Just shows how idiotic Fred was to belittle Holder though.
Flintoff the bowler was quite a force, he maybe didn’t take the five-wicket hauls as frequently as you may expect for someone of his ability, perhaps due to the more back of a length he had, where as Holder is that bit fuller. You just have to listen the batsman talk about Freddie from that era when he was at his peak, a horrible bowler to face.
It was a bit more than that. He was seriously consistently good (with the stats behind it) for a period of 3-4 years (longer if you include 1 day cricket). Would have been selected for both of his disciplines on their own. But beyond that his career was "mixed" to put it mildly/generously. And the further problem was that the England team selections for a long period were absolutely dependent on him performing (especially with the bat as he was generally used to lengthen the bowling attack, rather than the batting)
You can’t make a full judgement based on the overall stats at all, imo. His stats aren’t mightily impressive but stats don’t tell you the moments when he performed, they don’t tell you how he made things happen when England most needed it, they don’t tell you how other bowlers profited from his bowling at the other end, etc.
Boycott said Windies team is full of very average cricketers and Flintoff said the world has gone mad and if Holder gets 200 clearly England's top 6 should chase 600.
