Would Stuart Broad make the world's strongest XI?

[Spark]

Yeah that's pretty obvious IMO. A lot of those were charity wickets and his 4-for at the same ground last year was vastly, vastly superior. I was picking him in my world XI attack after the Pakistan series though.

Still. Shows that if you pitch it up on the right line, do a little each way with bounce (which he was), you'll get wickets even if you're not bowling magic balls.

 

[Howe_zat]

Still weird to see people criticising Broad for only having impressed for the last year* and then picking Philander instead. Huge contradiction.

*And that's dubious anyway

 

[Jacknife]

See that's the thing. By that logic, yes, but something in my head is saying "ehhhh..."

I think recent performances are the major factor but weighted by how established the player is (and hence how good an idea we have of how good the player 'actually' is). But yeah, overall by that logic:

Cook
Smith
Sanga
Kallis
Clarke*
Chanderpaul
Prior
Broad
Swann
Philander/Steyn
Anderson

But I just want to play both Philander and Steyn.

EDIT: And my philosophy on batting orders would see Clarke batting at 6 usually, but having your captain coming in at 6 is a bit strange


EDIT2: Having said this, I think picking Chanders to bat at 6 would be entirely at odds with the view on Chanders' bubble-batting, and to see him sandwiched between Clarke and Prior, very much strokeplayers both of them, is a bit strange. Ideally, this would be where I would pick Mike Hussey - highly adaptable, consistent and superb at batting with what is a reasonably strong lower order with Broad, Swann and possibly Philander there.

Sanga has had a pretty poor year in general I think, except for one series against Pakistan, he averages 41 in total, the 5 test against us averages 21, 30 against SA. Just as a comparison Trott averages 43 this last year and he also hasn't been at his best.

 

[Teja.]

On actual watching, I'd pick Steyn, Broad, Philander and Ajmal.

On statistical performance over a period, perhaps I'd have to pick Anderson over Philander but I reckon, for a match tomorrow, Philander's already better.

So basically, World XI - Anderson, Team I'd pick to play for my life tomorrow - Philander.

Bit like when India were heading to tour England and I predicted England would beat them 3-0 ( and was one off) but India still, on performance, was deservedly number one. not saying the difference is anywhere as big, mind. Merely an analogy.

 

[Spark]

Younis Khan, then. Or ABdV, though Younis would be a more like-for-like swap.

 

[CWB304]

Broad didn't bowl as well as his figures showed, imo. I watched the whole day and he didn't bowl particularly well with the new ball and just seemed to pick up wickets out of nowhere with the old ball. Perhaps that is the sign of a good bowler, but it won't go down as one of the great 7-fers, imo. I'm aware that devaluing a statistically sound performance is often maligned on these forums and also agree that performances and not the nature of performances should dictate how 'good' a player is, but that is just my opinion on the matter.

I think you're right. He wasn't at his best throughout yet ended up with seven wickets. I alluded to Broad's new-found mental strength after the first wicket because that is the main change I see in him: because he now knows he can do it consistently, he doesn't strain for magic balls or ramp up the pace to no effect when it isn't quite coming off for him, as in the first spell. He just comes back and keeps plugging away because he now knows that if he bowls the correct lines and lengths he will trouble batsmen and get wickets with his bounce and ability to move the ball both ways. A while ago given the way he started the day you'd have put money on him ending up with figures of 1 for 90, or similar, for the innings. Now he's moved onto the next level and I expect his bowling average to continue to plummet over the coming years.

 

[Valer]

Surely Watson has to be in with a shout as the opener given his bowling?

 

[LegionOfBrad]

Surely Watson has to be in with a shout as the opener given his bowling?

I would have thought that a team with the likes of Steyn/Anderson/Adjmal et all would have no need of a 4th seamer so you'd want to pick the best openers in the world. Of which he is not.

 

[Cabinet96]

I would have thought that a team with the likes of Steyn/Anderson/Adjmal et all would have no need of a 4th seamer so you'd want to pick the best openers in the world. Of which he is not.

I don't really like that policy. Surely by that method a team featuring the best 5 batsmen in the world and the best Wicket keeper don't need a really good opener and can therefore decide to go for the 5th bowling option? We need to go into PEWS' "level above test cricket" where wickets might not come as easily.

 

[GIMH]

This whole Broad has only been good for a year thing is nonsense IMO. He has been gun since Windies 09 away, save two and a half Tests of that year's Ashes and SL last year after injury.

I couldn't give a **** about stats I watched all our matches in that period and he bowled well.

Not to say he was worth a world XI place before the India series but he didn't just turn from plodder to world beater.

 

[Furball]

I don't really like that policy. Surely by that method a team featuring the best 5 batsmen in the world and the best Wicket keeper don't need a really good opener and can therefore decide to go for the 5th bowling option? We need to go into PEWS' "level above test cricket" where wickets might not come as easily.

Any gain you get from Watson's bowling would be offset by Watson running out the entire top order before nicking to the slips the ball after he passes 50.

 

[marc71178]

Hypothetical but say Watto and Shiv are in the World XI together and batting at the same time, who gets run out?

 

[Furball]

Hypothetical but say Watto and Shiv are in the World XI together and batting at the same time, who gets run out?

Watson. Strikes me as being much dumber than Chanderpaul.

 

[social]

For Oz, Hilfenhaus averages 28 with the ball in tests, Siddle something similar, Harris 23 (?), Patto 23 (?) and Cummins is supposedly the best of the bunch

Having said that, and despite the fact that all of their records are better than Broad's, I wouldnt feel comfortable picking any of the above in a world X1

TBH, the fact that Broad, Hilf, etc are even in contention for a world x1 is a pretty poor reflection of world bowling stocks

 

[social]

Any gain you get from Watson's bowling would be offset by Watson running out the entire top order before nicking to the slips the ball after he passes 50.

At least he can get 50 and take wickets

The British press talked up Flintoff for years when he was capable of doing neither

 

[social]

So in seriousness...where does everyone stand on the Broad in the World XI issue now?

Ben Hilfenhaus has done exactly the same thing and more to India and WI that Broad has done on much less friendly decks.

Is he in?

 

[GIMH]

Don't recall Hilf averaging less than 20 with the ball while averaging above 40 with the bat in the same series tbh

So no he's not

 

[social]

Don't recall Hilf averaging less than 20 with the ball while averaging above 40 with the bat in the same series tbh

So no he's not

Forget the batting as Broad is no all-rounder and neither is Hilf

Plus, in a World X1 you shouldnt need bowlers scoring huge amounts of runs

Anyway, I'm no great fan of Hilf but right at this point in time he is a better bowler than Broad

 

[Uppercut]

Forget the batting as Broad is no all-rounder and neither is Hilf

Plus, in a World X1 you shouldnt need bowlers scoring huge amounts of runs

Anyway, I'm no great fan of Hilf but right at this point in time he is a better bowler than Broad

Some real crap being sprouted in here eh

 

[GIMH]

Hilf better than Broad?

I mean. I just. I'm like. Oh man. So. Yeah, what?