Where have all the batsmen gone?

The fact that Bangladesh wrapped up the formalities of yet another Test match, albeit on the losing end of the bargain, without going the full distance against South Africa, should cause concerns for all connected with the game.
For as far back as anyone would care to remember, ever since Bangladesh ventured into the rarefied atmosphere of Test cricket, batting has never been the team's forte. For too long it seems our batsmen have been letting the team down. One assumes this malaise of the batting order not standing up to be counted and simply curling up to die at the first sign of a shot being fired in anger has posed questions to the management and players alike. The problem that needs to be addressed is whether enough is being done to redress this issue. Based on what is regularly being on view, presumably, not enough. If so why not? I am not certain who would be the individuals queuing up to answer these questions, but a good start may be to tap the curators, coaches, analysts, and the host of backroom boys who seem to be such an integral part of the team these days. It may well be an interesting inquisition.
Test matches being finished within the third or fourth day, irrespective of wicket conditions or quality of bowling faced, are increasingly and embarrassingly becoming all too familiar when Bangladesh take to the field. Snide remarks of international cricket persons and innuendoes notwithstanding, questions marks are regularly placed against each Test outing. For sure, no one, least of all the Bangladesh side wants this state of affairs to continue.
Regrettably, it does not appear we may be able to come up with the kind of batting performances that is essential to survive in the big bad world of Test cricket, in a hurry. The reasons are fairly obvious and have been so for some time now. For a start, our domestic structure for the longer version of the game has not yet been an effective tool for promoting and encouraging our players to bat for long periods of time on varying conditions and different types of wickets. Added to this, to my mind, has been the inexplicable overdependence on relatively young batsmen, some still in their teens, being thrown in at the deep end and expected to perform accordingly.
While the adage old age and treachery will always triumph over youth and enthusiasm may not entirely be germane to the issue at hand, it does not need a rocket scientist to determine the outcome of a contest which pits a teenaged batsman with a handful or less of first-class matches under his belt against class bowlers plying their trade in Test cricket for years. Davids have always been mythical characters while Goliaths sadly enough have little sense of humour. The old familiar refrain of talent being there is wearing a bit thin. Talent at the end of the day will have to deliver and for that to happen the talent has to be packaged in several layers of experience of performing at the top level of the game, be it domestic or otherwise.
Patience too is a highly essential virtue at the Test level; our batsmen, young and the not so young, would do well to realise this unpalatable fact of life after they have taken guard. An innings of sheer brilliance and dazzling array of shots that lasts long in memory but all too briefly in actual play, counts for little or nothing at the Test level. The bottom line as every cricketer worth his salt would realise, cricket is all said and done still a batsman's game. Our batsmen would do well to get those runs, taking as much time as possible, so that while we may still not harbour thoughts of winning a Test, at least think of not losing one. For want of a more poignant closing line, they owe it not just to everybody who follow their game, they owe it to their bowlers, who in a perversely twisted irony of fate nowadays, do not even get to bowl at the opposition the second time around!

The author is a former cricketer