Liam Plunkett?

[Will_NA]

Everyoen gets a few lucky wickets in ODI cricket. He bowls a lot of brilliant deliveries that go unrewarded. Plunkett can be brilliant when he decides to hit the pitch as shown against SL 2006 tour but Broad is much more consistent and has a better temperament.

Batting ability shouldn't decided which bowler plays but if it did, Broad would be chosen since he is the better, more reliable batsman.

 

[manee]

On a completely irrational basis, I have never liked Broad. He just seems to always get wickets (and gets a fair few lucky wickets) when Plunkett usually bowls as many good deliveries but beats the bat. Plunkett is in a sense, an unlucky bowler. It is like Mcgrath and Gillespie (dialled down a couple of notches), both RFM, one is 80mph, the other touches 90mph, one more accurate than the other but one extracts just enough movement whilst the other beats the bat.

It is no wonder Plunkett did well in the CB series, he had a bunch of left handers, if he beat the bat against them, he bowled them or trapped them LBW.

Back on a rational basis, Broad is the better bowler

 

[Leicester Fox]

it doesn't matter how you get your wickets as long as you get them. Neither can really say they've won matches signle handedly with their bowling yet, Plunketts not taken more than 3 wickets and broad only 4 once. i guess the main difference is Broad has shown big signs of improvement and has got his average down to 30. Broads hugley improving as a bowler, he looks a far better player than when he started against Pakistan whilst Plunkett never built on his success against the Aussies. If he's bowling better than someone in the team then Plunkett would be in there but until then we'll just have to see if he can fulfill his potential.

 

[Kev]

Every time I've seen Plunkett bowl in county cricket I think he's been the most expensive bowler on display, but he never seems to bowl all that badly. But he is young and he will improve and I don't think the selectors have forgotten about him at all.

 

[PhilD123]

I rate Plunkett very highly - at his best he is better than any other bowlers (except Flintoff) in our team.

To be honest, I'd rather have Harmison or Hoggard at their very best than Plunkett.

Broad over Plunkett for me any day of the week. Broad has better control, he gets movement, he's tall, gets bounce. And then, Plunkett's batting has never helped England when we've really needed it. I can think of 2 times over the last 3-4 months where Broad's has. The game against India at Old Trafford and also the series winner in Sri Lanka.

 

[FreddieFan]

Oh ok, so consistency is the issue and the fact he bowls too many loose deliveries. That will come with age.

I hope England go with him in the future. He is a gem!

Pretty much hits the nail on the head IMO. He has great potential as a bowler, and bats a bit, which always helps, but he has a lot of work to do if he will achieve that potential. Anderson, Broad and Plunkett looks a healthy enough base to a future seam attack to me, although a Harmison-style tall quickie would help the balance - maybe Saj, if he sorts out his consistency too?

 

[manee]

maybe Saj, if he sorts out his consistency too?

Saj needs to seriously sort out his consistancy and just looking at his action, I am not sure if he ever could. It seems he builds a strong power position then sorta aimlessly throws his weight vaguely at the batsman.

I was watching him in a county match a month or two back and boy, does he overdo those slower ball bouncers. Though the county batsman didn't have a clue, good batsman will punish his 60mph bouncers that he bowls every other ball in one dayers.

 

[Almost_Austwick]

Like many bowlers under 25, Plunkett just needs a bit of time to learn the game. As with any sport moving up the levels means a big jump in standard and a period of finding your feet.

Let's see where is he after his 25th birthday.

My only worry with Plunkett is that he sometimes seems a bit lost at Durhum and though I'm sure they think highly of him, I can't help thinking that he may benefit more by moving to another county.

Looking towards to the others and I'm sure Broad will have a period of poor form once people have worked him out, it's how you deal with the 2nd and 3rd year of international cricket that will mark you out as a worthy or not.

The likes of Mahmood and Plunkett are finding this now, Anderson may have finally come out the other side.

 

[Hooper]

it doesn't matter how you get your wickets as long as you get them. Neither can really say they've won matches signle handedly with their bowling yet, Plunketts not taken more than 3 wickets and broad only 4 once. i guess the main difference is Broad has shown big signs of improvement and has got his average down to 30. Broads hugley improving as a bowler, he looks a far better player than when he started against Pakistan whilst Plunkett never built on his success against the Aussies. If he's bowling better than someone in the team then Plunkett would be in there but until then we'll just have to see if he can fulfill his potential.

Commonwealth Bank Series Final this year, Plunkett, with a bit of help from Mahmood, won the match for England.

 

[Vcassano]

To be honest, I'd rather have Harmison or Hoggard at their very best than Plunkett.

Oh forgot about Harmison, yes, but Hoggard is an overachiever (Which is a compliment!) who isn't as talented as many bowlers but has maximised his potential, which is why I prefer the naturally talented Plunkett.

 

[Leicester Fox]

Commonwealth Bank Series Final this year, Plunkett, with a bit of help from Mahmood, won the match for England.

I would say Colly was the match winner in both finals although Plunketts performance contributed massively. He only picked up 3 wickets at 7 an over too, he did bowl well but it didn't win us the match imo, it was more of a team effort.

 

[Skater]

Looking at his performances in the Tests against the West Indies earlier in the year there is no question why he isn't in the England team right now.

There is no doubt Liam Plunkett will develop with age, but right now Hoggard, Harmison and Broad are better options.

 

[angryangy]

I'm still surprised Hoggard never got back into ODIs, there have been a lot of points where they could have used someone experienced, even if he isn't the best one-day player.

 

[RoboRocks]

I'm still surprised Hoggard never got back into ODIs, there have been a lot of points where they could have used someone experienced, even if he isn't the best one-day player.

Yeah, I'm a bit surprised myself.
Hoggard would of been a good selection a year or so ago when the England ODI bowlers were going to all parts but in the long term an average of 36 and an economy rate of over 5 RPO isn't very good for someone of his ability.

With the England bowlers doing better, there can't really be a way back for him in ODI's.