Insiders and Outsiders

[King Pietersen]

Everytime I've seen Hoggard bowl in the last year or so he seems to be down in pace also. Not according to the Speedo, but he doesn't seem to be rushing batsmen like he appeared to when at his best. The ball really seemed to nip onto the batsmen, especially the inswinger to the left-hander, but whenever I've seen him in the last year he appears to have lost that. I'm not too bothered that we appear to have moved on from him.

 

[wfdu_ben91]

Everytime I've seen Hoggard bowl in the last year or so he seems to be down in pace also. Not according to the Speedo, but he doesn't seem to be rushing batsmen like he appeared to when at his best. The ball really seemed to nip onto the batsmen, especially the inswinger to the left-hander, but whenever I've seen him in the last year he appears to have lost that. I'm not too bothered that we appear to have moved on from him.

His still better then that young blonde fella that averages over 40 with the ball.

 

[King Pietersen]

Which one's that? If you mean Stuart Broad, he now averages 38 in Test cricket

 

[wfdu_ben91]

Which one's that? If you mean Stuart Broad, he now averages 38 in Test cricket

Take his stats out against the West Indies & New Zealand and he has a Ponting-esque average of 56.

 

[King Pietersen]

You can twist statistics as much as you like. Take Hayden's runs against Zimbabwe, Bangladesh, New Zealand and West Indies out and check his statistics away from home he averages a very Ian Bell-esque 41. You can make most players look poor/below average if you pick and choose statistics. If you'd actually been watching Stuart Broad throughout his career you'd see a notable improvement in the last 5-6 months in Test cricket. He's a very decent ODi bowler (no matter how much you contest it, he's a much better ODi bowler than Jacques Kallis for example, something that you tried to contest on MSN) and I think he's developing into a good Test match bowler, who can be used an an effective Partnership Breaker. He's got 2 top class batsmen out in this innings, one of which he managed to bounce out on 100.

 

[wfdu_ben91]

You can twist statistics as much as you like. Take Hayden's runs against Zimbabwe, Bangladesh, New Zealand and West Indies out and check his statistics away from home he averages a very Ian Bell-esque 41. You can make most players look poor/below average if you pick and choose statistics. If you'd actually been watching Stuart Broad throughout his career you'd see a notable improvement in the last 5-6 months in Test cricket. He's a very decent ODi bowler (no matter how much you contest it, he's a much better ODi bowler than Jacques Kallis for example, something that you tried to contest on MSN) and I think he's developing into a good Test match bowler, who can be used an an effective Partnership Breaker. He's got 2 top class batsmen out in this innings, one of which he managed to bounce out on 100.

The West Indies are heading in the same direction as Zimbabwe. Once Chanderpaul retires then the Windies will virtually become minnows. I doubt Gayle, with his attitude will last much longer and with what seems to be like a corrupt national cricket board, failing to produce Test quality venues - I don't see a bright future. New Zealand on the otherhand have a bright future, but are currently raw, inexperienced and not the sort've team you want to judge a players statistics over. Plus, over the last few years, something like over 20 batsman average of 50 against the West Indies, which is ridiculous.

England have only performed well against NZ & West Indies since the Ashes 2005, so much so, that if you remove their stats from NZ & Windies then you get a much better perspective over how good their players are.. Pietersen averages 49, Cook & Collingwood low 40's and the rest average mid-low 30's. Bowlers are similar, Flintoff averages 31 whilst the rest average over 40.

Also, if you remove Hayden stats from Windies, Zimbabwe, Bangladesh & New Zealand, his Test averages drops from 50.73 to 50.09 - I fail to see where you are coming from.

 

[King Pietersen]

We performed well against South Africa, and could have easily won that series if Moores and Vaughan drummed a killer-instinct into the team. We also could have beaten India, but a master innings from Tendulkar won India the game, it's not like we've been decimated by the better sides in the last year or so. We've managed to beat the weaker sides, and have been in winning positions against the best sides but failed to capitalise. If you'd watched the games and not based your entire argument on stats and stats alone you'd know that.

Also, what about Ramnaresh Sarwan? He's been in brilliant form this year. 4 hundreds, and although most of them came on some flat Windies tracks he was still making the runs whilst most of the rest of his team were failing. He's averaging 84 with the bat this year and has been much better than both Chanderpaul and Gayle.

 

[wfdu_ben91]

We performed well against South Africa, and could have easily won that series if Moores and Vaughan drummed a killer-instinct into the team. We also could have beaten India, but a master innings from Tendulkar won India the game, it's not like we've been decimated by the better sides in the last year or so. We've managed to beat the weaker sides, and have been in winning positions against the best sides but failed to capitalise. If you'd watched the games and not based your entire argument on stats and stats alone you'd know that.

Also, what about Ramnaresh Sarwan? He's been in brilliant form this year. 4 hundreds, and although most of them came on some flat Windies tracks he was still making the runs whilst most of the rest of his team were failing. He's averaging 84 with the bat this year and has been much better than both Chanderpaul and Gayle this year.

Yeah, Pietersen & Flintoff performs against the better teams, which gives you an opportunity. One of your other batsman performs well for a series, whilst the others fail miserably and then the batsman that performs well fails for the next couple of series' whilst one of the batsman that failed stands up and then fails for the next series and so on.

For example:

vs South Africa: Pietersen & Bell performs (everyone else fails)
vs. Australia: Pietersen & Collingwood performs (everyone else fails)
vs. Sri Lanka: Pietersen & Cook performs (everyone else fails)
vs India: Pietersen & Strauss performs (everyone else fails - unless its played in the subcontient = flat decks)
vs West Indies: Everyone cashes in against the weak opposition, whilst Pietersen unperforms, so this series evens out the averages and doesn't make the other batsman look as poor in the overall statistics.
vs New Zealand: Same as West Indies.

Also, Sarwan is a decent bat, but not a world-beater.

 

[Jamee999]

Take his stats out against the West Indies & New Zealand and he has a Ponting-esque average of 56.

Lol, take out the teams he's played the most against recently, as he's improving, good job.

 

[wfdu_ben91]

Lol, take out the teams he's played the most against recently, as he's improving, good job.

Two weakest teams, bar Bangladesh in Test Cricket. How convenient.

 

[Pratters]

Aakash Chopra, like Badri is a real outsider. Had done all he could to bang the door open to India's test opening but you haven't got much chance when Sehwag and Gambhir are opening.

 

[GIMH]

I reckon that whatever Broad's average drops to - and it seems to be dropping pretty steadily - people will always have these digs at him. He's starting to do the business now, his place in the side can't be questioned IMO, but whatever

 

[Jamee999]

I reckon that whatever Broad's average drops to - and it seems to be dropping pretty steadily - people will always have these digs at him. He's starting to do the business now, his place in the side can't be questioned IMO, but whatever

BUT HE HAS LONG BLONDE HAIR AND LOOKS TWELVE SO HE CAN'T BE GOOD AT CRICKET!!

How do you people not get it?

 

[Manee]

I reckon that whatever Broad's average drops to - and it seems to be dropping pretty steadily - people will always have these digs at him. He's starting to do the business now, his place in the side can't be questioned IMO, but whatever

BUT HE HAS LONG BLONDE HAIR AND LOOKS TWELVE SO HE CAN'T BE GOOD AT CRICKET!!

How do you people not get it?

You really are oversimplifying the argument. The argument is that people are far too willing to overlook subpar bowling performances because he can bat, because he tries variations, because he looks the part, etc.

 

[King Pietersen]

He's been getting results in the last few months though, not just looked the part. His record on the dreaful flat pitches in the Windies was very good, and he's continued to take wickets in England. I'll admit he wasn't good enough with the ball 8-12 months ago, but he's definitely turned a corner, and is now not only looking the part, but getting results at the same time. I think you're a little harsh on Broad.

 

[GIMH]

I don't dispute that at all and he was very lucky to keep his place in the Test side after the South Africa series last summer, he certainly wouldn't have done but for his batting. But he has since started to take wickets and bowl well, but some people aren't prepared to give him credit.

 

[Manee]

He's been getting results in the last few months though, not just looked the part. His record on the dreaful flat pitches in the Windies was very good, and he's continued to take wickets in England. I'll admit he wasn't good enough with the ball 8-12 months ago, but he's definitely turned a corner, and is now not only looking the part, but getting results at the same time. I think you're a little harsh on Broad.

I am not being overly harsh. He has improved, I concede that. He is bowling with pace and thinks about his bowling but he still is not taking enough wickets and he is playing some pretty poor teams.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Look, let's be realistic, people; yes Stu's batting (and maybe even his sire) have helped him get a spot in the team and an extended run that his bowling alone perhaps didn't warrant, but you have to be pretty bloody one-eyed not to recognise his improvement. He dismissed the number two and number fourteen ranked batsmen today. The Windies may not be the force of old but Chanderpaul is world class and Sarwan is currently in great touch.

If his performances in the Windies were "sub par" we might as well not have bothered with a bowling attack because he was our best bowler (well, seamer anyway, with deference to Swanny's efforts).

 

[Pup Clarke]

he is playing some pretty poor teams.

Really?

 

[King Pietersen]

I don't dispute that at all and he was very lucky to keep his place in the Test side after the South Africa series last summer, he certainly wouldn't have done but for his batting. But he has since started to take wickets and bowl well, but some people aren't prepared to give him credit.

Perfectly put. For some reason, alot of people aren't prepared to give him the credit he deserves. Sure he's not been consistently threatening in Test cricket in the past, but give the guy his dues, he's worked bloody hard, has bowled on alot of very dead wickets, and is now starting to get results. His pace is clearly up, he's got variation, very good control, and proved with the dismissal of Sarwan that he's capable of bowling with genuine hostility, something that will be vital come the Ashes. He's one of the certainties in the England XI for me now.