Ishant Sharma vs Stuart Broad - Test bowler

[Sir Alex]

I presume you were referring to Sharma's spell to Ponting at Perth rather than Sydney. Anyhow as good as that spell was, Sharma ended the series with an average hovering at nearly 60, so as good as his one spell was, theres no reason to put it on a pedestal especially given what hes been serving up lately. I don't really see what the hype about Sharma is. Perhaps he might get better in the future, but hes clearly been nothing short of abysmal thus far in his career, minus the odd good spell. When he manages to run through a side, and not just one batsman, in the manner in which Broad did at the Oval, then give me a call. Until then hes overrated in my book.

Not that I think that Broad is particularly brilliant. Just that at this stage in their respective careers there is no real comparison.

Un believable, you don't even consider his home performances against Australia?

 

[pasag]

15 wickets @ 27 in India's 2-0 win over Australia did add to the expectations imho

I think that series was a much truer indication of his ability and potential before being run into the ground ie someone who could be a valuable bowler, always contributing, consistent. Just one good part of a bowling attack, not some sort of upcoming hero and saviour of Indian cricket that we heard about post-Aus home series.

 

[LongHopCassidy]

I presume you were referring to Sharma's spell to Ponting at Perth rather than Sydney. Anyhow as good as that spell was, Sharma ended the series with an average hovering at nearly 60, so as good as his one spell was, theres no reason to put it on a pedestal especially given what hes been serving up lately. I don't really see what the hype about Sharma is. Perhaps he might get better in the future, but hes clearly been nothing short of abysmal thus far in his career, minus the odd good spell. When he manages to run through a side, and not just one batsman, in the manner in which Broad did at the Oval, then give me a call. Until then hes overrated in my book.

Not that I think that Broad is particularly brilliant. Just that at this stage in their respective careers there is no real comparison.

I think assessing players on stats so early in their careers is a fairly self-defeating exercise. It's easy enough to jusxtapose the crap spells with the good ones but IMO it's fairly safe to assume that consistency (that is, withholding the crap spells more than producing more amazing ones) comes with maturity. The man's only 22 - at his age Johnson was bowling at second-graders who actually had day jobs. Sharma wouldn't be as hyped as he was if it was any player in the world he'd outwitted bar Ponting.

I don't have quantitative evidence to draw on but it's fairly presumptuous to expect relentless consistency as a plausible factor in ranking young players. In terms of what I've seen I think a disciplined Sharma would turn out better results than a disciplined Broad.

 

[AaronK]

Last time i saw Ishant.. he was bowling to many short and wide deliveries and was getting smack around the park for it.. I was like he has to be one of the most overrated bowler i have seen..so i voted for Broad..

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Broad hasn't been inconsistent. He debuted too soon, showed some glimpses of promise but didn't really put in any consistent performances, until the West Indies away series. His series figures aren't flattering, but that tour was played on the worst pitches I've ever seen.

In 2009, Broad was excellent and his star is definitely rising.

This,and he shouldn't have played in Bangladesh as he clearly wasn't fit hence he did a Sidebottom,good new ball spell then nothing else in the rest of the innings.

 

[pasag]

I think assessing players on stats so early in their careers is a fairly self-defeating exercise. It's easy enough to jusxtapose the crap spells with the good ones but IMO it's fairly safe to assume that consistency (that is, withholding the crap spells more than producing more amazing ones) comes with maturity. The man's only 22 - at his age Johnson was bowling at second-graders who actually had day jobs. Sharma wouldn't be as hyped as he was if it was any player in the world he'd outwitted bar Ponting.

I don't have quantitative evidence to draw on but it's fairly presumptuous to expect relentless consistency as a plausible factor in ranking young players. In terms of what I've seen I think a disciplined Sharma would turn out better results than a disciplined Broad.

Tbh you don't have significant qualitative evidence either, all you have is a pilot study

 

[Hogey]

Currently, Broad is comfortably better I'd say.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Think Sharma has potentially the greater natural assets, but Broad the greater variation and bowling smarts. Both just short of express (both quick enough tho) but Sharma seemed to hurry the batsman up with more regularity.

In practice you'd take Broad everytime tho because of his batting.

 

[Faisal1985]

I would rate Broad a touch higher then Ishant ATM.

 

[social]

Broad is a very average test match bowler who produces the odd great performance and I cant, for the life of me, work out why he's been rested or the Bangla tests

If anyone needs to bowl a lot in tests against anybody, he does

On the other side of the coin, Ishant has got great talent but needs to work on the physical side of things and needs a break

It'll come down to ambition in the long run IMO

 

[Cruxdude]

Ishant, for me, has the greater potential. The series against Australia in India and Srilanka in Srilanka were truly special. Ishant in the Mohali test against Ponting was almost as good as the Sydney test. Too many LOI in India have resulted in him losing the confidence. With a little boost he can still be one of India's best pacers.

 

[chicane]

Broad is bowling quicker and looks more confident than Ishant, but don't see much difference in their effectiveness. Especially looking only in tests and taking into account any differences in the wickets they've bowled in.

 

[Matt79]

In 2010,

Broad - 10 wickets @ 49.2 from 4 matches
Sharma - 12 wickets @ 37.25 from 4 matches



Both played 2 tests each vs SA and Ban. Broad played 2 in SA FTR while Ishant played in India.

Yeah, so they're both generally pretty ****, but have produced the odd freak spell vs Aus, like Mohd Sami

 

[Woodster]

When I first saw Ishant Sharma, I couldn't help but be impressed. It was not just his hostile spells against Ponting, but the way he got the ball to reverse and proved as much a handful with the old ball as he did with a newer one. He bowled decent pace and generally pretty good areas. Since then his pace has dropped, he's going round the park a bit more, inconsistency in his fledgling career was inevitable, just hope he gets back to where he was.

Broad on the other hand has grown on me, but still think he needs to work out what style of bowler he wants to be, or perhaps what kind of bowler England want him to be. He can look ineffective, leak runs, try too many variations, and then produce a magical spell that will win his side the game. A talent no question, and maintains very good pace throughout, just not his biggest fan and when they have both been at their best, I would edge in Ishant's corner at this stage.

 

[Jayzamann]

I'd personally love to see where they end up in 5-10 years. Both are basically tripping over their umbilical cords when it comes to test cricket, but both have already performed at times. It would be good for cricket if they both find their own headspace and get some consistent performances for their countries.

Right now I'd rate Broad ahead of Ishant. I thought the hooplah in the fallout from his Australian tour was hasty and unwarranted, and the kid having bags of money thrown at him needs to put that sort of excess in the back of his mind.

 

[TumTum]

Broad is useless, have to go with Sharma, but not by much.

 

[GotSpin]

Sharma. Promising though Broad is, nobody (read: nobody) has pwned Ponting as emphatically as Sharma did in Sydney, except for maybe Harbhajan in 2001 - and Sharma's effort is probably more telling since Ponting's among the best players of pace (at least compared to spin) in the modern era. If he ever reaches that potential again he'll be world-class even in the Richard sense, one feels.

Broad is well and good in spurts, but he's never been a go-to player for an entire series like Sharma was.

Roach worked over Ponting as well.

 

[morgieb]

Broad the better bowler (Oval spell anyone?), Sharma more consistent though.

 

[TumTum]

Broad the better bowler (Oval spell anyone?), Sharma more consistent though.

That spell was hardly impressive. And since when does 1 spell decide how good a bowler is?

 

[flibbertyjibber]

That spell was hardly impressive. And since when does 1 spell decide how good a bowler is?

If you don't think a spell of 5-37 which skittled out a side for 160 when the other 3 innings of the match averaged a score of 351 in an ashes deciding test match is hardly impressive then you have some pretty ridiculous standards.

This spell isn't a one off as he did the exact same thing in South Africa a few months later to win a test out there.For all his faults he is a matchwinning bowler and could easily do the same again this winter and deep down you know that too.