• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

james anderson averages 35 with the kookaburra

Status
Not open for further replies.
F

Fuller Pilch

Hall of Fame Member
TheJediBrah said:
Just for lols:
Harris - definitely better when on the field, but horrific fitness
Steyn - definitely better, not quite as long a career
Mohammad Asif - probably better, but a ****
Boult & Southee - don't think they're as good but Kiwi posters will disagree
Wagner - as above
Philander - not as good, even more conditions reliant and faked injuries to get away from roads
Johnson - not as good except for a very brief period
Broad - pretty close, hard to split the too on form

*edit*:
Cummins - probably better, still in progress
Hazlewood - had his own thread v Anderson

@FullerPilch who are the other ones (edit: that's 11, but at least half of them are objectively worse than Jimmy IMO)
Click to expand...
I wrote bowlers, not seamers. I think he's definitely behind Rangana Herath and Ravi Ashwin too, arguably ahead of Jadeja and Yasir, and definitely ahead of Lyon.
 
F

Fuller Pilch

Hall of Fame Member
235 wickets in 45 tests. That's extremely impressive.

In all the tests since 1877, 79 bowlers have reached the 200 wicket mark. Yasir Shah did it in the fewest matches of all 79. Of course it is arguable that Anderson is better. I was giving Jimmy a massive compliment.

And how were spinners sneaked in there? Just bcos NZ produces terrible spinners, it doesn't mean spinners don't count.
 
B

BSM

U19 Cricketer
Fuller Pilch said:
235 wickets in 45 tests. That's extremely impressive.

In all the tests since 1877, 79 bowlers have reached the 200 wicket mark. Yasir Shah did it in the fewest matches of all 79. Of course it is arguable that Anderson is better. I was giving Jimmy a massive compliment.

And how were spinners sneaked in there? Just bcos NZ produces terrible spinners, it doesn't mean spinners don't count.
Click to expand...
He's done that at an average of 30 though. Also ironic that Shah and Herath both have more lopsided away/home stats than Anderson. Herath's away record is what Jimmy naysayers pretend that his away record is
 
F

Fuller Pilch

Hall of Fame Member
BSM said:
He's done that at an average of 30 though. Also ironic that Shah and Herath both have more lopsided away/home stats than Anderson
Click to expand...
Leg spinner.
His average is slightly more than Kumble's and MacGill's (due to getting smashed down under) and lower than Abdul Qadir's.

Shah has hardly got to bowl at home. Most of his success has been in neutral conditions (UAE).

Like I said he is arguably not as good as Anderson.
 
B

BSM

U19 Cricketer
Fuller Pilch said:
Leg spinner.
His average is slightly more than Kumble's and MacGill's (due to getting smashed down under) and lower than Abdul Qadir's.

Shah has hardly got to bowl at home. Most of his success has been in neutral conditions (UAE).

Like I said he is arguably not as good as Anderson.
Click to expand...
Wouldn't necessarily say U.A.E counts as neutral conditions in most circumstances (maybe if they are playing against other teams in the subcontinent). I'm more curious as to how Herath is definitely ahead of Jimmy to be honest.
 
ParwazHaiJunoon

ParwazHaiJunoon

First Class Debutant
GIMH said:
6. English cricket is a joke - The 1990s would like its memes back. I mean Anderson is a big crank when things don't go his way, nobody disputes that. He could just smile and get on with it I guess, but then he probably wouldn't have the drive to be the most prolific seam bowler in the history of Test Cricket. Same goes for Broad. They're moody ***** because they want it so badly. It's why they've succeeded, played in winning teams that have gone round the world and won actual series of length in different countries against top-class batting line-ups. You can't debunk that.
Click to expand...
& @Flem274* is giving them very badly.
 
Flem274*

Flem274*

123/5
despite all the english effortposting overnight, the fact remains

160 @ 32.54
6
0

@

3
2
.
5
4

but of course, it's always the balls fault, or the pitch, or the house of jupiter in uranus
 
Last edited:
GIMH

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
Flem274* said:
160 @ 32 with the most used ball in the world, gets dropped away from home for a finger spinner or medium pacer, yet according to some we're meant to call him a genuine atg
Click to expand...
Most used ball - wrong. The fact its not used in India alone makes it wrong. The fact far more cricket is played in England than kookaburra nations also makes it so. So there's another one wrong.

He's been rested but not dropped for over a decade. That's a fact. The player he was rested for is Stuart Broad who is also a better bowler, and cricketer, than any that you masturbate over but let's not get greedy.

Nobody called him a 'genuine atg' so there you go with your straw man while you refuse to argue the actual points because you can't, you can't refute them. It's funny that you mentioned Richard earlier because you are actually beyond the territory he trod in when he went down the Hussain>Hayden path. You are reaching for everything you can, clinging to numbers that help you whilst ignoring the large body of evidence that makes you an idiot. History will prove you wrong, your opinion will be held somewhere beneath that view of Richard's and other such drivel.

So like I said. Debate my points or leave the forum. There's no way back for you.
 
Flem274*

Flem274*

123/5
*widely used ball in test cricket. you know what i meant.

funny you mention broad, a better bowler than anderson. so anderson was dropped for the better bowler. dropped!

people call him an atg all the time on here and elsewhere. this isn't debateable. the reaching to equate me to richard is sad. sad! the KOOKAFACTS are anderson has been disappointing overall with the most widely used ball in test cricket despite some excellent isolated series so he cannot be an atg imho. he is an atvg by my, i think quite fair, standards that require you to maintain excellent performances in almost all circumstances. im willing to give leeway. for example, if anderson maintained his duke figures everywhere except australia and maybe one other country but he still had the 11 and 17 ashes to his name then id look the other way. anderson overseas and anderson with non-duke balls in particular shows a strong trend though that i can't ignore.

lord protector more like schmord lamejector ha haaaaa my points are best points
 
F

Fuller Pilch

Hall of Fame Member
Maybe change the thread to Anderson is ATG in England, pretty decent in the rest of the northern hemisphere, and not very threatening in the southern (premier cricketing) hemisphere.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top