Pace is irrelevant, its what you do with it. Harmison on a track with a bit of pace is consistently more awkward, gets more bounce and poses more of a wicket-taking threat than Broad. It doesnt matter whether they both bowl at 90 mph along with Anderson, they are different types of bowlers.
Yes. I dont care if Onions is bowling on one foot, but he has to play at Lords. There about a billion reasons for why he should be in the side for this test, not least because he has 21 FC wickets at a shade over 24 on that ground, took a 5fer there on debut against the touring Windies, has the sort of bowling style that would make him most likely out of all the bowlers to be able to utilize the slope and lets not forget the fact that he has a better FC record this season than Harmison.
Yeah, he shows intent in the same way a boy band member shows his toughness. Still not convincing.
I'm calling bull****. Harmison hasn't even had a half-decent game for England in three years. Last time they bowled together, in the West Indies, Broad was so much better it was embarrassing for Harmy. His overall record will tell you how good Harmison used to be, but some English fans are intent on pretending we're still in 2005 and he's still an international standard bowler.
Err Harmison has had a few good games over the past few years, although its not often reflected in his figures. Not a lot of games, but that's also due to a combination of reasons which includes poor selection (dropping him everytime hes had one poor test match over the past year) and the pitches that hes played on. I don't deny that on flat lifeless subcontinental style pitches that Broad is a better bowler (hence why I suggested Broad be picked over Harmison at Cardiff, heck even Harmison was smart enough to realize that) but on any pitch where Harmison is able to get the ball to bounce above waist high, Harmison is consistently and considerably more of a threat than Broad ATM.
If you honestly think that his performances at the Oval last year where not instrumental in England winning, then you must be seriously kidding yourself. The whole game changed from the very moment that he bowled his first ball and not once in that series did things look remotely similar. That he took his wickets at 30 a piece is irrelevant because without him Anderson would have been half as effective as he was that test. The reason btw why I bring that test up was because it was the last time he played a test on English soil (and the only test hes played since 2007)
Do you realize that the reason he is still being considered because everyone else including Broad have failed to take their chances and have all generally struggled at the international level? Not one person on this forum is going to go on and rave about how great Harmison is. The fact is bowlers like Broad have been given opportunities and not made the most of them that the sad truth is that there is no better option but to go back to Harmison.
Took four wickets in a dead rubber. Bowled one good spell to get Smith and Amla out then dropped his pace in every other spell in the match.
Broad made Harmison look like a little girl rolling pies along the ground in the two matches they played together in the West Indies (thereby leading to Harmison's dropping, after which Broad continued to bowl better than Harmison has since 2006). In ODIs, he's been good for years. In the T20 World Cup, he was excellent. Broad has had one bad game since November, where he took no wickets (hardly exactly unique amongst England's bowlers over the past five days) and suddenly he's useless? Not having that.
This one's within 3 years:
Heh, you have to wonder whether that Test did England more harm than good. It cemented the places of Cook, Bell, Harmison and Panesar for an extended period thereafter... four champion Test cricketers indeed.
No just that based on recent evidence, it is clear Harmo in English conditons once it helpul can be dangerous.
Onions bowling performance although he deserved to be picked, unfortunately i dont see him being a serious wicket-taking threat. He doesn't swing or seam the ball, the most he can do is be a defensive stock bowler. In a potential 5-man attack Broad can do his role.
Bell is there.
What a complete and total load of bollocks.
