Stuart Broad vs Steven Finn - who should get the vote?

 
With James Anderson returning from injury for the 3rd Test either Stuart Broad or Steve Finn will have to make way from the bowling attack that spluttered last week at Lord’s. We run the rule over the two and deliver our verdict below:

Form

Neither were anywhere near the top of their games at Lord’s. Both were wayward and made Matt Prior dive full length kine an unconvincing swan more times than Cristiano Ronaldo does in a whole season. However, Finn did get better as the match wore on and picked up four wickets as well as giving the Sri Lankan tailenders a bit of a torrid time.

Broad has been rusty in both Tests, perhaps as a consequence of the injuries he picked up in the Ashes and World Cup. His strike rate in the two matches has been 82 making him as dangerous as a blancmange on a firing range.

Finn 1 Broad 0

Control

Finn was dropped after the Perth Ashes Test despite at that time being the leading wicket-taker on either side in the series. His problem was that he had been so expensive with an economy rate of 4.3 that he could have earned a sponsorship deal with Prada. That lack of control was on show again at Lord’s last week.

Broad is normally the more miserly of the two with a career economy rate of 3.15 runs per over to Finn’s 3.89. However, he has gone at 3.5 runs per over in the current series, which whilst not quite being worthy of a deal with Prada hardly justifies an approach from H&M either.

Finn 1 Broad 1

Record

Finn became the youngest England bowler to reach 50 Test wickets in the Lord’s Test. It has only taken him 12 matches and his wickets have come at an impressive average of 26.92. His strike rate of a wicket every 41.4 balls is just below the phenomenal Dale Steyn, but is perhaps skewed by the fact that eight of his 12 Tests have come against the powder-puff batting line-ups of Bangladesh and Pakistan. Whether he can be as effective against the likes of Tendulkar, Sehwag and Laxman is debatable.

Broad’s record isn’t nearly so good even if he reached an impressive milestone of his own at Cardiff by becoming the second youngest England bowler to reach 100 Test wickets. Broad’s 105 wickets have come in 36 Tests at an average of 36. His strike rate is that of a drunk taking up archery for the first time and stands at a distinctly mediocre wicket every 68 balls. However, Broad did bowl that pivotal spell in the Ashes decider at the Oval in 2009.

Finn 2 Broad 1

Batting

Whilst we have sympathy with those that would disregard the batting ability of the pair and argue that the decision should be made on bowling alone this is not what the selectors will do.

Broad wins this match-up hands down, being a very good Test number eight with the potential to go higher in the order. Finn is not a number 11 in the Glenn McGrath mould, but is as likely to score a Test 50 as Nick Clegg is going to win a Most Popular MP contest.

Finn 2 Broad 2

Verdict

So perhaps unsurprisingly it is a borderline decision. Both have their merits and both are young so are likely to get better in the years to come. Personally, we’d go with Finn for the Rose Bowl (though we doubt that the selectors will concur) and hope that Broad can get his rhythm back in the nets and County Cricket in time for the series with India where his extra aggression and runs could come in useful.

Both however, will need to look over their shoulders as England have a wealth of seam bowling talent in the likes of Bresnan, Shahzad, Onions, Woakes, Harris, Dernbach and Meaker champing at the bit to nail down a spot in the XI.

Where next?

2nd Test, Lord's: England marks out of 10

Are Cook, Trott and Bell more impressive than Pippa Middleton's derriere?

Matt Prior's Desert Island Discs

Jack Hobbs by Leo McKinstry | Book review

Check out all our Reverse Sweep cricket heroes and zeroes

If you like this, follow us on Twitter @thereversesweep

Comments

[Vim]

It will be Broad.

[wilo]

hmm -- Vim is right, of course, there's no doubt that it will be Broad, but I notice that in your 2-2 analysis, Broad gets points for batting and economy... In a side with Prior at 7 we really shouldn't be picking bowlers for how they bat, and if we're picking bowlers on economy rate it's hard to see how Broadie is at the top of the list...

Broad may be coming back from injury, perhaps, but that point is wearing a little thin, and who else gets three tests in a four-man attack to bowl themselves back into form?

The selectors *will* pick Broad, I don't think there's any real doubt about that, and I don't have a problem with that decision really. If I was a bowler competing for that place I might, though, especially if I was, say, Graham Onions or Ajmal Shazad (or Dernbach, for that matter).

Do you think a fit Bresnan might be enough to dislodge Broad from his untouchable position? If Broadie doesn't have a good Rose Bowl Test it probably should, but I don't think it will.

[The Reverse Sweep]

Wilo, you and Vim are correct it will be Broad. Having erroneously made him T20 captain, England will be loath to drop him.

 

I agree with you that in a four-bowler attack, batting shouldn't come into it - especially as Swann would be a decent number eight.

 

When Bresnan is fit, it will certainly be an interesting conundrum for the selectors. England haven't looked as good in years as they did in Melbourne and Sydney when it was Bresnan and no Broad who was in situ with Anderson-Tremlett-Swann. And Bresnan can bat too, which prevents that argument.

 

As I said on the post, I'd go with Finn for the Rose Bowl.