England v Bangladesh, 1st ODI, Trent Bridge July 8, 2010

Bell and Strauss flatten Bangladesh

  shares 18

England 251 for 4 (Bell 84*, Strauss 50) beat Bangladesh 250 for 9 (Raqibul 76, Siddique 51) by six wickets
Scorecard and ball-by-ball details

Andrew Strauss played the hare and Ian Bell the tortoise, as England returned to winning ways by making light work of a decent but ultimately unchallenging target of 251 in the first ODI against Bangladesh at Trent Bridge. Under the floodlights, and in front of a sparse 8,500 crowd, Strauss gave his side a flying start with 50 from 37 balls, before Bell ambled across the finish line with 29 balls to spare, having marked his first 50-over appearance since November 2008 with 84 not out from 101.

The final result was in keeping with recent contests between these two teams. Bangladesh did not disgrace themselves - far from it - but neither were England required to reach top gear to maintain their 100% record. In Raqibul Hasan, last seen flouncing into "retirement" ahead of the Chittagong Test in March, Bangladesh showcased another young batsman with the technique and talent to add value to their often brittle middle-order, while Junaid Siddique showed sound judgment in his 70-ball 51. But England's dominance was epitomised by James Anderson, who was smacked for 74 in ten overs, but was nevertheless able to weigh in with three wickets.

With Mashrafe Mortaza returning to the captaincy that he relinquished through injury 12 months ago, Bangladesh won the toss and chose to play to their strengths by batting first. Sure enough, Tamim Iqbal picked up where he had left off in June by smacking consecutive fours from the first balls of both Anderson and Tim Bresnan's new-ball spells, and at 40 for 0 after six overs, the stage was set for another of his whirlwind fifties.

Stuart Broad, however, ended all such notions by pinning Tamim lbw for 28 as he attempted a glide to third man, and when Bangladesh were limited to seven runs from their next four overs, their hopes of racing to an impregnable total were dashed. When Imrul Kayes lobbed Anderson to Eoin Morgan at extra cover for 14, Bangladesh were 70 for 2 in the 14th over, but this time, the departure of the openers did not lead to the sort of surrender that had been witnessed during last month's Test series.

That was largely thanks to the earthy efforts of Siddique, who produced a handful of shots of real authority before being nailed lbw by Michael Yardy, and Raqibul, who would not have been playing had it not been for Jahurul Islam's withdrawal through illness on the eve of the game. This was his first international since that Chittagong protest, but the headstrong naivety he had shown on that occasion was shelved for this performance.

An arrow-straight drive off Paul Collingwood brought Raqibul an excellent fifty from 61 balls, and he might have expected more had it not been for a painful blow to the foot that brought about a somewhat farcical downfall. On 76, he was struck on the boot by an Anderson yorker, went down for lengthy treatment, and called for a runner. Before he had even faced another delivery, a three-man mix-up led to him being run out by the length of the pitch. It brought an unedifying end to his tour, after scans showed he'd sustained a broken toe, putting him out of action for two weeks.

A late collapse of four wickets for 15 runs ensured a flaccid finish to Bangladesh's innings, and that lack of oomph was put in context as soon as Strauss got into his stride in the run-chase. He cracked seven fours in first Powerplay to leave his team perfectly placed on 66 for 0 after 10 overs, but then, having brought up his half-century by dabbing Abdur Razzak through backward point for three, he answered Craig Kieswetter's call for a sharp single in the same over, and was caught short of his crease by a pinpoint throw from Mahmudullah in the covers.

Kieswetter at this stage had been trailing in his skipper's wake on 19, much as he had done in each of the three innings of his debut series in Bangladesh back in March, when Alastair Cook had been the unlikely man to outscore him. He responded to the setback by flogging Razzak imperiously over long-off for an inside-out six, but before he could really hit his top gear, he sized up a slog-sweep against Shakib, and picked out Faisal Hossain on the midwicket boundary.

At 93 for 2 in the 15th over, Collingwood came out to join Bell who was playing in his first ODI since November 2008, and the pair proceeded with utmost caution, picking off a solitary boundary between them in 13 overs. On 20, Bell was beaten by a beauty from Shakib that spat and turned, and flew away past batsman and keeper alike for four byes, but that was the full extent of England's alarms.

Of greater concern, however, was an incident at the end of the 26th over, when Bangladesh's wicketkeeper, Mushfiqur Rahim, was struck on the cheekbone by a nasty lifting delivery from Faisal. His face swelled up almost immediately, and after a delay of several minutes, he was stretchered off the field and taken to hospital. He will now miss the final two matches against England but could return for Bangladesh's fixtures against Ireland, Scotland and Netherlands at the end of the tour.

His replacement behind the stumps, Junaid Siddique, was soon called upon, as Collingwood brought a dour partnership to an end by top-edging a mow across the line to give Shakib his second wicket, and Eoin Morgan made 23 from 26 balls before hoisting Razzak to deep midwicket. But for all the criticisms that have been levelled at Bell over the years, turning down a chance for easy runs is not one of them. He sealed the contest with a cut into the covers for his 84th run. It hardly amounted to a like-for-like replacement for Kevin Pietersen, but in the circumstances, it fitted England's requirements precisely.

Andrew Miller is UK editor of Cricinfo

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • POSTED BY look_nah on | July 9, 2010, 20:53 GMT

    @billg454 - Bangladesh does not have a Pietersen, Trott, Kieswetter, Strauss, Morgan [all transplants] so they are allowed their own time to come good.

  • POSTED BY _NEUTRAL_Fan_ on | July 9, 2010, 15:01 GMT

    One thing for sure is that the Bang fielding has improved. very heartening to see.

  • POSTED BY Bang_La on | July 9, 2010, 12:49 GMT

    @YorkshirePudding, its still a long time. People always speak from their faulty knowledge as they want to watch a kill-for-kill game to have Adrenaline rush. Only one thing that I would point out here is that IT IS Bangladesh alright, but a new team with younger players and in the process of crystalisation. However, such reasoning will not affect people like billig454 and stop them asking questions. Thank you.

  • POSTED BY 2.14istherunrate on | July 9, 2010, 11:50 GMT

    yorkshire Pudding- I do not base my comments about Bresnan on looks, though he does look like a policeman, but on style. Some players are intersting some,some -like Bresnan- are not. The point about Bresnan though is that his bowling is bland at best.! wicket in 5 ODI's v aus!!! As you are Yorkshire I guess you are entitled to wnat him toi succeed. Refs to Austin are based on '99 WC when england fielded the ultimately soporific attack and lost. If you looked at other countries, there would be a muystery spinner, a reall express bowler and a reverse swinger. They took the eye and took the interest. A bunch of medium pacers is a bout as intersting as a funeral.

  • POSTED BY demon_bowler on | July 9, 2010, 10:50 GMT

    The idea voiced by Andrew Miller that Bell will be dropped when KP is fit is daft. KP should have to force his way back into the team like anyone else -- which would be difficult for him as he now no longer has a county side to go back to. On current form Kieswetter is the more likely man for the drop anyway.

  • POSTED BY roxap on | July 9, 2010, 10:09 GMT

    lets hope these poor bengalis can perform well against ireland and scotland in there upcoming matches, i am sure both those sides will give a tough time to these bengalis, ireland have the potential to beat these so called TIGERS.............lol

  • POSTED BY YorkshirePudding on | July 9, 2010, 7:47 GMT

    @Maddy, you're a little off, the last test nation bangladesh beat was Srilanka in Jan 2009....@Maximum6, i sense you think that people should be picked based on thier charisma and looks, Bresnan is a good containing bowler though he isnt an opening bowler...I agree with EddyM, they did leave it too late for the batting power play, in the 5th ODI Australia showed what can happen when you take it early at 39 overs with two set batsmen. An interesting counter would be to save the 2nd Bowling power play until 37-40 overs, thus forcing an early batting power player or ensuring it can only be used in at the end of the innings.

  • POSTED BY jackiethepen on | July 9, 2010, 7:40 GMT

    Andrew Miller has now written another faint praise piece which allows for no comments. I think the point of Graham White is well made about it being "fashionable" to denigrate Bell. It was. But fans have moved on. Keep up Andrew. Andrew Miller was a leader of the pack so it becomes hard for him to swallow that he was wrong, hence the reluctance to praise. In doing so - and in the article about Bell - he misses a major point that England are a batsman light as has been noted by all the media, none more so in the last three games against Australia. This is a really urgent issue. Bell should have been used against Australia in the final two games instead of fielding as sub. Yardy as no 3 was a disaster. No comment from Miller? Blinkered prejudice might wish to keep Bell out of the side but the problem won't go away.

  • POSTED BY crashbang on | July 9, 2010, 7:14 GMT

    same sad story about Bangladesh they just are not up to it, Bell must love playing these guys he scores all the time against them, and that shows you Bangladesh are very ordinary cricket side, county level is about there status , and we will here it again we are improving SURE

  • POSTED BY Dearie_and_Me on | July 9, 2010, 6:03 GMT

    "England returned to winning ways " HA. They have a small spate of wins and suddenly their ways are "winning"? They have a long way to go to prove themselves consistant winners. The last two ODI's against Australia prove that.

  • POSTED BY look_nah on | July 9, 2010, 20:53 GMT

    @billg454 - Bangladesh does not have a Pietersen, Trott, Kieswetter, Strauss, Morgan [all transplants] so they are allowed their own time to come good.

  • POSTED BY _NEUTRAL_Fan_ on | July 9, 2010, 15:01 GMT

    One thing for sure is that the Bang fielding has improved. very heartening to see.

  • POSTED BY Bang_La on | July 9, 2010, 12:49 GMT

    @YorkshirePudding, its still a long time. People always speak from their faulty knowledge as they want to watch a kill-for-kill game to have Adrenaline rush. Only one thing that I would point out here is that IT IS Bangladesh alright, but a new team with younger players and in the process of crystalisation. However, such reasoning will not affect people like billig454 and stop them asking questions. Thank you.

  • POSTED BY 2.14istherunrate on | July 9, 2010, 11:50 GMT

    yorkshire Pudding- I do not base my comments about Bresnan on looks, though he does look like a policeman, but on style. Some players are intersting some,some -like Bresnan- are not. The point about Bresnan though is that his bowling is bland at best.! wicket in 5 ODI's v aus!!! As you are Yorkshire I guess you are entitled to wnat him toi succeed. Refs to Austin are based on '99 WC when england fielded the ultimately soporific attack and lost. If you looked at other countries, there would be a muystery spinner, a reall express bowler and a reverse swinger. They took the eye and took the interest. A bunch of medium pacers is a bout as intersting as a funeral.

  • POSTED BY demon_bowler on | July 9, 2010, 10:50 GMT

    The idea voiced by Andrew Miller that Bell will be dropped when KP is fit is daft. KP should have to force his way back into the team like anyone else -- which would be difficult for him as he now no longer has a county side to go back to. On current form Kieswetter is the more likely man for the drop anyway.

  • POSTED BY roxap on | July 9, 2010, 10:09 GMT

    lets hope these poor bengalis can perform well against ireland and scotland in there upcoming matches, i am sure both those sides will give a tough time to these bengalis, ireland have the potential to beat these so called TIGERS.............lol

  • POSTED BY YorkshirePudding on | July 9, 2010, 7:47 GMT

    @Maddy, you're a little off, the last test nation bangladesh beat was Srilanka in Jan 2009....@Maximum6, i sense you think that people should be picked based on thier charisma and looks, Bresnan is a good containing bowler though he isnt an opening bowler...I agree with EddyM, they did leave it too late for the batting power play, in the 5th ODI Australia showed what can happen when you take it early at 39 overs with two set batsmen. An interesting counter would be to save the 2nd Bowling power play until 37-40 overs, thus forcing an early batting power player or ensuring it can only be used in at the end of the innings.

  • POSTED BY jackiethepen on | July 9, 2010, 7:40 GMT

    Andrew Miller has now written another faint praise piece which allows for no comments. I think the point of Graham White is well made about it being "fashionable" to denigrate Bell. It was. But fans have moved on. Keep up Andrew. Andrew Miller was a leader of the pack so it becomes hard for him to swallow that he was wrong, hence the reluctance to praise. In doing so - and in the article about Bell - he misses a major point that England are a batsman light as has been noted by all the media, none more so in the last three games against Australia. This is a really urgent issue. Bell should have been used against Australia in the final two games instead of fielding as sub. Yardy as no 3 was a disaster. No comment from Miller? Blinkered prejudice might wish to keep Bell out of the side but the problem won't go away.

  • POSTED BY crashbang on | July 9, 2010, 7:14 GMT

    same sad story about Bangladesh they just are not up to it, Bell must love playing these guys he scores all the time against them, and that shows you Bangladesh are very ordinary cricket side, county level is about there status , and we will here it again we are improving SURE

  • POSTED BY Dearie_and_Me on | July 9, 2010, 6:03 GMT

    "England returned to winning ways " HA. They have a small spate of wins and suddenly their ways are "winning"? They have a long way to go to prove themselves consistant winners. The last two ODI's against Australia prove that.

  • POSTED BY maddy20 on | July 9, 2010, 5:52 GMT

    Apparently "Bell feels at home" after what? Beating Bangladesh? When was the last time Bangladesh had won an ODI against a test playing nation? Don't tell me 2007 World cup. If you haven't noticed it has been 3 years since that happened and this is 2010!

  • POSTED BY WaqasBajwa on | July 9, 2010, 4:24 GMT

    it will b nice if bangali tigars wins

  • POSTED BY on | July 9, 2010, 2:33 GMT

    Bangladesh bowling attack is not menacing enough, they need to find a Brett Lee, Shaun Tait or a Lasith Malinga fast, to really step on to the world scene. If not the batsman always go with the added pressure of scoring 30 or 40 runs more than needed in order to cover up for the weaknesses of the bowlers

  • POSTED BY 2.14istherunrate on | July 8, 2010, 22:21 GMT

    I guess that once Strauss had said that Bangladesh were a dangerous side, England had to live down to it. It's rather like saying that one can drown in a puddle or tea cup. You can if you really really try, and someone knocks you very hard on the head first and lies you face down in a deep puddle. Re the teacup it has to be a really wide circumference cup and overall extreme in size. Anderson was appalling- overall apart from Manchester his bowling has disappointed badly in these ODI's. Bresnan's presence in the side- he of the charisma of a dead frog-should be sounding the alarm bells in high places. With the Ian Austin lookalike award firimly on his mantlepiece even England fans will be willing the side out of the W C at the earliest opportunity if he is in the side. His batting seems a better bet. Kieswetter seems out of his depth batting and Wright seems to be gaining experience at being invisible. Surely there are better bets for the future. Overall a mediocre day for Eng.

  • POSTED BY jackiethepen on | July 8, 2010, 21:48 GMT

    Like for like replacement? Bell played most of his innings against spin which has been the undoing of Pietersen for a long time now. Instead of a recent typical KP low score we had Bell's 84*. I think in the circumstances your jibe at Bell about not turning down the chance for easy runs sums up your lack of assessment when guided by prejudice. In your effort to turn a success into a criticism, you had forgotten KP's weakness against spin. Strauss didn't have to face much spin either for his 50. I thought Bell and Colly had some difficult overs to get through when Shakib was bowling superbly. He beat Colly too but you didn't mention that. The ball that beat Bell beat the keeper too. But Shakib was turning it far more than you give credit for. How was Bell a tortoise with a S/R of 83 to anchor the innings at 3? He played a mature innings. A pity he couldn't get a mature report.

  • POSTED BY EddyM on | July 8, 2010, 21:39 GMT

    I don't believe that Bangladesh really tried to win this game. They seemed happy to get around 250 and left their batting powerplay to the tailenders.

    Rather than going for the extra 20-30 runs that would have given them half a chance, they conservatively went for the 250 so that they wouldn't be disgraced.

    When will they learn that being conservative is most likely going to mean that they lose? If they had taken the powerplay a few overs earlier, they may have got up to 270+. They may also have crumbled and been out for 230, but at least they would have gone for it.

    When will international teams wise up and use their batting powerplay when they have 2 reasonably set batsmen rather than leaving it until the 44th or 45th overs when they are 5,6 or 7 down?

  • POSTED BY billg454 on | July 8, 2010, 21:08 GMT

    Why is Bangladesh still a full member?

  • POSTED BY on | July 8, 2010, 20:59 GMT

    'It hardly amounted to a like-for-like replacement for Kevin Pietersen' is not particularly fair on Bell who has scored more runs in this innings than KP has in a number of his recent efforts. Accepted, Bangladesh are not the same fearsome opponents that Australia are, but Bell has shown his recent worth at county level and with the Lions team and done so here too. It seems to be fashionable to denigrate Bell's performances but recently he has shown significant improvement towards meeting the needs of England. At least praise him for that a little more than 'but in the circumstances, it fitted England's requirements precisely.'

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • POSTED BY on | July 8, 2010, 20:59 GMT

    'It hardly amounted to a like-for-like replacement for Kevin Pietersen' is not particularly fair on Bell who has scored more runs in this innings than KP has in a number of his recent efforts. Accepted, Bangladesh are not the same fearsome opponents that Australia are, but Bell has shown his recent worth at county level and with the Lions team and done so here too. It seems to be fashionable to denigrate Bell's performances but recently he has shown significant improvement towards meeting the needs of England. At least praise him for that a little more than 'but in the circumstances, it fitted England's requirements precisely.'

  • POSTED BY billg454 on | July 8, 2010, 21:08 GMT

    Why is Bangladesh still a full member?

  • POSTED BY EddyM on | July 8, 2010, 21:39 GMT

    I don't believe that Bangladesh really tried to win this game. They seemed happy to get around 250 and left their batting powerplay to the tailenders.

    Rather than going for the extra 20-30 runs that would have given them half a chance, they conservatively went for the 250 so that they wouldn't be disgraced.

    When will they learn that being conservative is most likely going to mean that they lose? If they had taken the powerplay a few overs earlier, they may have got up to 270+. They may also have crumbled and been out for 230, but at least they would have gone for it.

    When will international teams wise up and use their batting powerplay when they have 2 reasonably set batsmen rather than leaving it until the 44th or 45th overs when they are 5,6 or 7 down?

  • POSTED BY jackiethepen on | July 8, 2010, 21:48 GMT

    Like for like replacement? Bell played most of his innings against spin which has been the undoing of Pietersen for a long time now. Instead of a recent typical KP low score we had Bell's 84*. I think in the circumstances your jibe at Bell about not turning down the chance for easy runs sums up your lack of assessment when guided by prejudice. In your effort to turn a success into a criticism, you had forgotten KP's weakness against spin. Strauss didn't have to face much spin either for his 50. I thought Bell and Colly had some difficult overs to get through when Shakib was bowling superbly. He beat Colly too but you didn't mention that. The ball that beat Bell beat the keeper too. But Shakib was turning it far more than you give credit for. How was Bell a tortoise with a S/R of 83 to anchor the innings at 3? He played a mature innings. A pity he couldn't get a mature report.

  • POSTED BY 2.14istherunrate on | July 8, 2010, 22:21 GMT

    I guess that once Strauss had said that Bangladesh were a dangerous side, England had to live down to it. It's rather like saying that one can drown in a puddle or tea cup. You can if you really really try, and someone knocks you very hard on the head first and lies you face down in a deep puddle. Re the teacup it has to be a really wide circumference cup and overall extreme in size. Anderson was appalling- overall apart from Manchester his bowling has disappointed badly in these ODI's. Bresnan's presence in the side- he of the charisma of a dead frog-should be sounding the alarm bells in high places. With the Ian Austin lookalike award firimly on his mantlepiece even England fans will be willing the side out of the W C at the earliest opportunity if he is in the side. His batting seems a better bet. Kieswetter seems out of his depth batting and Wright seems to be gaining experience at being invisible. Surely there are better bets for the future. Overall a mediocre day for Eng.

  • POSTED BY on | July 9, 2010, 2:33 GMT

    Bangladesh bowling attack is not menacing enough, they need to find a Brett Lee, Shaun Tait or a Lasith Malinga fast, to really step on to the world scene. If not the batsman always go with the added pressure of scoring 30 or 40 runs more than needed in order to cover up for the weaknesses of the bowlers

  • POSTED BY WaqasBajwa on | July 9, 2010, 4:24 GMT

    it will b nice if bangali tigars wins

  • POSTED BY maddy20 on | July 9, 2010, 5:52 GMT

    Apparently "Bell feels at home" after what? Beating Bangladesh? When was the last time Bangladesh had won an ODI against a test playing nation? Don't tell me 2007 World cup. If you haven't noticed it has been 3 years since that happened and this is 2010!

  • POSTED BY Dearie_and_Me on | July 9, 2010, 6:03 GMT

    "England returned to winning ways " HA. They have a small spate of wins and suddenly their ways are "winning"? They have a long way to go to prove themselves consistant winners. The last two ODI's against Australia prove that.

  • POSTED BY crashbang on | July 9, 2010, 7:14 GMT

    same sad story about Bangladesh they just are not up to it, Bell must love playing these guys he scores all the time against them, and that shows you Bangladesh are very ordinary cricket side, county level is about there status , and we will here it again we are improving SURE