• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Do you think Stuart Broad's injury....

Did Broad's injury strengthened, weakened or make no difference to Eng's bowling?


  • Total voters
    33

Black_Warrior

Cricketer Of The Year
Broad's injury was a blessing in disguise? LOL thats a joke..
One of the main reasons England lost in Perth apart from Johnson was Stuart Broad.
Steve Finn is a bit of a pie chucker IMO and he really was the weak link in that match.
I was just thinking about this..if Broad comes back..
Anderson, Tremlett, Broad, Swann - that would be the best bowling attack in the world hands down.

I am glad Bresnan performed so he will play at Sydney..Steve Finn is just not ready in my opinion. He doesnt have the pace..I dont know why he is so slow at 21..he does not have immaculate line and length to make up for it..he tries to bang it in short at his pace and gets hammered.

Bresnan looks a good prospect but Anderson, Broad and Tremlett would be my first choice.
 

JBH001

International Regular
Tremlett is a better bowler than Broad so from that aspect Broad's injury strengthened the bowling attack although I doubt it would have made much difference at Perth. It would have been interesting to see which of Bresnan and Tremlett England selected for the Perth test. No way to tell now, of course. You also have to consider if the difference in their batting outweighs the difference in bowling.

But the rise of Tremlett, if it can be sustained over the next 3 - 5 years (given his age) would mean that Broad can give up this delusion of being a top grade bowler/strike bowler and focus on his batting, so that in time he can become a test standard no.7 (perhaps even a 6?) and a good first change bowler. An attack of Anderson, Tremlett, Broad, and Swann would be the most effective all-around attack in world cricket, IMO.
 

MW1304

Cricketer Of The Year
Tremlett is a better bowler than Broad so from that aspect Broad's injury strengthened the bowling attack although I doubt it would have made much difference at Perth.It would have been interesting to see which of Bresnan and Tremlett England selected for the Perth test. No way to tell now, of course. You also have to consider if the difference in their batting outweighs the difference in bowling.

But the rise of Tremlett, if it can be sustained over the next 3 - 5 years (given his age) would mean that Broad can give up this delusion of being a top grade bowler/strike bowler and focus on his batting, so that in time he can become a test standard no.7 (perhaps even a 6?) and a good first change bowler. An attack of Anderson, Tremlett, Broad, and Swann would be the most effective all-around attack in world cricket, IMO.
Not sure what you're saying here tbh because there is a way to tell who they would have chosen considering they did choose Tremlett.

If you meant Melbourne, they probably would have chosen Bresnan, considering we hadn't really seen what Tremlett was capable of so far (wasn't a huge difference between them in the tour game. Bres was probably better in the game at the MCG) and he suited the surface better. They were well prepared, so either decision was proven to be pretty good anyway.
 

Athlai

Not Terrible
Tremlett is a better bowler than Broad but their best attack still involves him IMO. Anderson, Broad, Tremlett, Swann.
 

FBU

International Debutant
I personally don't think i would have made a huge amount of difference. He was bowling pretty well before he got injured.

.
Broad this year

10 Tests 332.4 overs 26 wickets at 37.69 econ 2.94 s/r 76.7
 

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Broad this year

10 Tests 332.4 overs 26 wickets at 37.69 econ 2.94 s/r 76.7
Yeah, he's had it seriously easy too. Should have been cashing in hard this year given the batting lineups and conditions he's been faced with.
 

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Could easily have had Clarke many times tbh. Had Watson in a bit of a stiff spot as well.

If anything he was guilty of bowling a tad short, but I didn't think he looked innocuous. Hilfenhaus was economical without looking threatening but Broad did look threatening.
Well he wasn't two wickets in four innings bad but he wasn't an effective bowler and he's kinda lucky the team played so well around him and hence deflected criticism.
 

Bun

Banned
Yeah, he's had it seriously easy too. Should have been cashing in hard this year given the batting lineups and conditions he's been faced with.
How'd he go in South Africa? Personally I believe he's a better bowler than those stats suggest, I am not sure he would've emulated what Tiny Ts did.
 

wpdavid

Hall of Fame Member
Broad this year

10 Tests 332.4 overs 26 wickets at 37.69 econ 2.94 s/r 76.7
That's not good, especiallly, as Uppercut said, mostly at home against Bang and Pakistan in pretty helpful conditions. Rather supports the view that his bowling has actually regressed this year after improving significantly in 2009. Perhaps the competition from Tremlett & Bresnan will focus his mind somewhat.
 

Furball

Evil Scotsman
That's not good, especiallly, as Uppercut said, mostly at home against Bang and Pakistan in pretty helpful conditions. Rather supports the view that his bowling has actually regressed this year after improving significantly in 2009. Perhaps the competition from Tremlett & Bresnan will focus his mind somewhat.
Broad didn't play the home Bangladesh series (was rested to do conditioning work), and took 14 wickets @ 23 against Pakistan.

Funnily enough, the two bowlers who were given breaks to do conditioning work are currently injured.
 

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
Not so sure, if it weren't for the strength in depth (and Tremlett proving himself at Perth) I sus[ect he'd have played considering Broad was out.
 

wpdavid

Hall of Fame Member
Broad didn't play the home Bangladesh series (was rested to do conditioning work), and took 14 wickets @ 23 against Pakistan.

Funnily enough, the two bowlers who were given breaks to do conditioning work are currently injured.
Fair point - I'd completely forgotten about Broad missing the home tests against Bang.

Not sure about Finn being injured though: I thought he was dropped.
 

MW1304

Cricketer Of The Year
Broad this year

10 Tests 332.4 overs 26 wickets at 37.69 econ 2.94 s/r 76.7
Lots of wickets at 23 against Pakistan in the summer; not a lot of luck against Australia in the first two tests, despite being pretty useful.

I think getting 2 wickets at 80 in those tests didn't help the average, either.
 

King Pietersen

International Captain
Looking at purely the stats to judge Stuart Broad's bowling is not fair at all. He bowled very, very well last year. If you based his Ashes this time round purely on stats you'd imagine he'd had an awful tour, but I thought he was the pick of the bowlers in the first Test, and bowled very well without reward in the 2nd. His bowling has definitely come on a long way, and he should still be a part of the bowling attack. Anderson, Tremlett and Broad is easily our best attack for me.
 

Top