[Match Thread] Zimbabwe v Bangladesh: 2nd Test

[betterdays]

Still wondering how big the first innings Shingi decision was...

Good question. Using stats to figure it out...

what the stats do show though is just how badly wrong one gets it if you try to use them (btw, of course, I can do this without even going to statsguru. Tamim's best vs Zim is 49) ... because of course stats never work that way...

think poker. you have a pre-'flop' %, then a post-'flop' %, then a post-'turn' %, then a post-'river' % that really isn't even taking into account 'position' either as most poker players know it's not always just the cards.

defo still wondering how big that one was...

[Yorker]

Well done Hamilton! This had been a good series for the Masakadzas, both will surely move quite a few places up the bowling rankings.

[foreignfield]

Well done Hamilton! This had been a good series for the Masakadzas, both will surely move quite a few places up the bowling rankings.

After this match Shingi moves up to 61 and Hami up to 72, just behind Gayle, Samuels and Dilshan.

[Boundary]

Well done BD, I had predicted 2 things: that they would come at us hard and we wouldn't respond quick enough but that we would eventually recover and earn a draw. Well, I got the final result wrong but BD were worth their win, which came at the expense of Robiul who ran himself into the ground. But they have class batsmen and we have a slightly better attack, handicapped by Meth's injury. What I love though is we learned something of ourselves: we still have some fight in us. In the WI, we melted when the heat was on but here, we stood firm and gave ourselves a small chance of a draw. That must stand us in good stead when we face much better sides.

I like that the middle order, Taylor, and now Hami seem to have found some form. Vusi is a concern but after the centuries from Taylor and Hami in both matches, the revelation must be that Vusi lacks patience. He goes at a clip, fluently reaching 15, 20 or even 35 then gets out as soon as he is comfortable. Yet Taylor and Hami showed the benefit of staying in the crease - eventually a 100 will come up. But Vusi never stays; maybe that's his job but I think he's better than that.

As for bowling, my, my, don't we have selection headache for next time. Chatara was unlucky to find himself on the sidelines but at this rate how does he get back in? How does Mpofu get a look in? Waller Snr will have his work cut out. But what should we do about Cremer? He is expensive and if we persist with him (as we must) then he must have a quite few 5-fors in his future, otherwise what's the justification. He is easy to target but sometimes he bowls well though not consistently enough to warrant respect (and eventually fear) from his opponents. But like I said, it's not the time to pull him off. Yet Mushangwe must surely get a chance to impress too, no?

[Kriterion_BD]

what the stats do show though is just how badly wrong one gets it if you try to use them (btw, of course, I can do this without even going to statsguru. Tamim's best vs Zim is 49) ... because of course stats never work that way...

think poker. you have a pre-'flop' %, then a post-'flop' %, then a post-'turn' %, then a post-'river' % that really isn't even taking into account 'position' either as most poker players know it's not always just the cards.

defo still wondering how big that one was...

Buts the stats show that Bradman is a better batsman than Chris Martin, no?

I was using overall career HSs, but if you want just head to head, we can do that too.

Chakabva - add 10 runs
Shingi - add 20 runs
Meth - add 27
Elton - minus 13
Tamim - add 42
Ashraful - add 94

Total = -92 runs

ZIM shoulda lost by 235 runs and not 143.

No matter what way you try to spin it, the stats won't back up that preposterous junk science. So lets leave stats and argue logic. There are very rare #1 and #3 batsman who's value for wicket will be less than a #10. Whats even more ridiculous is that your argument rests on the assumption that 2 top order batsmen combined are of a lesser absolute value than a single tail ender.

I understand your point that what if Shingi had scored a 50. Lets assume he had, and everything else was the same. Bangladesh's lead would have been 59 and not 109. Agreed? That would increase pressure on our top order and we might not have made it to 291-9 and set 401. Agreed?

I agree with all that.

However, where you've made an oversight is that if you assume perfect umpiring for Shingi and ZIM, you must keep the same assumption for BD in order to have a valid study. The blatantly wrong decisions against Tamim and Ashraful created artificial pressure on our lineup, and created far more pressure than a Shingi masterclass would have. A Shingi masterclass would mean we would start the innings at 59-0. As it turned out we ended up slipping to 127-3, which is a far more pressured position. We should have been 127-1, which is a far more comfortable platform than 59-0.

At the very least you must agree to this, as it is the correct viewpoint.

[Kriterion_BD]

But they have class batsmen and we have a slightly better attack, handicapped by Meth's injury.

When I first read that I wanted to disagree. But the statistics, skewed only in part by different pitch conditions, do back up the fact that your bowling attack is at least one step ahead of ours.

[betterdays]

No matter what way you try to spin it, the stats won't back up that preposterous junk science. .

It's an accurate statistical formula (every poker site can give accurate percentage predictions of winning hands before each stage is played) but I agree, stats are predictive and predictive science has serious limitations if not quite amounting to 'junk

So lets leave stats and argue logic.

reason (or logic) is a slave of passion

Whats even more ridiculous is that your argument rests on the assumption that 2 top order batsmen combined are of a lesser absolute value than a single tail ender.

only when context is involved ... when Monty [Cardiff] or Onions [Pretoria?] bat not out for 2 hours to get a draw (then they have contributed as much - if not contextually more given the not out - than their openers). This is, unfortunately cricket, not science

I understand your point that what if Shingi had scored a 50. Lets assume he had, and everything else was the same. Bangladesh's lead would have been 59 and not 109. Agreed? That would increase pressure on our top order and we might not have made it to 291-9 and set 401. Agreed?
I agree with all that.

50 would have been great but the two + hours he managed in the second innings would've been even better in the first making the timing of the declaration tactically harder, one might suppose, which makes me reluctant to agree everything else would be the same

However, where you've made an oversight is that if you assume perfect umpiring for Shingi and ZIM, you must keep the same assumption for BD in order to have a valid study. The blatantly wrong decisions against Tamim and Ashraful created artificial pressure on our lineup, and created far more pressure than a Shingi masterclass would have. A Shingi masterclass would mean we would start the innings at 59-0. As it turned out we ended up slipping to 127-3, which is a far more pressured position. We should have been 127-1, which is a far more comfortable platform than 59-0.
At the very least you must agree to this, as it is the correct viewpoint.

No oversight, and extra few hours would have shed a whole new light on third innings ... I simply added a time pressure that would have left you in the same position "pressurewise". BD played good sensible cricket in the third innings because they had the time to.

basically, in an infinite world (if it is indeed infinite) there are also infinite possibilities. I am beginning to sound like a sour loser (and to be honest I don't think about it at all until I come here ...It is simply fun 'cos you were being so graceless from a position of such obvious strength in the middle of the 4th day that...) and I'm not overjoyed we lost but nor am I over-embarrassed
BD simply outplayed Zim this game and that is really enough for me ... good on 'em

[syedmahm]

Congratulations to Bangladesh for the win that levels the series. Bangladesh got hammered in the first test and the second one is a hard fought win. Even though the series is a draw, Zimbabwe done better than Bangladesh overall. A third test would have been nice as a decider. There are less opportunities to play against top teams, so BD and ZIM should play each other more. Thanks to all ZIM and BD fans here for making this a friendly and effective forum. Many thanks for appreciating BD's performance as well.

Taylor's performance is the most stand out one and will be remembered for a long time. Masakadza's 100 is a notable one as well. Surprisingly Robibul is the top performer from BD. Personally, I expected to see a couple of centuries from BD, but did not happen. Overall, a very good test series apart from some silly fielding mistakes by either sides.

[Kriterion_BD]

Congratulations to Bangladesh for the win that levels the series. Bangladesh got hammered in the first test and the second one is a hard fought win. Even though the series is a draw, Zimbabwe done better than Bangladesh overall. A third test would have been nice as a decider. There are less opportunities to play against top teams, so BD and ZIM should play each other more. Thanks to all ZIM and BD fans here for making this a friendly and effective forum. Many thanks for appreciating BD's performance as well.

Taylor's performance is the most stand out one and will be remembered for a long time. Masakadza's 100 is a notable one as well. Surprisingly Robibul is the top performer from BD. Personally, I expected to see a couple of centuries from BD, but did not happen. Overall, a very good test series apart from some silly fielding mistakes by either sides.

It appears as though the complains of poor accomodations is true. Cricinfo correspondent in Harare, Mohammad Isam, tweeted that the hotel didn't have water yesterday, the day of the final day of the Test. It might be a routine or minor inconvenience in this part of the world as lack of electricity is in ours, but our hotels are equipped. Also, I know westerners do not, not sure about the Shona, but Asians require water for bathroom activities like taking a leak or dropping a deuce. Its a basic necessity as toilet paper. Jeremy Fredricks kept mentioning the hotel they were staying at when the Crowne Plaza kept coming into view. But the Bangaldesh team was at the Holiday Inn.

Apparently, there was some attempt at time consumption during the ZIM innings by having ground staff milling about on the pitch when players and umpires were ready to play. I didn't see it, but our moderator said he did.

When you lose, you can't really complain, but after winning comprehensively, I'd hope the BCB brings this up.

[Boundary]

Personally, I expected to see a couple of centuries from BD, but did not happen. Overall, a very good test series apart from some silly fielding mistakes by either sides.

There might not have been hundreds but there were enough high scores (81, 60, 77 in the first innings and 59, 93, 67 in the second; from the same 3 batmen incidentally) to win the match. So Shakib, Mashfiqur and Nasir effectively won this for BD.