly not.

Is this mixture of "real" test players and A-teamers good enough to beat a team still coming to terms with international cricket, with only a few Test-class batsmen and, arguably, no Test-class bowlers? - almost certainly. Even on a pitch flatter than my singing (and to see England's vulnerability on these sorts of pitches, one only has to look back one year to the Windies series), Bangladesh never had a realistic sniff and were three hours away from a record-breaking miracle save... one partnership aside in either innings, they never looked even remotely capable of batting 5 sessions and beyond, on a pitch where, I'm sure Boycott, would claim his deceased childhood goldfish could have made 50.

Fully convincing? Perhaps not... but 181 runs and 3 hours is pretty convincing to me. Even if England had wrapped this up in 3 days with every bowler getting a 5-for and every batsman scoring 100, people would still have commented. England, literally, cannot win in the eyes of some supporters from this series.

I'm sure Cook/Bell/Pietersen/Prior should still be dropped too, right?

Is Graeme Swann going to be fined for his outbursts after he dismissed the two Batsmen??

I thought Dominic Cork a delightful addition to the TMS team. He is as combative and competitive a broadcaster as he was a player - which I suspect might not be the quality desired. At times he is a little unfair - trying to put words into his fellow commentators' mouths. I suspected they might find that a bit irritating but it was entertaining.

Is it just me or do the bowlers (Harmison apart of course) get better treatment - and understanding - from the media than our batsmen? Sky team apart where the batsmen captains are all clustered, do we have more ex-bowlers commentating than ex-batsmen?
Another thing I've noticed that whereas the ex-bowlers are clannish and more kindly to the bowling squad and newcomers, they are very contemptuous of batsmen. Old rivalry resurfacing?
Unfortunately the ex-batsmen commentators appear very critical of their kind. Is this because batsmen are poor lonely souls, even in partnerships, while bowlers act together as a pack?

Bangladesh cricket is improving. There were five decent knocks by the BD batsmen: two by Rahim and one each by Iqbal, Siddique and Mahamudullah. Against the massive total of the mighty English lions this performance of the Bangla tigers was modest and even respectable. But their fifties they need to convert into hundreds and consume some more sessions in the middle. Batsmen need to cultivate staying powers at the crease. Alastair Cook, KP, Collingwood, Bell, Swann and their team mates had a happy outing at the ZAC Cricket Stadium in Dhaka. Congratulations to the England batsmen and bowlers for the fine victory.




Dr. Cajetan Coelho

Is it just me or do the bowlers (Harmison apart of course) get better treatment - and understanding - from the media than our batsmen?

It's because batsmen's failings are easy to highlight, one mistake costs them an innings and sees them criticised even if they played very well for 30-odd runs. Wheras a bowler could be trundling along offering no threat whatsoever and gets slogged a couple of times straight to fielders and end up lauded for gettign important wickets. Wickets change matches and in the end the batsman is always on the wrong end of a wicket, unfortunately even ex-players seem to fall into the easy-criticism camp when you stick a microphone infront of them.

ZAC Cricket Stadium is ofcourse in Chittagong !

So the next test is to be held in the deep blue? (Dhaka is well north of Chittagong, not south!). Considering the conditions and the conservative approach to team selection and tactics, the makeshift England team performed adequately overall. From experience, Bangladesh has a harsh environment to play the game over any lengthy period. In particular, fast bowling can test endurance and fitness levels to the limit. given this, the trio in the England team peroromed admirably.

I thought England did everything they needed to do in this match, but not much else. I do think the decision to not enforce the follow on was sensible in the conditions, especially with 4 main bowlers and back to back tests. But it did let Bangladesh off the rack to an extent.

I do wonder if Bangladesh have any chance in early summer in England? They may well be lambs to the slaughter in those conditions.

On the TMS coverage, any chance of getting Channel 5 to let Simon Hughes do some radio work during an English summer? He is one of the more intelligent voices on the game, and just seems a bit wasted in the 45 minute highlights forum. Dominic Cork and Mark Butcher both did very well, and Simon Mann is developing into a fine commentator, though I disagree with him about names, and presumably numbers, on the back of test shirts.

I thought Shamim Chowdery (Sp?) was good as well, though he was perhaps trying to be a little to hard to be English, using 'English' phrases that no Englishman has used to describe a game of cricket in maybe 50 years!

My Team for the 2nd Test V Bdesh:
COOK
PRIOR
TROTT
KP
COLLY
BELL
BRESNAN
SWANN
BROAD
TREDDERS
PLUNKETT
= LONG Batting + 3 Pace + 2 Spinners
... What more could you want!?

Why worry about what team England picks?

There is so much Cricket in the modern game that different combinations need to be tried regardless of form. Anyone who can pick the ideal England team on a consistant basis, please stop posting, play the lottery (you will win with that kind of luck) and send your winnings to the charity of your choice.

Yes England eventually got there, but Bangladesh have some really good players and there is a lot of very derogatory talk about their standard of cricket. I think we are now seeing what they can do this test.


I enjoy listening to test match special on the radio as I don't have sky. It is being spoiled for me by having to listen to Dominic Cork turn every coversation back to himself. Let's listen to someone else please.

I have to disagree with No. 14 above, although if you'd asked me before I'd heard Dominic Cork I would have been less complimentary. I like the fact that he is still playing county cricket and can provide an uptodate insight to the county game. I found today's debate about the county structure fascinating because the contributors know something about the current county game, which is an area where I find the ³ÉÈËÂÛ̳ Cricket Correspondent to be disappointingly weak.

I am enjoying this TMS team more than any other for some time. I have always been a Simon Mann fan, but I am finding the others a balanced and erudite group. I liked Steve James's contribution last winter - where is he Adam?

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.