ICC Cricket World Cup 2011 / Features
Bangladesh v England, World Cup 2011, Chittagong
Rahim's presence of mind
Plays of the day from England's innings against Bangladesh in Chittagong
Sidharth Monga in Chittagong
March 11, 2011
The review of the tournament. Not
It will take something to beat this one as the poorest review of the World Cup, even if you were to make allowance for the fact that it was Daryl Harper whose decision was challenged. It was in the second over of the day when Rubel Hossain beat Andrew Strauss on the pull. After a long deliberation, Bangladesh went for the review, but apart from the fielders, everybody at the ground knew it pitched way outside leg and was bouncing over the stumps. The rest was okay.
Presence of mind
Mushfiqur Rahim might have dropped Eoin Morgan today, but his stumping of Matt Prior was a superb example of alertness. Prior had overbalanced as Abdur Razzak bowled wide down the leg side, and Mushfiqur had whipped the bails off fast enough, but when he saw Prior was making no attempt to get back to the crease, Mushfiqur took the whole stump out, just in case. Just as well that he did that, for the replays showed Prior was safe in the first instance. One keeper was at the top of his game then, the other wasn't.
In the 25th over of England's innings, Eoin Morgan called Jonathan Trott for a tight single, and TV replays showed it was touch and go even after many replays. The bat seemed to be on the line, but the time it took to make the decision had the crowd resigned to the fact that it was not conclusively out. And then when the verdict came out on the big screen, they yelled in joy, because for a split second the screen said only "out". Only for the "not" to appear soon, and end their joy.
It is no secret that Andrew Strauss loves to cut and pull. Once the spinners came on pretty early in the England innings, an interesting contest was on. Naeem Islam maintained the immaculate in-between length, and Strauss still kept trying to cut. First attempt: Naeem gets the line right, Strauss rocks back, cuts off the middle-stump line, finds point. Second attempt: he gets slight width, creates his length by going deep into the crease, and cuts it fine of backward point. Third attempt: again not too short, and no room, Strauss is beaten, but the ball misses the top of middle. Fourth attempt: Strauss gets the width but can't place it square enough, and gets a single to deep cover. Fifth attempt: again Strauss manufactures the length, but fatally so, as the ball hurries onto him and the edge is pouched at slip. Fair to say Naeem had earned himself a send-off after playing so well on Strauss's strength.
The grey area
Hardly a day goes by when DRS doesn't introduce us to a new shade between black and white. This one wasn't as grey and grave as what Asoka de Silva showed us in the West Indies-Ireland game, but is still worth a nerdy thought. Graeme Swann and Matt Prior went for a catch down the leg side, but Daryl Harper called the delivery a wide. Everybody except for the umpire knew this wasn't a wide, but they also knew the ball had hit the pad. Andrew Strauss later said they didn't want to review it because while it would have overturned the wide call, it would have cost them a review. Why cost a side a review when the umpire is actually admitting to have made a mistake?
Mustafizur, Mosaddek, Mehidy, Nazmul - where did they all come from? By Mohammad Isam
Mark Nicholas: England's recklessness in the name of positivity is a sign that the art of batting in the longest format is no longer given due attention
Imran Yusuf ponders an age-old question
The Cricket Monthly
On tour in the UK, Firdose Moonda witnesses a fine comeback, visits the country's oldest pub, and squeezes in some yoga lessons
The memoirs of a fan who has seen the excellence and the excesses of the country's cricket
The month of November was all about the stars of yet another glorious Ashes series
He may be remembered for one delivery, but there was rather more to the Falstaff-like Warwickshire leggie born 98 years ago today
He is known to work hard on the field but not get the wickets he seemingly deserves. Harsh but true: it's because he doesn't bowl enough wicket-taking balls
1975 Perhaps the most audacious innings in Test history