There's a case- albeit one I highly disagree with- to play Harmison ahead of Broad at Lord's. But what case exactly does Onions have to play ahead of Broad? Everyone is in such a rush to discount Broad's excellent bowling in the two West Indies tests, why do Onions's performances hold so much water?
I'd agree in most circumstances, TBH, but Lords is verrrry flat pitch - presuming it hasn't changed signficantly, of course. I'd certainly back Broad to make significant contributions with the bat on such a surface and I think the bowlers will have their work cut out for them; I reckon five could be handy.
I realise that this sounds negative, but my current thinking is that I would be fairly happy for us to draw at Lord's, with vast numbers of runs being scored by a long England batting line-up (6 batsmen plus Prior). If there's a bit of seam movement you'd hope that Harmison, Onions and Anderson ought to be able to exploit it.
Michael Atherton in today's Times said that he was at the ground yesterday and the pitch was lush, green and damp. The one used for the West Indies test was very favourable to fast bowlers- but since that game ended in three days costing the ECB a lucrative Saturday at Lord's, they may decide to give the strip a Brazilian and play out another draw.
In that case, isn't it Harmison replacing Broad?
Well, you're playing Onions and not playing Broad. What's the reasoning behind that?
As for being robotic in their selections, I think it's more the fact that they've seen what he's about and he's clearly not fit enough or something
I dont know why they didn't play him TBH. I thought it was very stupid to play Onions "the new bowler" vs AUS so early in the tour. When Sidebottom was the one who needed the 4-day cricket.
Theoretcially 6 batsmen (Prior as one), Flintoff 7, Foster 8 would be ENG best team. But unforuntely given Fred's injury record it would be suicidal to pick him as one of 4 bowlers.
TBH, I called the Australian bowling at Cardiff "pretty damn good" considering a lot of things, to start with the bowling attack for that game was very inexperienced, and on top of that they were playing their first Ashes test, and that too away from home.
Bit of a myth, this. When was the last time Flintoff had to stop bowling halfway through a match due to injury?
Never but, ENG have never played has part of a 4-man attack since IND 2001 if my memory is correct. It still would be suicidal to play in a 4-man attack since it very well & happen.
Might have something to do with the fact that Onions is the leading FC wicket taker this season and is currently averaging 20 in test cricket. Like it or not, there was never any reason for Onions to be left out. He has far more money in the bank for his selection than anyone other than Anderson.
Bit irrelevant because Freddie would run up to the wicket and bowl on one leg if he had to.
Broad performed slightly less well than Onions in the test series against the WI. Broad took 12 wickets at 30 with 1 5-fer and Onions 10 wickets at 20 with 1 5-fer.
If someone has not done it then how can you claim him as an equal or better to someone who has? Onions has taken FC wickets, Broad hasnt. Broad failed in the first test, Onions didnt play. Broad has had a mediocre test career so far, Onions is unproven. Unless you are a real conservative, the facts are that there is more going for Onion's selection than Broad ATM.
