But anyway, this strange thing didn't happen.  England won by 9 wickets.

He's big, he's bad, he's better than his dad.

-- Edited by Salmon on Saturday 28th of August 2010 01:05:21 PM

It'll be brilliant if he takes a 5for here. A hundred and a 5for in the same match is something that even Flintoff never managed (Swann nearly got it last year).

Of the 24 wickets to fall so far,  22 of them have fallen at an average of 7.23 apiece. 

Oh, the other 2 fell at an average of  176.5     

Well basically Broad bats behind Swann for England ( as he does for Notts actually I believe ) because Swann has performed better and did have a better test average.

Anyway, it's as you suggest kinda unlikely that England will be batting again.

Yeah, as Indy said, Swann has done very well at number 9 in the last year or two. Broad's form with the bat had dipped remarkably in the last year as he went from being a potential no. 7 (at least in the media's eyes) to a batsman who had failed to cross 25 even once in South Africa or Bangladesh.

Funnily enough, Swann hasn't done well since being promoted, while Broad has scored a 169, a 48 and did well in an ODI against Bangladesh, too. One logic behind it is that Swann isn't that good with blocking stuff and he can go berserk at 9, while there's more responsibility at 8.




I am pretty sure that Broad will be batting at 8 in the Ashes after this knock, partially on form and partially because Swann doesn't enjoy bounce that much.