Bangladesh v England, 1st test, Chittagong, Mar 12-16

Bangers playing Tests is frankly ridiculous. Sure, they'd be the best non-Test ODI team, but are still a million miles away from Test status.

Athers summed it up pretty well, it's like watching a first class team play the universities at Fenners.

Swann & Broad the pick of the bowlers, Bresnan dissapointed.

Invader Zim wrote:Bangers playing Tests is frankly ridiculous. Sure, they'd be the best non-Test ODI team, but are still a million miles away from Test status.

Aye, they'd have a job even finishing off Western Aus FFS.

Well, take em a day or two - 6-37 etc.

JKLever wrote:Bresnan dissapointed.

Our reserves are poor. Jammy takes a break, Bunny goes lame and we are reduced to fielding county trundlers.

Come back Harmi Harmster, all is forgiven.

From Steyn and co. on a hard green pitch to the tweenies on a pudding.

I wish the Bangles well and have no probs with England playing one dayers against them but this is all a bit futile. Still these may be the last tests (after this summer) against Bangladesh for a long while with the future tour programmes to be changed.

Invader Zim wrote:Bangers playing Tests is frankly ridiculous. Sure, they'd be the best non-Test ODI team, but are still a million miles away from Test status.

Zim you forgot about Zim

Bangers put in a gritty partnership with Rahim and Mushy before folding tamely. England opt not to enforce the follow on.

A freakin brilliant catch by Tredwell to end Mushy's innings, look it up.

Well done to Swannie on another Test Michelle.

Apart from Tamim, Mahmadullah and Shakib - bangles don't have a player who would get into any county side never mind being international class.

But England farq up the non-follow-on and leak wickets. Unused to being way ahead, I guess.

No ... if they had had the proper five bowlers (three of whom can bat), they'd have been follow-on enforcers. Are you listening, Gordon?

Yes, I know. A pretty unimpressive debutant and an okay medium-pacer, shouldn't be among your four frontliners. But still.

Not that surprised that England lost wickets in that kind of circumstance. They know they're going to win, it takes all the edge off.

Bit conservative perhaps to bat again but from the 2 hours play I saw last night this is an incredibly flaaaaaaaaat pitch and you saw how difficult it was to nurdle even tailenders out. The decision must have totally been down to the fact that England only had 4 bowlers in that heat.

Quite impressed by Finn on the 3rd day despite what Pete says, he got it to reverse nicely a little both ways and could have picked up at least 3 wickets in his spell. Onviously stamina is an issue with the lad because I thought he was taken off just as he had the measure of the batsmen.

Think it was down to the heat, JKL. By all accounts it's absolutely draining.

On Finny (as I guess he is now known) I bow to JKL's greater judgment and TV. I was going only by impressions from the radio, coupled with number of overs bowled during a long inings (e.g. Broad coming back - it seems - slightly gingerly from injury took a greater share) and results in terms of wickets.

If he was unlucky, and showed greater skill than the radio experts communicated and appeared to give him credit for, I'm glad to hear it.