Would Stuart Broad make India's strongest test XI?

[Howe_zat]

Speaking of Onions, has anyone seen him bowling for Durham this season? Is he up to full pace yet?

 

[vcs]

Uppercut, I'd argue that Sree has bowled some absolutely beautiful spells to not deserved effect in the past year too. Mohali, second Innings-lower order, NZ - 3rd test, second Innings to the top 3-4. Also pretty much all of his wickets in SA were top order batsman. It isn't a broad as daylight case as make it out to be. I'd have them about equal right now. Broad still wins on batting ability though.

Ishant is a **** **** and shouldn't be in this debate. His stats are massively boosted by knocking out the tail and injured McCullum and taking 8 wickets in the third test against NZ.

The same Test where you are saying Sreesanth bowled well without reward. Also brought us back into the first Test against Australia in Mohali by taking 3 quick wickets in the 2nd innings when Watson was threatening to run riot. Granted, Sreesanth bowled better in SA, and played a vital part in our success despite having ordinary figures, while Ishant was complete tripe throughout that series.

 

[Mike5181]

Lets not forget the comparatively different bowling partners these different bowlers have had in the last year or so as well. The England team has had Anderson, Finn, Tremlett and Swann all averaging in the mid 20s. It is statistically likely then that Broad would on more occasions be bowling to a less confident/hesitant batsmen. That's not to say he isn't more talented than the other two. He may rightly so turn out to be a world class bowler in five years time but the statistics don't lie at this stage. He is average at best.

 

[vcs]

Broad's bad run isn't five Tests, it's two, maybe three if he doesn't step up tomorrow (or today if they come back on).

If you wanna purely play cricket-by-numbers, then sure he had a poor Ashes. However, he bowled well. He didn't let us down over there and it was a worry when he went down with the sidestrain. Prior to that, he averaged something pretty low against Pakistan.

He does need to step up, and soon. There are very good alternatives available, Finn really bowled well from day three onwards at Lord's, Bresnan is quality. But this thread isn't about whether he should be in the England XI.

He'd walk into the India side. As would Anderson, Tremlett, Finn, Bresnan, Shazhad, Onions etc

India play half their Tests or more in the subcontinent and there is no guarantee any of those guys bar Bresnan perhaps would do any better than the incumbents. If the World Cup is any indication, they probably wouldn't.

 

[GIMH]

Well the World Cup is no indication of how our bowlers would do anywhere in Tests.

I was told for a long time they'd all go to Australia and die, too. They are top quality bowlers, and certainly better than India's current alternatives.

 

[Jono]

GIMH how do you know that? You have seen jack **** of India's alternatives.

 

[Howe_zat]

India play half their Tests or more in the subcontinent and there is no guarantee any of those guys bar Bresnan perhaps would do any better than the incumbents. If the World Cup is any indication, they probably wouldn't.

If the world cup is anything to go by, Broad is actually our best seamer.

I'd understand not being interested in Shahzad or Onions as you won't have seen much of them. But dismissing Tremlett based on the fact that he's not that great an ODI bowler is nonsense.

 

[Jono]

He's not dismissing them, he's wondering how they'd bowl on the subcontinent.

I'd imagine some of them would bowl well, and others wouldn't. Either way, let's not pretend like India plays its test cricket in conditions that Anderson and Tremlett bowled in today.

 

[vcs]

Most of those guys have played <10 Tests, mostly in England. Well, I'm not convinced TBH. I'd like to see more, and the early signs are certainly more promising than the Indian seamers have shown, but that's what it comes down to.. more evidence in varied conditions. If I was picking for a Test tomorrow, both Tremlett and Finn will make it over Sreesanth and Sharma on current form, but I can't say I'm convinced they'll keep their position in the long term, yet.

 

[Teja.]

Ftr, I believe Vinay and Praveen are without any doubt better long form bowlers than Sree and Ishant right now.

 

[Jono]

Vinay Kumar

 

[Howe_zat]

Most of those guys have played <10 Tests, mostly in England. Well, I'm not convinced TBH. I'd like to see more, and the early signs are certainly more promising than the Indian seamers have shown, but that's what it comes down to.. more evidence in varied conditions. If I was picking for a Test tomorrow, both Tremlett and Finn will make it over Sreesanth and Sharma on current form, but I can't say I'm convinced they'll keep their position in the long term, yet.

It's fair enough to say that you're not convinced after a few Tests. But Finn doesn't even swing the ball, and Tremlett has played as many Tests in Australia on his current run as in England. A difference in average of 15-20 can't be explained by conditions alone.

 

[GIMH]

GIMH how do you know that? You have seen jack **** of India's alternatives.

Sorry, poor wording on my part, what I meant by alternatives was Ishant and Sree.

 

[vcs]

It's fair enough to say that you're not convinced after a few Tests. But Finn doesn't even swing the ball, and Tremlett has played as many Tests in Australia on his current run as in England. A difference in average of 15-20 can't be explained by conditions alone.

It's what Uppercut would call a lol sample size, especially in case of Tremlett.

 

[Teja.]

It's what Uppercut would call a lol sample size, especially in case of Tremlett.

Indeed.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Praveen or Vinay don't look test bowlers to me. I don't think either has enough in their locker to trouble batsmen when the ball doesn't move off the narrow. Pace isn't the be all and end all, but neither gets much bounce or carry either.

Munaf looked a live prospect before his injury, but seems to have lost a lot of nip (& aged about ten years) since he came back.

 

[Furball]

GIMH how do you know that? You have seen jack **** of India's alternatives.

Sreesanth is your second best seamer. I don't need to see your alternatives to know that they're probably crap.

 

[NasserFan207]

I know Tremlett has a small sample size, but I would back him anywhere currently. He has every tool a fast bowler needs in tests, is in prime physical condition and seems to have gained the right mentality too. One of the top test bowlers in world cricket at the moment IMO.

 

[Jono]

Sreesanth is your second best seamer. I don't need to see your alternatives to know that they're probably crap.

Typical cheerleading posting from you lately.

I won't bother then.

 

[vcs]

It's hard to defend the Indian seamers, it really is, but sometimes it's made out on here as if the Timbuktu Under 12s team have better options going than what we do.

As for the question of this thread, Broad certainly wouldn't walk in over any of our alternatives, and anyone who can't see that is being a bit deluded IMO.