ODI Cricket Draft QF 4: Harshad vs NM

[The Man Himself]

btw, Flintoff only has 12 innings at no. 7 and his SR is just 75. His most innings have been at 5th. Compare this to Razzaq who has a century and 9 fifties at no. 7, at SR of 90+ and has batted that the most. A century from no. 7 is special, it was an unbelievable performance and he played many such knocks. The century is vs SA as well. http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/461567.html
He came in with 150 needed of 20 overs with 5 wickets in hand for Pak. Won it single-handedly. Scored 109 out of those 150 and in 100 odd balls.

Our team is full of players who can handle the pressure very well and not get buckled by target.

 

[NM]

Why exactly I won't ahve that option if it is for 5 overs? Ashwin has SR of 86 and has ODI 50 and has avg of 17. Holding has 2 ODI 50s. If at all they need to accelerate, they can. As I said though, our no. 9 is there to limit the target, not hit the inning shot. He won't be required for that.




If you are going to just go by avg. then your openers are not at all better than ours. You can keep repeating Chanderpaul is in same league as Waugh, I doubt anybody who has watched both play is going to agree. Flintoff is again not better than Razzaq. Razzaq is someone who used to be trusted with playing at no. 3 in ODIs and he could both consolidate as well as score fast. He is better guy to have at no. 7 as well.
There won't be a 'huge score.' Not when 3 of the bowlers in my team has career econ less than 4 who are very tough to get away.

I'm not going by average. Anybody who has seen Kirsten and Hayden play will agree that Hayden is the best out of the 4 openers, and Kirsten is better than Dilshan. I haven't seen enough of Guptill to comment on him. Hayden was amongst the best in the world at what he did.

I've given my opinion on Chanders. Waugh is being overrated because of his test match record here. He is very good, but not great in ODIs. Averages 30, is a world beater, should be a new meme.

Re Razzaq: He was a shit 3. 27 average and 55 strike rate. Don't know what point you are trying to make. Flintoff is better to have anywhere.

 

[NM]

btw, Flintoff only has 12 innings at no. 7 and his SR is just 75. His most innings have been at 5th. Compare this to Razzaq who has a century and 9 fifties at no. 7, at SR of 90+ and has batted that the most. A century from no. 7 is special, it was an unbelievable performance and he played many such knocks. The century is vs SA as well. http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/461567.html
He came in with 150 needed of 20 overs with 5 wickets in hand for Pak. Won it single-handedly. Scored 109 out of those 150 and in 100 odd balls.

Our team is full of players who can handle the pressure very well and not get buckled by target.

Like JP Duminy and all the SA chokers right? Of course he won't choke in a close match

 

[NM]

You are relying on two SAFFERS in a chase. Of COURSE you are going to choke and lose

 

[NM]

@Boycott thought you were leaning my way?

 

[The Man Himself]

Hayden was amongst the best in the world at what he did.

He was very good but not as good as his test. I won't have problem in him being better than Guptill.

I've given my opinion on Chanders. Waugh is being overrated because of his test match record here. He is very good, but not great in ODIs. Averages 30, is a world beater, should be a new meme.

I missed the bit where Chanders played those knocks vs SA and won his team world cup. Can you share the link for that? ffs Chanders better than Waugh

Re Razzaq: He was a shit 3. 27 average and 55 strike rate. Don't know what point you are trying to make. Flintoff is better to have anywhere.

Razzaq is batting at 3 for me or no. 7? I shared no. 7 position stats of both Razzaq and Flintoff. Tell me how they say Flintoff is better at 7.

 

[The Man Himself]

lol looks like NM has gone mad and losing his shit with all the green smilieys. Are you cracking under pressure, NM? S. Waugh has taught my team to be cool though

 

[Boycott]

@Boycott thought you were leaning my way?

I think your team would have been better off chasing.

Relying on your front liners to go the whole way keeping the score in check and bagging wickets at the same time is too much to ask for on a batting paradise. I don't rate either spinner fwiw.

 

[NM]

lol looks like NM has gone mad and losing his shit with all the green smilieys. Are you cracking under pressure, NM? S. Waugh has taught my team to be cool though

Nahh mate. I'm having a good time. I don't take this draft too seriously.

Re: Razzaq: You specifically said he was so good he was trusted to bat at 3. I pointed out he was shit there, and of course there was no response from you.

 

[NM]

I think your team would have been better off chasing.

Relying on your front liners to go the whole way keeping the score in check and bagging wickets at the same time is too much to ask for on a batting paradise. I don't rate either spinner fwiw.

Fair enough. Obviously I disagree - he has 2 chokers chasing. I don't think a SAFFER will ever win his team a big game, like this is. Surely that has to count for something?

 

[crappycraperson]

I'm not going by average. Anybody who has seen Kirsten and Hayden play will agree that Hayden is the best out of the 4 openers, and Kirsten is better than Dilshan. I haven't seen enough of Guptill to comment on him. Hayden was amongst the best in the world at what he did.

I've given my opinion on Chanders. Waugh is being overrated because of his test match record here. He is very good, but not great in ODIs. Averages 30, is a world beater, should be a new meme.

Re Razzaq: He was a shit 3. 27 average and 55 strike rate. Don't know what point you are trying to make. Flintoff is better to have anywhere.

Do you have any Chanders innings to highlight that rival's Waugh's knocks in 96 QF against NZ and 99 super six match against SA?

 

[The Man Himself]

Nahh mate. I'm having a good time. I don't take this draft too seriously.

Re: Razzaq: You specifically said he was so good he was trusted to bat at 3. I pointed out he was shit there, and of course there was no response from you.

No my point was that he was trusted to bat at 3 too on occasions. He did play it slow up there mostly and tried to consolidate. It wasn't his A game but he did it few times. His best position is where he is playing for us anyway so his no. 3 record doesn't matter much as far as this match up goes.

 

[Boycott]

Fair enough. Obviously I disagree - he has 2 chokers chasing. I don't think a SAFFER will ever win his team a big game, like this is. Surely that has to count for something?

We gloss over fixers in these drafts. That doesn't come into my reckoning tbh

 

[The Man Himself]

Fair enough. Obviously I disagree - he has 2 chokers chasing. I don't think a SAFFER will ever win his team a big game, like this is. Surely that has to count for something?

That's nonsense. The guy chasing is ABD. What SA as team does doesn't matter. Also since ABD has come in, they have been pulling off wins from difficult situations.

 

[NM]

That's nonsense. The guy chasing is ABD. What SA as team does doesn't matter. Also since ABD has come in, they have been pulling off wins from difficult situations.

You know it to be true

You will choke

 

[Mani]

Ya we could have but we liked the look of our batting. There are players for all circumstances.

I get the point of batting wins ODIs but you just have to look at matches between two decently matched batting teams go, on a batting paradise wicket, when one team has edge in bowling. That slightly better bowling can save 15-20 runs which can change result. For batting to win it, it needs to be significantly better which I don't think NM's is here than us.

I didn't say batting win matches ,its was Parth, its a flat pitch and with avaliablity of batsmens on both side scoring woundn't be difficult task, pitches like this especially need bowlers, bowlers who can hit the deck hard or bowlers who could bowl yorkers to make it difficult for batsmen.
There is no issue with your front 3 bowlers but bowlers like Razaaq would suffer.
For him Roberts/Wasim to open and Flintoff can be decent 1st change with Bracken with his mix up can be handy in those middle overs but again the spinner would go for some runs.

 

[Mani]

I have voted for them but I do believe they effed up the reinforcements. Should have kept Lee and upgraded Waugh with Pointing.

Yep,Ponting and AB at middle, wow.

 

[Mani]

Country restriction compared to current lineup's balance prevented that. Ponting I would have had in top 3 but one of the top 3 would have had to go down or Ponting at 4. We thought on 4-5, AB-Waugh provides combo who played in those positions in their career and did well in all circumstances.

No one bothered about position here, you should have took him.

 

[KM]

He was being severely underrated but even I said Ambrose was clearly superior.

I'll have to strongly disagree on the Dilshan/Kirsten opinion.

Eh? I'm saying Kirsten is better inspite of whatever stats say

 

[prath92]

Why exactly I won't ahve that option if it is for 5 overs? Ashwin has SR of 86 and has ODI 50 and has avg of 17. Holding has 2 ODI 50s. If at all they need to accelerate, they can. As I said though, our no. 9 is there to limit the target, not hit the inning shot. He won't be required for that.




If you are going to just go by avg. then your openers are not at all better than ours. You can keep repeating Chanderpaul is in same league as Waugh, I doubt anybody who has watched both play is going to agree. Flintoff is again not better than Razzaq. Razzaq is someone who used to be trusted with playing at no. 3 in ODIs and he could both consolidate as well as score fast. He is better guy to have at no. 7 as well.
There won't be a 'huge score.' Not when 3 of the bowlers in my team has career econ less than 4 who are very tough to get away.

Haha no one is going to agree that Chanderpaul is as good as Waugh but guptill is as good as Hayden? I used average only because you did. Guptill has scored a lot of his runs in the new NZ grounds which are smaller than school grounds. And against inferior bowling like WI Zim and all too. And Razzaq is in no way better. Flintoff also used to come up in the order to 3 or 4 if that's your method to determine who is a better batsman. Flintoff was more consistent than Razzaq. Razzaq was like the pak version of Agarkar. Decent bowler when he came, tried a little in batting but in a couple of years declined in both.

The superiority we have in batting cannot be offset by whatever little advantage (in this pitch Waugh will not be able to do too much to impact the likes of Kohli and Dhoni so no it's not that much of an advantage). Dilshan and Duminy may have bowling experience but They will be sitting ducks for spin players that we have. The pitch won't help them one bit unlike it will for my batsmen. And they are barely run controllers themselves.

 

[prath92]

I didn't say batting win matches ,its was Parth, its a flat pitch and with avaliablity of batsmens on both side scoring woundn't be difficult task, pitches like this especially need bowlers, bowlers who can hit the deck hard or bowlers who could bowl yorkers to make it difficult for batsmen.
There is no issue with your front 3 bowlers but bowlers like Razaaq would suffer.
For him Roberts/Wasim to open and Flintoff can be decent 1st change with Bracken with his mix up can be handy in those middle overs but again the spinner would go for some runs.

But Shakib has been a run controller most of his career. Having played for Bangladesh he goes unrated but I have posted that even when his team goes for runs (against the big teams) he doesn't go for runs at all. So in this bowling attack he would be much better than for Bangladesh.

As for Chanderpaul he can play anywhere in the MO and can definitely play a fast innings.

For instance this innings in a game against Fanie,Donald,Pollock http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/66126.html. They would have won that game had it not been for Kirsten,Cronje and Rhodes.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/64787.html This against Srinath Nehra Agarkar (bth before they got shit) Harbhajan and Ganguly

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/65663.html this to support Lara ?

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/65197.html this against Pak in WC? Had he got a better support from his batsmen they could have won but he would get help here.

All very quick innings to get the team to a good score. So this shows he can bat quickly whenn he wants. But he wasnt required in the same way as waugh because WI were almost always requiring CHanderpaul to do a stabilizing job with Lara. So yes Chanderpaul can pplay a quick innings. Yes he can bat at 5. Hope that clarifies that. Just solidifies that our batting is superior.

 

[NM]

Eh? I'm saying Kirsten is better inspite of whatever stats say

My bad. I'm brainfecked. I had to rate all my junior staff and some co-workers today. The process is so unfair and has so many politics it drove me mad.

 

[prath92]

Chamderpaul bowling

This game where he took 4-0-16-2 against Aus (took wicckets of Waugh brothers) http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/65550.html
This game where he took 5-0- 18-3 against Ind http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/65878.html
This game in 2008 where he took 4-0-19-0 against SA http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/298809.html
This game where he took an important wicket to break the partnership against Pak http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/65549.html
This game in 1996 where he bowled 8-0-35-1 against NZ http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/64525.html
This game against Eng where he took 5-0-23-1 http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/64588.html

So he may not be rated much but he could definitely send in 3 or 4 overs and could chip in wickets too. If all we need is to get 4-5 overs done without conceding a lot of runs, Chanderpaul does seem to have done that a few times in his career. So I dont think we are as low in Bowling options as TMH seems to make it seem. We have 5 bowlers, a decent part timer which seems sufficient from the fact that this pitch is suited for batsmen. We would prefer to deal with the situation that if a bowler supposedly has a bad spell he would be removed and then we would get Flintoff early to stifle the runs and get the other bowler to make up for it in the end. All 4 of our frontline bowlers were death bowlers so they are capable of coming back from a supposed bad spell if any (I hope this answers @Mani and @Boycott questions too)

 

[prath92]

@Boycott We could have won chasing but we definitely have the players to set up a huge score in this pitch and the bowlers to stifle it so there's every chance we can win it by batting first. Akram Roberts bracken Flintoff are experienced death bowlers who as I said, could take advantage of the mistakes that batsmen could make in being forced to score quicker. They also have good swing (except maybe Roberts) that they generate which will flummox the batsmen. There is Razzaq who could do that for them .It will be difficult to bat against these bowlers chasing

 

[Akshay]

Country restriction compared to current lineup's balance prevented that. Ponting I would have had in top 3 but one of the top 3 would have had to go down or Ponting at 4. We thought on 4-5, AB-Waugh provides combo who played in those positions in their career and did well in all circumstances.

Ponting at 4 would be fine imo. He was great at 3, why would it hurt him to come in just a little later? That said, I still like Waugh quite a bit. Very good player whenever his team needed him most.

 

[Akshay]

Conditions and toss are in harshad's favour imo. He has the more explosive batsmen and whereas a player like Dilshan is normally not the most reliable I expect to thrive on this wicket. NM's batsmen are steadier but it's not as important here. A batting friendly wicket also makes it difficult to defend even large totals.

 

[prath92]

btw, Flintoff only has 12 innings at no. 7 and his SR is just 75. His most innings have been at 5th. Compare this to Razzaq who has a century and 9 fifties at no. 7, at SR of 90+ and has batted that the most. A century from no. 7 is special, it was an unbelievable performance and he played many such knocks. The century is vs SA as well. http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/461567.html
He came in with 150 needed of 20 overs with 5 wickets in hand for Pak. Won it single-handedly. Scored 109 out of those 150 and in 100 odd balls.

Our team is full of players who can handle the pressure very well and not get buckled by target.

Flintoff batted at 5 only because he was required as a batsman by England. I'm sure you have seen that he scored 50(28) 84(60) and all batting at 7? Then a stable innings against India in WC 2003 to score 64 when all others were useless against Nehra s moving ball. We don't need him to do anymore than this which he clearly is capable.

Edit- Fred's ODI SR is 88. I think his acceleration is just fine

 

[prath92]

Conditions and toss are in harshad's favour imo. He has the more explosive batsmen and whereas a player like Dilshan is normally not the most reliable I expect to thrive on this wicket. NM's batsmen are steadier but it's not as important here. A batting friendly wicket also makes it difficult to defend even large totals.

As I said, we have more tougher bowlers to face in that they get the ball to swing. I disagree he has more explosive batsmen. Kohli Dhoni Hayden are all extremely explosive. Allan Lamb could explode when required too. He once scored 16 off Bruce Reid in the last over that was unheard of till then. Neither guptill nor Dilshan can really play a steady innings and would take more risks against Akram and Roberts. Roberts in his prime was arguably better than any other bowler too. In fact chasing against these bowlers are trickier.

 

[prath92]

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

Akram's ball of the century

Spoiler

Top batsmen struggled against Akram in his prime. And he can move the ball in the air

 

[prath92]

Flintoff Death Bowling

Spoiler: Flintoff yorkers and death bowling

Bracken bowling

Spoiler: Bracken bowling

 

[prath92]

Akram Hattricks

Spoiler: Akram ODI Hattricks

 

[harshad]

 

[prath92]

Can Allan Lamb play a quick innings? Here is your answer

94(76) vs Aus in 1983 (against Lillee) http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/65346.html
75(89) vs WI in 1984 (against Garner Holding Marshall) http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/64976.html
81(69) vs Pak in 1985 (against Akram Imran Naqash) http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/65726.html
100(105) vs Aus in 1989 (alderman, waugh,lawson, rackemann and moody) http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/64994.html
62(50) vs WI in 1991 (Ambrose, Patterrson, Walsh and Marshall) http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/65001.html
53(53) vs Aus in 1985 (McDermott, Lawson, O'Donnell, Alderman) http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/65719.html

 

[harshad]

 

[prath92]

Our Batting is a mix of both reliability and explosiveness as shown before. All of Kirsten,Kohli,Lamb,Chanderpaul and Dhoni can play a solid yet spectacular innigs or can scoe quickly. Lamb is a solid batsman but can easily go big as has been shown earlier (that too against the best bowlers of the time). Dhoni is a match winner and when on song, even the best bowlers can go for quite a few runs. Then if required explosiveness from the end through Fred, Shakib and Akram (wont be required mostly). All batsman can play their natural game without a target to achieve.

Frankly our bowling is sufficient 5 bowlers with a part timer who can get in godd 4-5 overs. Thats all you need. Especially when the frontline bowlers are wily creatures as well. Akram at his best outfoxed most batsmen with his movement on the ball. Roberts with his pace and accuracy. Flintoff again with his pacy moving yorkers and Bracken with his medium fast swingers and yorkers that was found tough to handle by a lot of batsmen. Shakib again has shown that he could intelligently play and keep it as economical as possible even when his other bowlers go for runs so he would be a much bigger asset with this bowling lineup. If need be for 4-5 overs chanderpaul has shown that he has done that multiple times in his career often against top batting opposition. We dont expect him to be used but if need be we can use him. Dhoni is a master of bowling rotation anyway so he would handle it well.

So I think we definitely have what it takes to win. In pitches like this which doesnt change much, its tougher to chase and especially facing akram and roberts early on can create mistakes out of the openers with two agressive openers playing. AB is a tough batsman and Waugh is a good batsman too but the requirement to score will force mistakes out of a batsman than otherwise so we can bank on that. Not saying that we are going to stop them scoring at all (its a batting pitch so thats impossible) but we definitely have the bowling to restrict their batting and any mistakes can be taken advantage of. Chanderpaul can fill in if need be and he has done that against good batting sides before.

Chamderpaul bowling

This game where he took 4-0-16-2 against Aus (took wickets of Waugh brothers) http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/65550.html
This game where he took 5-0- 18-3 against Ind http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/65878.html
This game in 2008 where he took 4-0-19-0 against SA http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/298809.html
This game where he took an important wicket to break the partnership against Pak http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/65549.html
This game in 1996 where he bowled 8-0-35-1 against NZ http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/64525.html
This game against Eng where he took 5-0-23-1 http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/64588.html

Can Allan Lamb play a quick innings? Here is your answer

94(76) vs Aus in 1983 (against Lillee) http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/65346.html
75(89) vs WI in 1984 (against Garner Holding Marshall) http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/64976.html
81(69) vs Pak in 1985 (against Akram Imran Naqash) http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/65726.html
100(105) vs Aus in 1989 (alderman, waugh,lawson, rackemann and moody) http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/64994.html
62(50) vs WI in 1991 (Ambrose, Patterrson, Walsh and Marshall) http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/65001.html
53(53) vs Aus in 1985 (McDermott, Lawson, O'Donnell, Alderman) http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/65719.html

So yes I think we have more than what it takes to win the game

 

[The Man Himself]

Haha no one is going to agree that Chanderpaul is as good as Waugh but guptill is as good as Hayden? I used average only because you did. Guptill has scored a lot of his runs in the new NZ grounds which are smaller than school grounds. And against inferior bowling like WI Zim and all too. And Razzaq is in no way better. Flintoff also used to come up in the order to 3 or 4 if that's your method to determine who is a better batsman. Flintoff was more consistent than Razzaq. Razzaq was like the pak version of Agarkar. Decent bowler when he came, tried a little in batting but in a couple of years declined in both.

The superiority we have in batting cannot be offset by whatever little advantage (in this pitch Waugh will not be able to do too much to impact the likes of Kohli and Dhoni so no it's not that much of an advantage). Dilshan and Duminy may have bowling experience but They will be sitting ducks for spin players that we have. The pitch won't help them one bit unlike it will for my batsmen. And they are barely run controllers themselves.

You are just repeating yourself again and again and twisting my words in the process assuming that will make it right. Your desperation on part timers is understandable given you don't have any and are trying to justify it when whole ODI history suggests otherwise. You still didn't answer what is your team's backup plan when Flintoff-Bracken-Shakib will get smashed, as they will, and you don't have any cover.

 

[The Man Himself]

Chanderpaul's bowling figures are being provided now!! He has grand total of 14 wickets!! Hehe, Prath, you want innings list of Waugh's 195 wickets and Dilshan's 100+?

 

[prath92]

You are just repeating yourself again and again and twisting my words in the process assuming that will make it right. Your desperation on part timers is understandable given you don't have any and are trying to justify it when whole ODI history suggests otherwise. You still didn't answer what is your team's backup plan when Flintoff-Bracken-Shakib will get smashed, as they will, and you don't have any cover.

Nah the likelihood of they being hit is less likely especially chasing when the need to score is higher. Bracken for instance played in that 434 chase of SA and almost won the game for his country with 5-67 off his 10. His economy of 6.7 The next best economy from a frontline bowler was 7.6 by johan vander wath http://www.espncricinfo.com/rsavaus/engine/current/match/238200.html

Another game where Aus scored 377 against SA and SA in reply scored 294. He had the best figures for a front line bowler. http://www.espncricinfo.com/wc2007/engine/match/247478.html

Chanderpaul's bowling figures are being provided now!! He has grand total of 14 wickets!! Hehe, Prath, you want innings list of Waugh's 195 wickets and Dilshan's 100+?

All people asked were if need be where would you get 4-5 overs done. Which he is fine for. If you think Dilshan is going to make some kind of difference on this pitch because he has taken 100 wickets then I think my batsmen would love it. Kohli and Dhoni would have no issues to score at all against dilshan. Especially in this pitch.

 

[Mani]

But Shakib has been a run controller most of his career. Having played for Bangladesh he goes unrated but I have posted that even when his team goes for runs (against the big teams) he doesn't go for runs at all. So in this bowling attack he would be much better than for Bangladesh.

As for Chanderpaul he can play anywhere in the MO and can definitely play a fast innings.

For instance this innings in a game against Fanie,Donald,Pollock http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/66126.html. They would have won that game had it not been for Kirsten,Cronje and Rhodes.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/64787.html This against Srinath Nehra Agarkar (bth before they got shit) Harbhajan and Ganguly

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/65663.html this to support Lara ?

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/65197.html this against Pak in WC? Had he got a better support from his batsmen they could have won but he would get help here.

All very quick innings to get the team to a good score. So this shows he can bat quickly whenn he wants. But he wasnt required in the same way as waugh because WI were almost always requiring CHanderpaul to do a stabilizing job with Lara. So yes Chanderpaul can pplay a quick innings. Yes he can bat at 5. Hope that clarifies that. Just solidifies that our batting is superior.

I don't have any issues with Chanderpaul's credential against those sub continent teams, he was so good against India especially but aganist the bowling line up of Holding/Mcgrath/Ambrose, i doubt he could score quick enough.
In regards to Shakib we have small sample size to compare and especially against top teams and if you put that to this flat wkt i doubt he would survive here.

 

[prath92]

I don't have any issues with Chanderpaul's credential against those sub continent teams, he was so good against India especially but aganist the bowling line up of Holding/Mcgrath/Ambrose, i doubt he could score quick enough.
In regards to Shakib we have small sample size to compare and especially against top teams and if you put that to this flat wkt i doubt he would survive here.

Shakib in the world cup last year was just like this which was flat. He would be the most economical of Bangladesh bowlers often bowling in the powerplay. If you want i can post it too (that england game is from there).

I think Chanderpaul can definitely score quickly and plus he would have someone alongside him like Kohli Kirsten Lamb or Hayden. He is capable of playing a second fiddle innings to any of the others who undoubtedly can score fast. Even if that batsman go Dhoni can come in and play attacking from the start. Chanderpaul could get his eye in and then hit. This is a pitch where the ball will come onto the bat well. He can easily play a good fast knock once he gets his eye in and till he gets his eye in we have enough batsman who can score quickly.