West Indies in England

[aussie_ben91]

Yeah, I wanna see Stuart Broad bat against Shaun Tait, Brett Lee, Shaoib Akhtar or Shane Bond when their on target! The kid would get mauled...

 

[Griffo]

stuart broad hasnt proved that he can bat in county cricket ye, but the england tail is quite hopeless

 

[Leicester Fox]

Yeah, I wanna see Stuart Broad bat against Shaun Tait, Brett Lee, Shaoib Akhtar or Shane Bond when their on target! The kid would get mauled...

not really, he'd probably struggle as much as any other inexperienced tail ender in world cricket would

 

[RoboRocks]

Yeah, I wanna see Stuart Broad bat against Shaun Tait, Brett Lee, Shaoib Akhtar or Shane Bond when their on target! The kid would get mauled...

You would like that, wouldn't you?

 

[Vcassano]

Plunkett should play in the ODI's as he is a good number 8 and a penetrative bowler. A bit of an enigma, but he is capable of winning games by himself - Commonwealth Bank Series. Better than Broad who seems to flatter to deceive in what little he's played. Although Broad seems more reliable, Plunkett gets wickets and that's why I prefer him.

 

[Leicester Fox]

Broad will never do well if you keep taking him in and out of the side, you have to give him a chance to find some consistency. Really neither Plunkett or Broad are reasy but after his performances in the tests has Plunkett honestly shown himself good enough to deserve a chance? Broad did no worse than any of the other bowlers in the twenty20 too.

 

[PhilD123]

If i'm honest, i'd give Yardy the first ODI as let's be fair, you can't really judge his bowling in a Twenty20 match. Especially as we know he can bowl well in ODI's. Give him a game on Sunday and if he fails it's Monty time from then on.

Lets just say if I was a batsman, I know who I'd rather face over Yardy and Monty. Panesar has much more variation and will get more wickets than Yardy. We need wickets in the middle overs, thats what we've been struggling with and while Monty hasn't taken the ODI world alight, he'll get more wickets than Yardy. Yardy is the typical kind of English player, he'll bowl a few, for about 4-5 an over, but won't get wickets. Surely we should be more attacking than that, and try to get wickets. Also, in Yardy's 4 innings in ODI cricket for England, his highest score is 12.

I really dont mean to lay into Yardy, but, its another annoyance about the selection for England, which isn't his fault. However, he was dropped last year after the Champions Trophy. So far this season in OD games, he's had 3 innings, and got 4 runs, no NO's. Surely players should be brought back on form, I mean he cant have been brought back on form.

 

[Insomniac]

Lets just say if I was a batsman, I know who I'd rather face over Yardy and Monty. Panesar has much more variation and will get more wickets than Yardy. We need wickets in the middle overs, thats what we've been struggling with and while Monty hasn't taken the ODI world alight, he'll get more wickets than Yardy. Yardy is the typical kind of English player, he'll bowl a few, for about 4-5 an over, but won't get wickets. Surely we should be more attacking than that, and try to get wickets. Also, in Yardy's 4 innings in ODI cricket for England, his highest score is 12.

I really dont mean to lay into Yardy, but, its another annoyance about the selection for England, which isn't his fault. However, he was dropped last year after the Champions Trophy. So far this season in OD games, he's had 3 innings, and got 4 runs, no NO's. Surely players should be brought back on form, I mean he cant have been brought back on form.

He was brought back in desperation by the English selectors?

 

[Sureshot]

Exactly, Yardy might keep it tight, but will rarely pick up wickets, we need to take pace of the ball. Monty has to come back into the side, as far as I can see, he has not performed badly in ODI cricket, not to his potential though, but he was one of our best bowlers in the World Cup imo, and did pretty well Down Under. Oh and all this rabbiting about Monty bowling too quickly, which is slightly true, but why is yardy, who is in the side as a spinner firing it in above 60 mph? The argument seems flawed to me...

Illingworth was poop then?

Not all spinners have to be the same do they? Samuels is fairly succesful bowling quickly likewise Afridi.

 

[BigCrickNan]

The trouble with Yardy in our ODI team is that he is neither good enough with bat or ball. He can do a decent job with the ball and might make a few runs. That's not the sort of person we need, we need specialist bowlers/batsman or either top all-rounder such as Flintoff.

 

[rabeta]

Illingworth was poop then?

Not all spinners have to be the same do they? Samuels is fairly succesful bowling quickly likewise Afridi.

Well if you look at the most successful spinners in Twenty20 then you woill see the likes of Doshi who give it at lot of air. I would have no probelm with Doshi being in our Twenty20 side, but the fact that they have picked Yardy goes against the fact that spinners who give the ball some air are extremely useful in Twenty20s as he does not turn the ball nor does he give it a chance to turn...

Oh and Illingworth never played any Twenty20s so how would we know if he would have been any good at this format?

 

[Cricketman]

The trouble with Yardy in our ODI team is that he is neither good enough with bat or ball. He can do a decent job with the ball and might make a few runs. That's not the sort of person we need, we need specialist bowlers/batsman or either top all-rounder such as Flintoff.

Yeah.
To me 2020 is an Allrounders' game. Come in and hit the long ball, then bowl a quick 2-4 overs and pick up the wickets. The specialists, or more technically accurate, at least batsman, seem to not fit in as well as the all rounders for some reason. But before you chop my head off, i havn't watched too much twenty20 so I really wouldn't know. Its just my "judgment"

 

[Vcassano]

Broad will never do well if you keep taking him in and out of the side, you have to give him a chance to find some consistency. Really neither Plunkett or Broad are reasy but after his performances in the tests has Plunkett honestly shown himself good enough to deserve a chance? Broad did no worse than any of the other bowlers in the twenty20 too.

I agree with the consistent selection of Broad, but what has Test performance got to do with ODI's? A mistake we continually do with the One day team is pick good Test performers in the One Day team when they are not suited to that game. See: Vaughan, Hoggard, Cook. In an ideal world, like Australia our Test players would also be our one day players but alas that is not the case right now.

 

[Leicester Fox]

I agree with the consistent selection of Broad, but what has Test performance got to do with ODI's? A mistake we continually do with the One day team is pick good Test performers in the One Day team when they are not suited to that game. See: Vaughan, Hoggard, Cook. In an ideal world, like Australia our Test players would also be our one day players but alas that is not the case right now.

Well ifhe can't control the ball in a test match then i doubt he can do it in an ODI either

 

[Stephen Bailey]

Broad will never do well if you keep taking him in and out of the side, you have to give him a chance to find some consistency. Really neither Plunkett or Broad are reasy but after his performances in the tests has Plunkett honestly shown himself good enough to deserve a chance? Broad did no worse than any of the other bowlers in the twenty20 too.

Neither bowler should be anywhere near the international sides, they should both be playing county cricket and actually learning their game and not getting spanked in international cricket at such a young age. This is one of the areas we keep making mistakes, picking players too young when they don't actually know their own game.