Be patient, for the world is broad

Broad cutting a typically frustrated figure.

Is Stuart Broad's form with the ball a problem for England?

The superficial statistics would say yes: even including a very successful summer series against Pakistan last year, where he took 14 wickets in the low twenties, his average since the turn of 2010 is over 40, dragging his career average comfortably the wrong side of 35. For a four man attack, this causes problems. This period has however been one of the most successful in England's history - why?

James Anderson has led the Test attack brilliantly in this period, and has become the incisive, consistent spearhead that we on this blog hoped he could be. Barring injuries, he should be able to lead the attack for the next few years. He's been sharing the new ball with Broad when they've both been available and whilst Broad has been economical, Anderson has been making the breakthroughs.

Graeme Swann has also played a huge role, consistently taking wickets and rarely being dominated, he has made a four man attack possible.

These two mainstays have been well supported by a succession of good reserve seam and swing bowlers: Chris Tremlett, Tim Bresnan and Steven Finn have all contributed effectively to a four man attack when needed. Although Broad did not bowl badly in the first two tests of the Ashes, this attack was improved by Tremlett.

Career records of England's current fast bowlers (before Third Test v Sri Lanka)

Bowler Tests Wickets Average Strike Rate Economy

James Anderson 58 215 30.98 56.8 3.26
Stuart Broad 36 105 35.97 68.4 3.15
Steven Finn 12 50 26.92 41.4 3.89
Chris Tremlett 8 38 26.84 53.7 2.99
Graham Onions 8 28 31.03 51.0 3.64
Tim Bresnan 7 25 28.28 59.2 2.86

So the solution to the Broad "problem" seems obvious: when everyone's fit, replace him with better bowlers until he can prove he's more effective. If this is the solution, then why do England still so obviously regard him as a guaranteed selection in all forms of the game, a view reinforced by his appointment as Twenty20 captain?

I think it is because, perhaps subconsciously, the selectors and management have glimpsed his true value. He has latent talent with the bat, having played several genuinely top class innings, capped by his spectacular century last summer at Lord's against Pakistan. He looks a proper batsman when he bothers to build an innings. He also has the aura of a matchwinner, and has produced some bowling spells of real quality to swing big games in England's favour, more often in ODI cricket, but also famously in the Oval Test in 2009. So even though on paper he has not taken the wickets to justify inclusion, they cannot bring themselves to put someone so clearly talented, capable of taking 5fers and scoring tons, on the sidelines. Despite having played a lot of cricket already, he's still only 24 years old, one of the youngest ever to do the Test double of 1000 runs and 100 wickets.

This is the right instinct, but will hinder England unless they change their structure. They should back this instinct, and move Broad up the order, in my view to six, at the expense of their sixth batsman. This would then allow for the inclusion of a fifth bowler, and lessen the pressure on Graeme Swann. I think it would also help Broad. If he could be largely entrusted with holding an end up and going for under two runs an over, he would pay a really valuable role. His bowling tends to fall apart when he stretches for magic balls. He is capable of real pace, but should rely on his height to bowl a Pollock/McGrath line; fractionally back of a length on or outside the top of off-stump. If he can achieve this consistently, he will be able to throttle back his pace and bowl long, economical spells.

We should be brave enough to do this: England's top four has never been stronger in my memory, Bell has found his feet at five, and Prior staying at seven is a great insurance policy. The lower order, with Bresnan and Swann potentially at eight and nine, also compares very favourably to recent, successful, years.

So to answer the question I set myself, Broad's lack of wicket-taking recently should be pushing us towards taking the opportunity to move to a five man attack. Opponents of this view will point to our successful track record with four bowlers in the Strauss-Flower era. This is valid, but if we really want to be the number one side in the world then this is the sort of move we need to make. We seem to be entirely wedded to the Australian model in the Waugh and Ponting eras - this was obviously a successful four-bowler formula but was successful only because two of the bowlers were McGrath and Warne, and came about because the Australians have not produced a genuine Test standard allrounder for several generations.

Having a genuine quick bowling allrounder also paves the way for playing two spinners when we need to without unbalancing the side - crucial to England's prospects on the subcontinent...

Read more...

Fantasy all-time England Twenty 20 team

As the rain pours down on the first day of the oldest format of the international game at its latest venue, my thoughts turned to players from the past who might have graced T20 cricket. I've placed extra weight on power-hitting, the ability to improvise shots, good athletes in the field, variety of bowling and bowling depth. I've chosen three out-and-out bowlers, but backed up by two high class all-rounders and a further two useful change bowlers to give the captain up to seven decent options for his twenty overs.

None of the players I've picked is a natural captain.

Here's my pick for a fantasy England XI:


1. Marcus Trescothick

Should still be more of a reality than a fantasy, but Tresco would be an incredible asset to the team, with his calm, powerful hitting and ability to regularly dominate all types of bowling. He plays proper cricket shots by and large, and relies on the clean strikes of a straight bat. Other than Chris Gayle and Sachin Tendulkar, no batsman has been more consistent at the top of the order in the T20 era. He would just edge out another modern batsman, Graham Gooch, for me.

2. Wally Hammond

Particularly earlier on in his career, Hammond was one of the most relentless attacking batsmen we've seen, murdering bowling through the off-side as no-one else could. Although he later abandoned some shots in order to minimise risks, he also started as a dangerous on-side player, and his power and poise would have allowed him to capitalise during powerplays. Would be an extremely handy fifth or sixth bowler, capable of genuine pace and swing for short spells, and often used (not least by Jardine on the bodyline tour) as a containing bowler. Also one of the best athletes English cricket has seen. Because of his power and versatility, he edges out Jack Hobbs and Len Hutton, two truly great English openers whose careers overlapped with his before the second world war.


3. WG Grace

Arguably the greatest cricketer ever, although comparisons with the modern game aren't straightforward. Again a great athlete in his youth, Grace proved adaptably prolific in all forms of the game, not just first class cricket. The father of modern batting in many ways, he had a capacity to innovate his technique to dominate whatever bowling/conditions he faced; the key requirement to success in T2o batting. As with Hammond, and probably more so, he would add an effective change option to the bowling and another gun fielder. In the absence of any real contenders on merit, he captains the side because he's about 40 years older than the others.


4. Denis Compton

Compton was a superb innovator, capable of inventing shots as he played them, and his ability to cut, glance and sweep the ball at an almost infinite degree of angles would drive any fielding captain to distraction in the middle overs. He would be a terrific finisher in a T20 game, as well as someone to set the platform for big scores. He nicks Kevin Pietersen's place, who narrowly misses out.

5. Gilbert Jessop

Jessop would be the powerhouse in my (for some reason rather Gloucester heavy) batting lineup, providing impetus and hard hitting - his records for fast-scoring at all levels of cricket beggar belief. As well as being able to hit boundaries, he was a rapid runner between the wickets (his 76 ball ton against the Aussies at the Oval in 1902 included an all-run five!). Until he had been overbowled a few years into his career, he was a rapid bowler, and a lightning quick fielder either in the covers or in the deep. If he'd been born a hundred years later, he would have been one of the most valuable cricketers on the planet. A country mile ahead of his nearest competitor for this slot, Allan Lamb.


6. Eoin Morgan

A pick more on promise than achievement, although he's had a fair amount of that, Morgan would bring an almost Comptonian ability to manufacture shots and, for a slight man, to hit shots with a suprising amount of power. His steely temparament is ideal for someone who might come to the crease in the final over needing to slog a few boundaries, or might need to resurrect and finish a run chase. The only current England T20 player in the side edges out stalwarts like Paul Collingwood and Neil Fairbrother.


7. Andrew Flintoff

A difficult pick to put him ahead of Botham, but Freddie just takes it for me. Beefy's limited overs batting never really lived up to its promise, although he was arguably a slightly better limited overs bowler than Flintoff. Freddie's power with bat and ball swing it for me. The side is also possibly already over-filled with egos (Hammond, Grace and Barnes) and the addition of Botham would probably sink the team!

8. Alan Knott

Knott edges out Les Ames, probably a better allround batsman, on the genius and neatness of his keeping (with such a premium on missed chances and unnecessary extras) and his ability to find awkward runs whenever they were needed in tough match situations.


9. Harold Larwood

A tough pick, with a couple of standout fast bowlers, Fred Trueman and Brian Statham, each missing out by a whisker. Larwood was famed for his relentless accuracy, and is possibly the quickest bowler we've produced (competing with the more fragile Frank Tyson). Bowlers like Dale Steyn and, to a lesser extent, Shaun Tait and Brett Lee, have shown the value of having a genuine express option in the opening and closing overs. There hasn't been a better bowler of this type than Larwood.


10. Derek Underwood

The choice of spinner isn't straightforward. As out and out bowlers, Hedley Verity and Jim Laker are right up there with him. Deadly Derek Underwood has the advantages of a terrific understanding with Knott, and his incredible economy rate in the ODIs he did play. Other than Compton, and occasionally Hammond, he's the only spinner I've picked. On the subcontinent, I'd be tempted to drop Morgan and replace him with a high class spinning allrounder, like Frank Woolley. As it is, the final bowler would be just as likely to exploit any turn in the pitch....


11. SF Barnes

From what you read, Barnes was a unique bowler, operating at medium-quick pace, he could cut, seam, swing and spin the ball at will, and combined incredibly prolific wicket taking with an iron will and quick bowler's selfishness which meant he just didn't bowl bad balls. I think in some ways as a professional he was ahead of his time (he could give the WIPA a few lessons about negotiating a contract) as he was acutely aware of his market worth and did not quietly tolerate exploitation. He would have been tailor made for the IPL.

Read more...