They stoned Shakib Al Hasan’s house last week; this week they will probably give him the freedom of Chittagong. Such are the extremes of reaction in Bangladesh.
All the anger was replaced by joy. There was hugging in the press box, normally a reserved sort of a place, and the security guards threw down their guns and danced a jig. Those thousands who left the ground when Bangladesh were virtually beaten at 169 for eight will regret their impetuosity for the rest of their lives.
Victories against England do not come easily. This was only the second and the more important as it keeps alive their hopes of qualification.
As for England, it is a measure of how bad the structure of this tournament is that they can still qualify by beating West Indies in Madras (Chennai). Bizarrely, they can lose to West Indies and, if results go their way, still progress. Go figure.
Not that they deserve to, mind you, and given how badly they missed Stuart Broad yesterday, not many would bank on them going much farther.
Advertisement
Yesterday was as bad as it gets. From the stuttering, nondescript batting to the sulking and petulance as the dew descended and the ball became wet and refused to respond to their urgings, to the way they lost the plot at the fag end of the game once victory had been seemingly assured, it was hard to reconcile this team with the one led by Andrew Strauss for the previous 12 months.
The problems are many and varied. Who should open with Strauss? Matt Prior did it yesterday but again looked far from convincing. What has happened to James Anderson? He suffered from something very close to the yips as Bangladesh closed in on victory, bowling repeated wides down the leg side. England bowled 23 wides in all, far too many in such a tight and low-scoring contest.
What about spin? Bangladesh played four to England’s one, faith in Michael Yardy evaporating game by game. In James Tredwell and Luke Wright, England have reserves who it would be hard to see affecting games. Paul Collingwood’s influence is declining day by day.
At least, in Eoin Morgan, they have a motivated and in-form player. While his team-mates have been on a constant diet of cricket for the past five months, Morgan’s half-century showed the value of a fresh and uncluttered mind. Before he arrived as a replacement for Kevin Pietersen, the left-hander had not picked up a bat since his recovery from a broken finger, through choice and inclination after a frustrating winter in Australia. The benefits of the approach were plain to see as he flourished in conditions that the rest of England’s batsmen struggled with.
Although Strauss publicly defended Pietersen’s decision to return early for a hernia operation instead of opting to play through the pain, privately England feel that they have lost nothing through the addition of Morgan.
Advertisement
For while Pietersen is well known, and the chink in his armour against left-arm spin obvious, Morgan is more of an unknown quantity. His strengths, which are his ability to manoeuvre the ball, to play spin well and to hit with unorthodox methods towards the end of an innings, should be well suited to the conditions.
He went to the crease yesterday with a third of England’s overs gone and only 53 on the board, his team struggling. Morgan, though, was quickly into his stride, skipping down the pitch and hitting over the top with ease, despite the sluggishness of the surface.
With Jonathan Trott at the other end entrenched but becalmed, Morgan’s eagerness to score was badly needed.
The only sign that Morgan was short of cricket were the droplets of sweat and the reddish film to his normally ice-cool features. Not that tiredness brought his downfall; instead, an uppish sweep was brilliantly held by Imrul Kayes at deep square-leg and Morgan’s value to the team was immediately apparent as England stuttered through the powerplay, not for the first time in the tournament. Only with Morgan at the crease was the hoped-for gulf in class between these teams apparent.