Originally Posted by Richard
No, it's an all-too-often-presumed presumption. Just because you're young, it DOES NOT automatically mean you'll get better. Plenty of bowlers who are crap remain crap. There are bowlers in there who have already done well (Asif, Patel, Malinga) but there are also plenty who have to date been extremely poor. And that they will change is most certainly not a given, I can see far more of those than not being poor for their entire ODI careers.
Erm, he was instrumental in winning 1 game, the Second Final. Other than that, he got the treatment (and most of the wickets he did get were with poor deliveries). And yes, India and Australia should and have dropped Pathan and Johnson.
Eh? Good bowlers are good bowlers. Bowlers who start off as terrible as Plunkett rarely get anywhere. Anyone who becomes seriously good has to look better than dreadful from the start.
Obviously. But you only open the bowling if you are the best candidate. For me, Hoggard and Flintoff are better candidates for England.
I wouldn't say Asif has done well in ODIs 22 matches 22 wickets. I would say the minimum for an ODI opening bowler is 1.5 wickets per match with the rest of the bowlers 1.00 per match. Of the three you mention only Malinga has done well.
So who are all these good bowlers that are being kept out of the teams by these young players?
I can't be bothered to argue about Plunkett as he is not one of my favourites but who was taking all the wickets to get us to the final. Mahmood was invisible.
Flintoff is not an opening bowler and when he has opened has looked even less likely that Harmison to take a wicket in his opening spell. Jones should open with Hoggard until Broad becomes available.