West Indies vs Bangladesh: West Indies slump to their second-lowest ODI total at home

WI vs BAN, 2nd ODI, West Indies were bowled out for a paltry score of 108 by Bangladesh in the second match at Providence Stadium in Guyana.

Kyle Mayers and Nicholas Pooran. Courtesy: Windies Cricket Twitter

Kyle Mayers and Nicholas Pooran. Courtesy: Windies Cricket Twitter

HIGHLIGHTS

  • West Indies played only 35 overs in their innings in the 2nd ODI vs BAN
  • Keemo Paul top-scored for the West Indies
  • Mehidy Hasan Miraz picked up 4 wickets

Bangladesh, on Wednesday, July 13, bowled West Indies out for 108 in 35 overs in the second ODI at the Providence Stadium in Guyana.

It also happened to be the second-lowest ODI score registered by the Caribbean team at home. Their lowest score is 98, which they got against Pakistan back in July 2013 at the same venue.

After being put in to bat first, the hosts got off to a steady start. Shai Hope and Kyle Mayers put on 27 runs for the opening wicket, but once they were separated, West Indies huffed and puffed.

Keemo Paul scored 25 runs off 24 balls with four fours and took the team’s score past the 100-run mark and, most importantly, 98. Nicholas Pooran and Co found it extremely tough to face the Bangladesh spinners.

Eight of the 10 wickets went to the Tigers’ spinners. Mehidy Hasan Miraz was the pick of the Bangladesh bowlers after he finished with stupendous figures of 8-1-29-4.

Nasum Ahmed was on top of his game as he picked up three wickets and conceded only 19 runs at an economy rate of 1.90. Mosaddek Hossain Saikat, who replaced Taskin Ahmed in the playing XI, got the important wicket of Mayers.

Among the pacers, left-armer Shoriful Islam got rid of Powell in the 26th over. Mustafizur Rahman was economical in the four overs he bowled, but failed to pick up a wicket.

Hope, Mayers, Brandon King, Rovman Powell and Paul got into double digits. Even as Paul chipped in with some vital runs, the others failed to carry on after getting off to starts.

— ENDS —

News
Source link

Leave a Reply