Stuart Broad

He's been around the side for about 18 months. I think it's time he delivered. 20 wickets in this series should be his aim. That and continued development with the bat.

I'm quite worried that he is going to do a Harmison actually.

It feels eerily familiar....

A tall English fast bowler with all the attributes to be a World Class performer but just hasn't delivered faces a fragile West Indies batting side on a quickish Sabina Park wicket.....

I think he should definitely be given a run this time.

Delivering big time is not yet essential. Just delivering enough to be going on with.

I would give him all the tests and see what he does. In a five-man attack he should be OK.

I've backed him from the start. He's got the right attitude for starters - something Harmison doesn't have.


Like to see him bring his test average down in this series though not sure he'll be suited to the pitches...

JKLever wrote:I've backed him from the start. He's got the right attitude for starters - something Harmison doesn't have.


Like to see him bring his test average down in this series though not sure he'll be suited to the pitches...

I disagree, 3/4 of the pitches are going to be at least partially helpful for the pacemen.

- Sabina Park is good for pace and spin.

- Kensington Oval has excellent pace and bounce

- Queens Park Oval was the scene of our last test victory which we achieved with pace like fiyah from Fidel and JT.

- Admittedly the Sir Viv Richards Stadium has an absolute road for a wicket and does not suit any bowler at all.

I think Broad will do very well tbh, and there is no excuse if he doesn't.

FWIW, I think he should play in all four tests unless the wheels fly off in all directions in the first two. He's seriously talented, there's no doubt about that, I just think there should be some evidence of progress in his bowling returns.

Basil wrote:FWIW, I think he should play in all four tests unless the wheels fly off in all directions in the first two. He's seriously talented, there's no doubt about that, I just think there should be some evidence of progress in his bowling returns.

What other options do we have? It's not like Harmison & Anderson are anything but inconsistently gash with the odd decent match thrown in.

WIFAN wrote:

JKLever wrote:I've backed him from the start. He's got the right attitude for starters - something Harmison doesn't have.


Like to see him bring his test average down in this series though not sure he'll be suited to the pitches...

I disagree, 3/4 of the pitches are going to be at least partially helpful for the pacemen.

- Sabina Park is good for pace and spin.

- Kensington Oval has excellent pace and bounce

- Queens Park Oval was the scene of our last test victory which we achieved with pace like fiyah from Fidel and JT.

- Admittedly the Sir Viv Richards Stadium has an absolute road for a wicket and does not suit any bowler at all.

I think Broad will do very well tbh, and there is no excuse if he doesn't.

Interesting - didn't think the WI would make lively pitches this time around tbh...

JKLever wrote:

Basil wrote:FWIW, I think he should play in all four tests unless the wheels fly off in all directions in the first two. He's seriously talented, there's no doubt about that, I just think there should be some evidence of progress in his bowling returns.

What other options do we have? It's not like Harmison & Anderson are anything but inconsistently gash with the odd decent match thrown in.

We musn't get stuck in the "Bell Trap" though - just picking a player automatically long after he's ceased to be worthy of a regualr place

Oh f*ck he's so promising, he could surpass Flintoff. He's probably going to end with a record closer to Chris Lewis but we won't see him the age of 40 smuggling class A drugs in a fruit cocktail tin.

What are the odds that Bell gets a game at the Antigua road due to an injury or a disaster run for someone else and ends up offensively breaking the world record?

Basil wrote:

JKLever wrote:

Basil wrote:FWIW, I think he should play in all four tests unless the wheels fly off in all directions in the first two. He's seriously talented, there's no doubt about that, I just think there should be some evidence of progress in his bowling returns.

What other options do we have? It's not like Harmison & Anderson are anything but inconsistently gash with the odd decent match thrown in.

We musn't get stuck in the "Bell Trap" though - just picking a player automatically long after he's ceased to be worthy of a regualr place

Bell would have melted after being struck for six 6's in an over. Made of different stuff IMO...

JKLever wrote:

Basil wrote:

JKLever wrote:

Basil wrote:FWIW, I think he should play in all four tests unless the wheels fly off in all directions in the first two. He's seriously talented, there's no doubt about that, I just think there should be some evidence of progress in his bowling returns.

What other options do we have? It's not like Harmison & Anderson are anything but inconsistently gash with the odd decent match thrown in.

We musn't get stuck in the "Bell Trap" though - just picking a player automatically long after he's ceased to be worthy of a regualr place

Bell would have melted after being struck for six 6's in an over. Made of different stuff IMO...

Aye, no argument there.

Well the only way we win Test matches at the moment is when our pacers do the damage.

It is a risk but England's attack is not too much more threatening than ours IMHO, the difference could well be the spinners and our insistence on picking Powell.

I don't think England fans have had the privilege of seeing JT when he is fully fit and on song, and I am hoping he really does the business at Sabina Park.

I'd pick him.

But it's time for him to show some substance - to show that he's actually developing as a bowler, that the penny is dropping.

10 Tests, 26 wickets @ 45 is a rubbish return from a guy who has played 5 of those Tests against the semi pros of NZ. Never taken more than three wickets in an innings.

Yet he's the darling of English cricket.

Compare him with the leper of English cricket, Sajid Mahmood: 8 Tests, 20 wickets @ 38, all against non-minnows (SL, Pak and Aus) and has taken four-fors twice.

Weird, no?

Saj is not *that* bad. He has intimidating pace, and can be just about unplayable when on song. But sadly, that's just the point. He's not on song long enough. He is just not consistent enough to be a reliable Test bowler.

I like Mahmood - rate him as a prospect. I was just highlighting the nonsensical discrepancy between players England back to the hilt and players they throw on the scrapheap.

It's hard to see what Mahmood did that was so wrong when apparently Broad is doing things so right. Against minnows.

I might agree. Except he's about 26, isn't he?

A bit late for a seam bowling prospect, sadly.

27 in fact. (Just checked it.)

PeterCS wrote:27 in fact. (Just checked it.)

He should be in his prime

PeterCS wrote:I might agree. Except he's about 26, isn't he?

A bit late for a seam bowling prospect, sadly.

Late starter, wasn't he? Didn't turn pro until he was 22, I think.

Too young to write off. Stuart Clark didn't get going until he was 30.

Saj Mahmood is carp.


I hope he never gets anywhere near the England Test Setup again, reverse swing or not.

The big Mah Moo was a huge hit with the Aussie fans

horace wrote:The big Mah Moo was a huge hit with the Aussie bats

Fixed.