Tigers confront Lions in Chittagong

By 10.30 in the morning on November 1, fourth day of the war, Bangladesh tigers have already lost two of their valiant frontline fighters. Both of them have self-sacrificed in the most familiar manner, Tiger Sarkar nicked at a ball, which he should have well spared, and the Greatest Tiger of all, Bashar, most foolishly ran for a third run which was not there.

And this happened, when Bangladesh needed these two tigers most at the crease, when they did not have to go for the kill, but just stalk and stalk and wait for the right moment.

How many times should Bashar and others play before you can call them batsmen! The answer, my friend, is not blowing in the wind; the answer is here, in the team selection, in the coaching, and in the training, and, probably, in the doubt whether we deserve to be there, to play at the test level.

In the evening before the match the players of the teams, and coaches, trainers, managers and officials were invited to a dinner at the poolside of Chittagong Club by Standard Chartered Bank, the sponsor of the tournament.

During the tidbits talking at dinner one inquisitive guest remarked to the Bangladesh Coach whether he had taken any look at the pitch since it was his first visit to Chittagong. He said he had, but though from a distance. It was pointed out to him that the Chittagong pitch was livelier than the Dhaka pitch, and a strong pace department would benefit Bangladesh. This suggestion was ignored, as Tapash was not included. The visiting lions scavenged the biteless pace of the likes of Mushfique and Sujon's from the word go. And, with the recurrence of Mashrafe's knee injury, Bangladesh bowling was shorn of any real power for two whole sessions, the lions scoring freely at four runs per over.

Judging by the players' performance it seems that coaching has gone a little flat, the players have become absolutely dispirited, they duck a lot more (Rajin Saleh) than necessary, and they also seem to have lost their natural touch. The coaching should aim at increasing the players' creative urge for the game, not otherwise.

The whole team performed at Chittagong test as if they had been forbidden to show the dare of a cricketer.

We seem to have given birth to what in literature is known as misplaced emotion by having faith in a man as captain who is neither a bowler, nor a batter, nor even a fielder.

After Mike Brearley of England, the great philosopher-cum-cricketer, Sujon, the captain of the tigers, seems to have become the greatest puzzle in the history of test cricket.

Commentator Ian Chappel clearly said it at Darwin Test that if one did not perform, he shouldn't be chosen just for captaincy. Sujon has blocked either Tapash's chance as a bowler, or Aftab or Nafeez or Moniruzaman's chance as a batsman.

Why do we have to show this national indulgence? Oh, to compare Mike Brearley? Yes, he scored a triple century at Bahawalpur just in one day against a regional side in Pakistan in the late sixties.

Except for the first-rate commentary, and the slowest outfield, there was nothing to remember from the Chittagong match.