England 17-man squad

[Penguinissimo]

Onions is the man in form, and he has a much better FC and test record than Broad. If anyone should miss out for the extra spinner it should be Broad IMO, although I would still have him back for the 2nd test at Lords.

Well, his Test record is slightly irrelevant since it is based on only two Tests, and those against the least interested opposition in the world ever. And since when have FC records meant all that much at Test level?

Broad has improved out of sight in the last 9 months, and is an automatic pick IMO.

 

[tooextracool]

Flintoff's batting relies almost entirely on having his eye in, otherwise he's just a lower order slogger (although a good one). And his eye couldn't be more out if it was at the top of a very large spiked pole in the Antarctic.

Flintoff has never been a 'good lower order slogger' and there is no evidence in any of his 75 tests. Hes always been a player who has

a) played more shots after getting his eye in
b) played orthodox cricket shots rather than out and out slogs unless the situation demanded it

I think it's reasonably ridiculous to be assessing a player based on what he used to be able to do. At the moment, we have no evidence whatsoever that Flintoff is a top 7 batsman. He is a bowler who can bat occasionally to me.

Its not about what he used to be able to do. Flintoff needs time in the middle, and as you have already said hes a much better player when he has his eye in. How often is he going to get to do that at no 8? Having him slog around at number 8 isnt going to turn the Ashes series around or give him the opportunity to do so.

As far as his recent batting record is concerned, lets just remember that he scored a vital half century in India and top scored in the 2nd innings at Sabina Park. Ok, so he didnt score big 100s or anything but its a slight better than most number 8s and it just shows that hes hardly been disgracing himself off late with the bat.

 

[tooextracool]

Well, his Test record is slightly irrelevant since it is based on only two Tests, and those against the least interested opposition in the world ever. And since when have FC records meant all that much at Test level?

Broad has improved out of sight in the last 9 months, and is an automatic pick IMO.

Broad has improved, but by no means is he an automatic pick. Hes yet to consistently take test match wickets and prove that he can. I have no doubt that he will at some point but we do not know if he is good enough at the moment to do so during the Ashes or not. He is also yet to show that he has the tools to take wickets consistently at the test match level, because he doesn't swing the ball prodigiously or get the ball to move off the seam much. And AFAIK I have never heard of him being able to get the ball to reverse either.
Onions on the other hand has been tearing apart county sides in a manner in which Broad has never been able to do. From what I have seen of the two, I rate Onions as the better bowler at present, although I would like to see more of Onions before I can make a full assessment

 

[Richard]

Solanki in the Lions squad...wtf.

That's pretty remarkable ICL or no ICL, but the ICL-ers-are-accepted-straight-back message rings loudest, to my ears. Solanki's clearly not going to be playing for England but his presence there is a symbolic one.

 

[Richard]

And since when have FC records meant all that much at Test level?

All the time, since Test and domestic First-Class cricket is the same thing played under the exact same rules, so thus if someone outperforms someone in one, there's an exceptionally high likelihood they will also do in the other.

I've never thought much of Onions but there's no doubt he's currently a far better bowler than Broad.

 

[Richard]

Ah. Oh.

But one of the other "batsmen" was Bell, who doesn't count. That's my excuse, and I'm sticking to it.

Nope, sorry, still doesn't wash. Bell didn't play that Test.

 

[Penguinissimo]

Nope, sorry, still doesn't wash. Bell didn't play that Test.

Can I just delete all my posts and pretend none of this ever happened?

 

[four_or_six]

All the time, since Test and domestic First-Class cricket is the same thing played under the exact same rules, so thus if someone outperforms someone in one, there's an exceptionally high likelihood they will also do in the other.

I've never thought much of Onions but there's no doubt he's currently a far better bowler than Broad.

There's plenty of doubt, because Broad hasn't bowled in the CC this season, so we have no basis for comparison.

Edit: Actually, that's not true. Broad has 7 wickets @ 15 in one match.

 

[Penguinissimo]

I've never thought much of Onions but there's no doubt he's currently a far better bowler than Broad.

Well, I'm not entirely sure I agree with that now - Broad is a much, much better bowler than he used to be, and he is battle-hardened in a way that Onions certainly isn't.

Plus, Broad's batting is fairly important to the balance of the team. Imagine a tail of Anderson, Onions, Panesar...it'd be like 2006/7 all over again.

 

[Penguinissimo]

Edit: Actually, that's not true. Broad has 7 wickets @ 15 in one match.

Which isn't bad.

 

[tooextracool]

I've never thought much of Onions but there's no doubt he's currently a far better bowler than Broad.

Out of curiousity, Why dont you rate Onions?
From the little Ive seen off him so far, he seems to be about as close as anyone has ever managed in emulating Shaun Pollock if anything.

 

[tooextracool]

Well, I'm not entirely sure I agree with that now - Broad is a much, much better bowler than he used to be, and he is battle-hardened in a way that Onions certainly isn't.

Plus, Broad's batting is fairly important to the balance of the team. Imagine a tail of Anderson, Onions, Panesar...it'd be like 2006/7 all over again.

Err Anderson is hardly a poor bat, hes good enough to bat 9 or 10 pretty easily. If Panesar plays a test I will be very very disappointed. AFAIC, the only test in which Broad should miss out will probably be at Cardiff, where he should be replaced by Adil Rashid who is by all means at least as good if not a better batter than Broad.

 

[Richard]

Can I just delete all my posts and pretend none of this ever happened?

TBH, I wish none of it ever happening applied to England not picking a Test-class batsman (or someone with hopes to be thus at worst) to bat at six.

 

[Richard]

There's plenty of doubt, because Broad hasn't bowled in the CC this season, so we have no basis for comparison.

Edit: Actually, that's not true. Broad has 7 wickets @ 15 in one match.

That's just the point - Broad has barely bowled, Onions has bowled far less than he might've done and Onions' record is far better.

Also Broad despite all his improvement in the last six months still has plenty of doubt over whether he's a Test-standard bowler.

 

[tooextracool]

Well, I'm not entirely sure I agree with that now - Broad is a much, much better bowler than he used to be, and he is battle-hardened in a way that Onions certainly isn't.

This is true, and a very important point being something I have alluded to in the past.
To be honest, I would not be too distressed if either Broad or Onions missed out at Cardiff.
However, my concern with Broad is that he hasn't shown consistent wicket-taking tools with the red ball, although perhaps at Cardiff, if the pitch plays like what it is expected to play, it might suit Broad more than it would suit Onions.

 

[Richard]

Out of curiousity, Why dont you rate Onions?
From the little Ive seen off him so far, he seems to be about as close as anyone has ever managed in emulating Shaun Pollock if anything.

Nah, Onions has spent too long being a Durham reserve for me to get too excited about him.

It's only this season that he's convincingly suggested he's possibly better than the likes of Davies, Harmison, Plunkett, Thorp etc. And as everyone knows, I've never been one to place too much on 1\3 of a season. If Onions keeps this season's work up he'll be a genuine prospect for sure, but he's been a nothing bowler for ages, and it's quite rare to see someone make such massive strides in such a short time.

Not unheard of though, obviously.

 

[four_or_six]

That's just the point - Broad has barely bowled, Onions has bowled far less than he might've done and Onions' record is far better.

Also Broad despite all his improvement in the last six months still has plenty of doubt over whether he's a Test-standard bowler.

It's not the point at all. You're saying that Onions is obviously better than Broad. How can it be obvious if there's not been a decent comparison this season?

There might be doubt over whether Broad is a test-standard bowler. But surely there's at least as much doubt over the same with Onions?

 

[Richard]

Yeah, but playing someone at 10 for their batting is a mistake. One/two wickets and it's all over. Even if they're good, it's likely they would just end up 10*.

That isn't true. Someone at ten is going to be coming in with everyone above them better. That means they could easily put on 70 or 80 with the man who was a the crease as they came to it.

Unlike bowling, you can never, ever have too deep a batting unit. You want all the batting you can get. In any case, Rashid's batting > Swann's at worst, and maybe Broad's too.

 

[Richard]

It's not the point at all. You're saying it's obvious that Onions is obviously better than Broad. How can it be obvious if there's not been a decent comparison this season?

There might be doubt over whether Broad is a test-standard bowler. But surely there's at least as much doubt over the same with Onions?

Of course there is. Heavens, I'm not hailing Onions as a Test-standard bowler at this point in time. But where there is something for him, there is nothing for Broad. Ergo, Broad = not proven good enough for anything much; Onions = proven outstanding so far this season if not much else.

 

[tooextracool]

Not unheard of though, obviously.

Yeah happened not too long ago with another injury plagued bowler who ended up being instrumental in winning the last Ashes series.