Has Broad done enough to justify continued inclusion? England favour the five bowler theory, but if one isn't taking enough wickets can they include him on the basis of a decent batting average?
SCJ BROAD
Tests : 19
Inns : 25
Not Out : 5
Runs : 582
Ave : 29.10
HS : 76
50s : 3
Balls : 3736
Runs : 2053
Wkts : 50
Ave : 41.06
SR : 74.72
ER : 3.30
BB 5/85
5wi : 1
BY OPPONENT
vs Australia : 49 runs @ 16.33 & 4 wkts @ 76.75
vs India : 1 run @ 1.00 & 2 wkts @ 67.00
vs South Africa : 161 runs @ 53.67 & 8 wkts @ 49.00
vs Sri Lanka : 2 runs @ 2.00 & 1 wkt @ 95.00
vs New Zealand : 209 runs @ 34.83 & 15 wkts @ 37.00
vs West Indies : 160 runs @ 26.67 & 20 wkts @ 28.50
vs AUS/IND/SAF/SRI : 213 runs @ 26.63 & 15 wkts @ 61.87
vs NZE/WIN : 369 runs @ 30.75 & 35 wkts @ 32.14
So his record with the ball overall is poor for a frontline bowler, if you split it by quality of opponent you can see he struggles against the better nations while maintains a fairly ordinary average against the likes of New Zealand and West Indies. His record with the bat is pretty decent for someone batting down the order, but he needs to sustain an average of around 30-35 to justify a place in the side. The analyses below should show how beneficial his batting is and further look at his bowling
WICKETS BY FREQUENCY
INNINGS
0 wkts : 8
1 wkts : 9
2 wkts : 9
3 wkts : 6
4 wkts : 0
5 wkts : 1
TEST
0 wkts : 3
1 wkts : 3
2 wkts : 2
3 wkts : 5
4 wkts : 2
5 wkts : 4
Picking up 2-3 wickets is ok but he's only doing that half the time. ideally you'd want your bowlers to pick up 3-4 wickets a Test, Broad is averaging 2.63 wickets per Test although he didn't bowl in five innings (excluded from the innings analysis) The other problem is he's simply not picking wickets up against the better sides and the above analysis alone can't reflect that.
TEST vs AUS/IND/SAF/SRI
0 wkts : 1 (current Test)
1 wkts : 3
2 wkts : 2
3 wkts : 1
4 wkts : 0
5 wkts : 1
Picking up 1-2 wickets in a Test against good opposition puts too much pressure on the rest of the attack, if he can only pull his weight in 25% of Tests against the better opposition then he may as well be replaced with a batsman or bowler.
So does his batting down the order justify his lack of bowling contribution? (so far)
RUNS BY FREQUENCY
INNINGS
DNB : 13
00-09 : 7
10-19 : 8
20-29 : 2
30-39 : 3
40-49 : 2
50+ : 3
TEST
DNB : 1
00-19 : 7
20-39 : 6
40-59 : 1
60-80 : 4
He's mostly contributing 10s and 20s, that is when he does bat which is only 2/3 of the time. But even Anderson is weighing in with 10s and 20s, five of Anderson's last six knocks have been 14+ and while Anderson's average may be only just over half Broad's, his bowling average is around 34 which is a lot closer to where it should be.
And from the runs per Test analysis it is pretty clear that Broad chips in reasonably often, about 2/3 of the time, but only 1/4 of the time does he chip in with the kind of runs that could justify including someone with such a weak bowling average.
So is he just another Ashley Giles? Included because he "can bat and can bowl" without carrying his weight often enough to justify it? Giles had a few good series, against the West Indies and when playing in favourable conditions. Otherwise his average might have been a whole lot worse
AF GILES
Tests : 54
Inns : 81
Not Out : 13
Runs : 1421
Ave : 20.90
HS : 59
50s : 4
Balls : 12180
Runs : 5806
Wkts : 143
Ave : 40.60
SR : 85.17
ER : 2.86
BB 5/57
5wi : 5
So Broad is a better bat, not a great surprise, but was Giles a more likely match-winner?
10+ WICKETS IN A SERIES
GILES (5) : 17 vs Pakistan (00/01), 18 vs Sri Lanka (03/04), 22 vs West Indies (2004), 11 vs South Africa (04/05) & 10 vs Australia (2005)
BROAD (1) : 12 vs West Indies (08/09)
While there is a fair difference between the two in terms of batting ability and bowling types, the purpose and contribution of both is very similar. Is there any doubt that both were very much the fifth bowler?
SCJ BROAD
Tests : 19
Inns : 25
Not Out : 5
Runs : 582
Ave : 29.10
HS : 76
50s : 3
Balls : 3736
Runs : 2053
Wkts : 50
Ave : 41.06
SR : 74.72
ER : 3.30
BB 5/85
5wi : 1
BY OPPONENT
vs Australia : 49 runs @ 16.33 & 4 wkts @ 76.75
vs India : 1 run @ 1.00 & 2 wkts @ 67.00
vs South Africa : 161 runs @ 53.67 & 8 wkts @ 49.00
vs Sri Lanka : 2 runs @ 2.00 & 1 wkt @ 95.00
vs New Zealand : 209 runs @ 34.83 & 15 wkts @ 37.00
vs West Indies : 160 runs @ 26.67 & 20 wkts @ 28.50
vs AUS/IND/SAF/SRI : 213 runs @ 26.63 & 15 wkts @ 61.87
vs NZE/WIN : 369 runs @ 30.75 & 35 wkts @ 32.14
So his record with the ball overall is poor for a frontline bowler, if you split it by quality of opponent you can see he struggles against the better nations while maintains a fairly ordinary average against the likes of New Zealand and West Indies. His record with the bat is pretty decent for someone batting down the order, but he needs to sustain an average of around 30-35 to justify a place in the side. The analyses below should show how beneficial his batting is and further look at his bowling
WICKETS BY FREQUENCY
INNINGS
0 wkts : 8
1 wkts : 9
2 wkts : 9
3 wkts : 6
4 wkts : 0
5 wkts : 1
TEST
0 wkts : 3
1 wkts : 3
2 wkts : 2
3 wkts : 5
4 wkts : 2
5 wkts : 4
Picking up 2-3 wickets is ok but he's only doing that half the time. ideally you'd want your bowlers to pick up 3-4 wickets a Test, Broad is averaging 2.63 wickets per Test although he didn't bowl in five innings (excluded from the innings analysis) The other problem is he's simply not picking wickets up against the better sides and the above analysis alone can't reflect that.
TEST vs AUS/IND/SAF/SRI
0 wkts : 1 (current Test)
1 wkts : 3
2 wkts : 2
3 wkts : 1
4 wkts : 0
5 wkts : 1
Picking up 1-2 wickets in a Test against good opposition puts too much pressure on the rest of the attack, if he can only pull his weight in 25% of Tests against the better opposition then he may as well be replaced with a batsman or bowler.
So does his batting down the order justify his lack of bowling contribution? (so far)
RUNS BY FREQUENCY
INNINGS
DNB : 13
00-09 : 7
10-19 : 8
20-29 : 2
30-39 : 3
40-49 : 2
50+ : 3
TEST
DNB : 1
00-19 : 7
20-39 : 6
40-59 : 1
60-80 : 4
He's mostly contributing 10s and 20s, that is when he does bat which is only 2/3 of the time. But even Anderson is weighing in with 10s and 20s, five of Anderson's last six knocks have been 14+ and while Anderson's average may be only just over half Broad's, his bowling average is around 34 which is a lot closer to where it should be.
And from the runs per Test analysis it is pretty clear that Broad chips in reasonably often, about 2/3 of the time, but only 1/4 of the time does he chip in with the kind of runs that could justify including someone with such a weak bowling average.
So is he just another Ashley Giles? Included because he "can bat and can bowl" without carrying his weight often enough to justify it? Giles had a few good series, against the West Indies and when playing in favourable conditions. Otherwise his average might have been a whole lot worse
AF GILES
Tests : 54
Inns : 81
Not Out : 13
Runs : 1421
Ave : 20.90
HS : 59
50s : 4
Balls : 12180
Runs : 5806
Wkts : 143
Ave : 40.60
SR : 85.17
ER : 2.86
BB 5/57
5wi : 5
So Broad is a better bat, not a great surprise, but was Giles a more likely match-winner?
10+ WICKETS IN A SERIES
GILES (5) : 17 vs Pakistan (00/01), 18 vs Sri Lanka (03/04), 22 vs West Indies (2004), 11 vs South Africa (04/05) & 10 vs Australia (2005)
BROAD (1) : 12 vs West Indies (08/09)
While there is a fair difference between the two in terms of batting ability and bowling types, the purpose and contribution of both is very similar. Is there any doubt that both were very much the fifth bowler?
