1st Test: England v Australia

[evertonfan]

But if Broad does nothing at Lords it will cost us the series. We've absolutely no room for sentiment now; I like Broad, but he's not good enough to play the rest of this series.

 

[SciD]

 

[King Pietersen]

1 bad Test and he's suddenly not good enough again. He's been in good form, has taken wickets consistently in all forms of cricket in the last few months, and then after 1 poor Test on a flat wicket you're calling for his head. Very harsh. Swann bowled poorly as well, and he's not going to get dropped, at least Broad got a wicket.

 

[jordox]

You're saying to bring back guys with abit of heart in the same post as calling for Harmison's recall. HA!

Broad needs to be given 1 more game, he's been bowling well of late and it'd be incredibly harsh to drop him after 1 poor performance. I'd keep him in for Lords, and if he does nothing there, then drop him for Harmison or Sidebottom.

It's the ashes. Broad's bowling attributes strongly to the reason England are being flogged. Get rid of him - he's not good enough for Australia at the moment.

 

[evertonfan]

Yeah but the thing is with Swann is that we've got no one better; we do have better bowlers than Broad. Certainly more capable of bowling Australia out anyway.

We can't carry him in the Lords Test because it is now an absolute must win game.

 

[King Pietersen]

That's rubbish. He is good enough, and should not be judged on 1 Test match. Jimmy Anderson's only bowled 1 good spell, Graeme Swann bowled too full for all but 1 spell and Flintoff only looked good for 1 spell, no different to Broad. Just seems that people like using Broad as a scapegoat because of his record and the fact he's struggled in the past. He is good enough, I'm sure of that, and I don't think he'll get dropped, as basing your judgement on a bloke after 1 poor Test on a flat slow wicket after a spell of consistently good cricket is incredibly harsh. The only replacement should be Onions in for Panesar.

 

[iridescentt]

C'mon, one more wicket before tea.

 

[Ayub 95]

The only replacement should be Onions in for Panesar.

Probably be Harmison

 

[Themer]

Would be hilarious if Australia bottled this and England survive after how much bottling we've been doing. Shame its not going to happen though.

More of a shame for Collingwood might not be the best batsmen in the world but he sure does have some mettle.

 

[King Pietersen]

It better not. Onions has done nothing to deserve being replaced by Panesar, let alone Harmison as well. He was the man in possession, and the best bowler in the Country. Be annoyed if Harmison leapfrogs him.

 

[valvolux]

Broad needs to be given 1 more game, he's been bowling well of late and it'd be incredibly harsh to drop him after 1 poor performance. QUOTE]

1 bad performance? What cricket have you been watching? Oh against the winidies in the middle of winter.....any man and his dog couldve bowled well in those conditions. He still hasnt had a good game against a decent side. Broad bowls way too short and only has pace in his first over. Aussie batsmen apparently can play the pull and hook fairly well....not sure if you know cause its apparent you dont watch a lot of cricket...but thats what you get served day in day out in Australia. He's there as a bits and pieces player...cant really bowl, cant really bat. It took South Africa 15 years to realise that bits an pieces players will never stand up against good opposition.

England may escape with a draw if they are lucky.....but the damage has been done to their bowling attack. Changes are required - you have wicket taking pacemen in the reserves in Sidebottom, Harmison and Onions - you need a controlling bowler now that you have an attacking spinner? If thats control id rate myslef to get the 3 lions down my shirt. England have the potential to have an attack like 05 but they just arent selecting the right guys.

 

[Mercules]

Nah it'll be Onions. They wouldn't have kept him around all match otherwise.

I'm still thinking Sidey though.

 

[Ayub 95]

It better not. Onions has done nothing to deserve being replaced by Panesar, let alone Harmison as well. He was the man in possession, and the best bowler in the Country. Be annoyed if Harmison leapfrogs him.

It will be Harmison as Onions' been 12th man while Harmison got himself a 5fer in the CC so I think the selectors will pick Harmison. I hope Onions gets it, got the best average in the CC and looks promising

 

[jordox]

That's rubbish. He is good enough, and should not be judged on 1 Test match. Jimmy Anderson's only bowled 1 good spell, Graeme Swann bowled too full for all but 1 spell and Flintoff only looked good for 1 spell, no different to Broad. Just seems that people like using Broad as a scapegoat because of his record and the fact he's struggled in the past. He is good enough, I'm sure of that, and I don't think he'll get dropped, as basing your judgement on a bloke after 1 poor Test on a flat slow wicket after a spell of consistently good cricket is incredibly harsh. The only replacement should be Onions in for Panesar.

Yeah exactly, Broad is the one to go because he hasn't proved himself to begin with. What has he done in his test match career to make him play over the obviously capable Onions and Harmison in the Ashes? I doubt the frozen and pathetic West Indian test team is much of an indicator. I firmly hold the belief that Stuart Broad isn't test match level yet. He needs more time.

Broad out, Onions in.
Panesar out, Harmison in.

Harmison and Onions should be playing because they are in form. Simple. They can't afford to stuff about and try Broad again. They lose the second test, and it's goodbye ashes.

 

[SciD]

What has Broad done that Monty has not done to be included in next game?