Four players were placed in the boundary when David Warner and Steve Smith started day four's play in the Mirpur Test
When the Bangladesh bowlers were on top and Australia were stumbling, the Tigers should have created more pressure to take the remaining wickets and wrap up the tail-enders.
Imagine if Steven Smith was the captain then and Shafiul Islam and Taijul Islam were batting, then what approach he would have taken to take the remaining wickets?
Well, Australia were more attacking, as usual, while they were fielding. Tamim Iqbal was batting solidly along with Mushfiq and building the lead further to set a difficult fourth innings target for the Aussies.
But despite saving runs, Australia still set aggressive fields, knowing that if these two batsmen get going then Australia would be in more trouble. So Smith created more chances by offering batsmen to play free shots, rather than waiting for mistakes from the opposition batsmen.
Second inningsBangladesh started their bowling with Mehedi Hasan Miraz with David Warner and Smith batting for Australia. Australia were 109/2 chasing a challenging 265 on a difficult fourth innings pitch.
Smith and Warner formed a 81-run unbeaten partnership at stumps on day three. And so on day four, Miraz came to bowl with his off-spin.
Mustafizur Rahman was fielding at dip mid wicket. Suddenly Miraz bowled a short ball and Warner smashed it for four. Warner did what he does best with short balls. He just rolled his wrist to play a pull shot and get four in return.
In the very next over, four fielders were patrolling the fence, considering that one boundary came in the previous over from a bad ball. The Tigers needed to break that partnership, rather than checking the boundary.Also read: We showed Bangladesh can be aggressive on field as well, says Mushfiq
Yes, checking runs were also important as Warner and Smith batted well on day three and remained unbeaten but it was a fresh day and fresh start on day four. So Bangladesh had to take the wicket of either Warner or Smith to get back in the match. In the 37th over, four fielders were in the fence with deep point, long on, deep fine leg and deep mid wicket. It seemed that Warner would have gone for a wild sweep and the deep fielder in leg side will catch it. But Warner did not even try to sweep in the whole innings. So was it justified to put four fielders in the boundary? The result? Bang, bang, bang, three fours in that over came through the cover region.
In the 47th over there were four fielders in the fence as well. Australia lost the crucial wicket of Smith. Glenn Maxwell came in and faced only one ball while Peter Handscomb was batting on nine from 15 balls.
There was only one slip and one close-in fielder at that time. Wicket had just fallen and Bangladesh needed to create more pressure.
But only one close-in fielder was placed. Then Shakib came in to the act and brought one more fielder in the close-in region. And that move paid dividend just an over later as Handscomb was dismissed in the 49th over when Taijul was bowling.
In a tense situation, the Tigers can't rely on the opponent to make mistakes and give their wicket away, rather Bangladesh need to put more pressure upon them by creating more wicket-taking opportunities.
Sometimes over aggressiveness can cost Bangladesh but too much defensive mindset can also cost the Tigers. Bangladesh need to find the balance.
Pressure was on Australia in the first Test, and not on Bangladesh. So the Tigers should have piled more pressure on them, rather than give them the chance to take ones and twos, and wait for them to commit a mistake.
And so in the second match, the visiting side are under tremendous pressure after losing the first Test. If they lose again they will drop them to sixth in the ICC Test rankling, their lowest ranking in more than two decades.
If Bangladesh can make a good start and place themselves in a commanding position, captain Mushfiq should step up and attack the opponent by deploying attacking field placing. Australia are very much on the back foot, and not Bangladesh, so why all the defensiveness?