• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Stuart Broad

inbox24

inbox24

International Debutant
I've never really rated Stuart Broad, James Anderson or Stephen Harmison as top quality international bowlers at all. Broad particularly lacks the control, the pace and any ball deviation to trouble high quality batsmen. If you look at his test average in the mid 40s, even though it's early in his career, the signs are there, that if the pitches are absolute greentops, he's really not effective. The only reason he works in ODIs is that poor quality/out of form batsmen have really tried to take it to him and gets wickets caught. He's kind of like IK Pathan at the moment, absolute cannon fodder for good batsmen.
 
Athlai

Athlai

Not Terrible
inbox24 said:
I've never really rated Stuart Broad, James Anderson or Stephen Harmison as top quality international bowlers at all. Broad particularly lacks the control, the pace and any ball deviation to trouble high quality batsmen. If you look at his test average in the mid 40s, even though it's early in his career, the signs are there, that if the pitches are absolute greentops, he's really not effective. The only reason he works in ODIs is that poor quality/out of form batsmen have really tried to take it to him and gets wickets caught. He's kind of like IK Pathan at the moment, absolute cannon fodder for good batsmen.
Click to expand...
Except Pathan gets swing and is a far better bowler than Broad.
 
zaremba

zaremba

Cricketer Of The Year
There's currently no justification for playing Stuart Broad. In terms of Test bowling, he is currently comparable to Ian Bell and Paul Collingwood.

I do like the look of the lower middle order with him at 8. However I am coming round to the view that if you need to bolster the lower batting order then you should drop Monty and bring in Swann. This would make way for another quick bowler who could actually take you some wickets. Anderson is the likeliest in the current squad although he's proved his unreliability over the course of 6 long and frustrating years. Perhaps Davies of Durham is worth a shot.

One myth about Broad is that he lacks pace. He did a year or so ago, but is now quite capable of bowling at 90mph. The problem is that he gets no real lateral movement, his accuracy isn't great, and doesn't get as much bounce as he should from his height. I also suspect that if he made proper use of his front arm when bowling (as has been pointed out, it swings out into a useless arc rather than actually powering his delivery) he would greatly improve as a bowler. But he can't be expected to learn or to make that kind of technical adjustment fast enough in Test cricket.

Drop him, then, and let's see how good he is in a couple of years' time.
 
social

social

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I watched a programme a short while ago where Willis, Knight and Hussain were discussing, amongst other things, Bell and Broad

The praise that those guys poured over those 2 was mind-boggling and is obviously shared by the selectors

Anyway, in Broad's case, he obviously isnt test class yet and the only rationale behind his continued selection is that he is one for the future

I tend to be slightly more optimistic than Goughy but agree that unless he learns how to move the ball, he'll never go anywhere
 
thierry henry

thierry henry

International Coach
social said:
I tend to be slightly more optimistic than Goughy but agree that unless he learns how to move the ball, he'll never go anywhere
Click to expand...
Don't think it's that crucial tbh

Can be an Ambrose style bowler with his combo of height and pace- but he needs to find his max pace (which is mid-high 140s at times) and accuracy consistently. Easier said than done.
 
BoyBrumby

BoyBrumby

Englishman
Son Of Coco said:
:laugh:

I thought it...you said it, so I feel safe to jump on the bandwagon now! Quite frankly, he annoys me because he looks English :ph34r:
Click to expand...
Yeah, 'cos our team is packed full of guys with bleached hair & wanky, mulletty, spikey "dos". Oh, no, actually, that's yours. :p
 
Goughy

Goughy

Hall of Fame Member
Burgey said:
Seems effeminate, frankly.
Click to expand...
You are right he does.

Its a strange thing sweeping cricket. The current Australian cricket team look like underdeveloped school boys.

They look like they need a good meal and rather than beeing elite level athletes they look like refugees.

Ive been noticing for a long time this trend and it has me worried. Michael Clarke being the first to look like a 12 year old. It has spread through the team and even Tait, who once appeared broad shouldered and strong in the chest, has the Clalista Flockhart head-too-big-for-the-body thing going on now.

With Symonds and Watson out of the team the players looks physically underdeveloped.

Id seriously be talking to their expert nutritionists. Their chests look shrunken and they look underweight and childlike.

There is a difference between being fit and strong and being skinny and the Australians seem to have taken it too far. And before anyone mentions, it is not the 'cut' of the ODI shirts.
 
TT Boy

TT Boy

Hall of Fame Member
Gilly always had the look of someone who was terminally ill and in need of a good meal and a pint of blood.

Whilst Langer, the karate expert didn't look like he could even take Daniel LaRusso.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top