Burgey
Request Your Custom Title Now!
At least Murali was selected when available I guessJadeja doesn’t average 70 though
At least Murali was selected when available I guessJadeja doesn’t average 70 though
Read his bio.While 17.51 is a fair sight better than the 28.35 that is his Test career, it still begs the question, why could he never translate that performance to Tests? His pre-bodyline tests were during his prime, and 16 tests is far from being able to say "he didn't get a run".
Who rates him that high?Jimmy Anderson. He’s good but taking more career wickets than McGrath and Marshall does not mean he’s in their class as a quick, and there’s about 20 others better than him through history.
People on social media cricket pagesWho rates him that high?
Really good bowler but he has got to where he is due to longevity. He isn't in the Marshall, Akram, Younis, Ambrose, Walsh, McGrath type level.Jimmy Anderson. He’s good but taking more career wickets than McGrath and Marshall does not mean he’s in their class as a quick, and there’s about 20 others better than him through history.
This is such a dumb post on so many levels. No one that has half a clue on the game rates JA in McGrath or Marshall class. Just because you've seen some **** YouTube or Facebook comments to that affect does not mean he's overrated and frankly you've got to be some kind of idiot to take opinions from those sorts of platforms and bring them here to make a point.Jimmy Anderson. He’s good but taking more career wickets than McGrath and Marshall does not mean he’s in their class as a quick, and there’s about 20 others better than him through history.
Case in point......utter ****ing imbecile.Rating Anderson in the same tier as McGrath and Marshall as a cricketer is fair
Anthony McGrath and Xavier Marshall that is
I've read and heard many reputable cricketing brains call Anderson "England's greatest bowler" thus better than Barnes and therefore in the McGrath/Marshall class. I think he has gone past Underwood and Snow and is perhaps England's best since Trueman.This is such a dumb post on so many levels. No one that has half a clue on the game rates JA in McGrath or Marshall class. Just because you've seen some **** YouTube or Facebook comments to that affect does not mean he's overrated and frankly you've got to be some kind of idiot to take opinions from those sorts of platforms and bring them here to make a point.
You won't find much better cricketing knowledge than we've got right here on CW on any online platform. And it's my opinion that right here Jimmy Anderson is massively underrated.
I completely agree, I am indeed an imbecileI'm glad you agree.
One of your best Shane!Rating Anderson in the same tier as McGrath and Marshall as a cricketer is fair
Anthony McGrath and Xavier Marshall that is
Thats a really long bow your drawing there......675 test wickets does make a strong case for him being England's "greatest".......in no way does the infer that he's the best or put him in the same class as those bowlers.I've read and heard many reputable cricketing brains call Anderson "England's greatest bowler" thus better than Barnes and therefore in the McGrath/Marshall class.
It probably is Barnes, but it's hard to include someone who played way back in the early 1900s, so I'd probably say Fred Trueman too.England's greatest bowler is a really hard question.
i have had a couple so im gonna commit to trueman.