What was crickets best decade?

[subshakerz]

Thats the most insulting thing I’ve ever read about Courtney Walsh.

Nah, Walsh is better than Jimmy but they are in the same tier.

 

[subshakerz]

What if bowlers could be rated ATG on more than just an arbitrary wickets milestone?

200+ is fine. 300+ is more than enough.

I don't think in the current era where a modern cricketer is expected to play a decade plus, 200 wickets is enough to judge definitively. Longevity is a factor.

 

[Molehill]

Nah, Walsh is better than Jimmy but they are in the same tier.

You could split Jimmy's career in half. Pre-30 he's just your run of the mill 300 wicket taking seamer (if such a thing exists). Post 30 he's ATG, unless 380 wickets at 22.6 somehow don't qualify.

 

[Coronis]

You could split Jimmy's career in half. Pre-30 he's just your run of the mill 300 wicket taking seamer (if such a thing exists). Post 30 he's ATG, unless 380 wickets at 22.6 somehow don't qualify.

You can split anyones career in half. He’s still **** unless he’s at home and **** with the ball the majority of the world uses.

 

[Molehill]

You can split anyones career in half. He’s still **** unless he’s at home and **** with the ball the majority of the world uses.

Yeah you can, but you don't normally find 350 wickets. I sense from your tone that maybe that annoys you....

180 wickets at 26 since the age of 30 outside of England. Not a bad return considering some of the unfriendly surfaces he's had to bowl on.

 

[Aritro]

Every decade

 

[Slifer]

And someone made a comment about 90s bowlers getting rated because of "nostalgia". I disagree with that notion, because we already rate S Smith as an atg. We already rate Williamson as NZ's best and Root is routinely picked in an English atg XI.

 

[Ali TT]

Anderson averages 0.5 runs more than Warne, who sucked majorly in India and West Indies. So if Jimmy isn't an all time great, then neither is Warne.

But anyway, how about those 1850s, amiright?

 

[HookShot]

Anderson has been briliant in England, but merely good in most other countries. I really wish that he and Root had performed better in Australia as the Ashes series would have been more exciting.

Played In	Mat	O	M	R	W	5w	10w	Best	Avg	S/R	E/R
Australia​	21​	824.3​	217​	2313​	68​	1​	0​	5/43​	34.01​	72.75​	2.81​
England and Wales​	101​	3640.2​	962​	10207​	429​	24​	3​	7/42​	23.79​	50.91​	2.80​
India​	13​	375.4​	102​	997​	34​	0​	0​	4/40​	29.32​	66.29​	2.65​
New Zealand​	9​	319.2​	74​	1021​	36​	1​	0​	5/73​	28.36​	53.22​	3.20​
Pakistan​	2​	67.0​	17​	148​	8​	0​	0​	4/36​	18.50​	50.25​	2.21​
South Africa​	10​	385.1​	75​	1177​	34​	2​	0​	5/40​	34.62​	67.97​	3.06​
Sri Lanka​	7​	207.4​	49​	599​	18​	2​	0​	6/40​	33.28​	69.22​	2.88​
United Arab Emirates​	6​	216.0​	63​	452​	22​	0​	0​	4/17​	20.55​	58.91​	2.09​
West Indies​	10​	346.3​	95​	893​	36​	2​	0​	6/42​	24.81​	57.75​	2.58​
Overall (9)​	179​	6382.1​	1654​	17807​	685​	32​	0​	7/42​	26.00​	55.90​	2.79​

 

[subshakerz]

Anderson has been briliant in England, but merely good in most other countries. I really wish that he and Root had performed better in Australia as the Ashes series would have been more exciting.

Played In	Mat	O	M	R	W	5w	10w	Best	Avg	S/R	E/R
Australia​	21​	824.3​	217​	2313​	68​	1​	0​	5/43​	34.01​	72.75​	2.81​
England and Wales​	101​	3640.2​	962​	10207​	429​	24​	3​	7/42​	23.79​	50.91​	2.80​
India​	13​	375.4​	102​	997​	34​	0​	0​	4/40​	29.32​	66.29​	2.65​
New Zealand​	9​	319.2​	74​	1021​	36​	1​	0​	5/73​	28.36​	53.22​	3.20​
Pakistan​	2​	67.0​	17​	148​	8​	0​	0​	4/36​	18.50​	50.25​	2.21​
South Africa​	10​	385.1​	75​	1177​	34​	2​	0​	5/40​	34.62​	67.97​	3.06​
Sri Lanka​	7​	207.4​	49​	599​	18​	2​	0​	6/40​	33.28​	69.22​	2.88​
United Arab Emirates​	6​	216.0​	63​	452​	22​	0​	0​	4/17​	20.55​	58.91​	2.09​
West Indies​	10​	346.3​	95​	893​	36​	2​	0​	6/42​	24.81​	57.75​	2.58​
Overall (9)​	179​	6382.1​	1654​	17807​	685​	32​	0​	7/42​	26.00​	55.90​	2.79​

Those numbers don't reflect the unique impact Anderson has had in the SC. He has been better than McGrath IMO.

Important role in winning England a series in India in 2012.

The best fast bowler ever to tour the UAE.

The only fast bowler with a matchwinning spell in India during their dominant period.

Awe-inspiring series in Pakistan recently to win a series there on absolute roads.

I will go to the extent of saying I have never seen a better bowler ever on dead tracks based on his UAE and Pakistan performances.

 

[Xix2565]

I don't really see how Cummins ends up anywhere near McGrath. He's currently about to turn 30 and has 217 wickets at 21.5 and has been prone to injuries.

In the last 6 years, Anderson has 218 wickets at 20.6 so he doesn't even compare favourably with a certain 'over-rated' English veteran.

I wouldn't be surprised if Cummins ends up with less than 400 wickets in his career and that leaves him nowhere near McGrath.

Come on, Anderson doesn't even come close to Cummins' rate of wickets which are on par with McGrath even if you limit him to the last few years like Cummins. He's a great beneficiary of Test span and workload management even accounting for his improvements. Cummins handily clears him and isn't too far off McGrath at similar stages in their careers (in matches played).

 

[subshakerz]

Come on, Anderson doesn't even come close to Cummins' rate of wickets which are on par with McGrath even if you limit him to the last few years like Cummins. He's a great beneficiary of Test span and workload management even accounting for his improvements. Cummins handily clears him and isn't too far off McGrath at similar stages in their careers (in matches played).

Cummins just needs to clear 300 plus wickets to be comparable to McGrath IMO.

 

[Athlai]

Cummins just needs to clear 300 plus wickets to be comparable to McGrath IMO.

Maybe if he takes 100 wickets at 10

 

[Athlai]

Like I'm all for there's ATG bowlers in the 10s and 20s but it's ****ing McGrath. Arguably the best of all time.

 

[Xix2565]

Like I'm all for there's ATG bowlers in the 10s and 20s but it's ****ing McGrath. Arguably the best of all time.

Sure but none of the ATG bowlers before are anywhere as untouchable as Bradman is for batters. I don't get this idea that they can't be compared when the numbers are strikingly close. And no, it's not just averages being looked at here.

 

[Flem274*]

I don't think in the current era where a modern cricketer is expected to play a decade plus, 200 wickets is enough to judge definitively. Longevity is a factor.

Actually when you look into it, it is very rare for a cricketer to provide 10 respectable or better years. Rarer still for 10 good years.

Only 9 pace bowlers have put in 10 years averaging under 30 (3 test minimum). Anderson is one. 42 managed more than 5, which sounds like a lot until you click it is about the total number of quicks currently active. 22 pacers averaged sub 35 for 10 years or more.

Many peoples' choice for #1 of all time managed 8 years averaging sub 30 (Malcolm Marshall). If we're fair and consistent, you need less than you might think to put your name in the ATG conversation.

200 wickets is fine. 300 you're in if you bring the results.

 

[srbhkshk]

Steyn is the only real ATG bowler and McGrath is somewhere nearby, every plodder averages <25 when the wickets are conducive to pace bowling.

 

[Spark]

And someone made a comment about 90s bowlers getting rated because of "nostalgia". I disagree with that notion, because we already rate S Smith as an atg. We already rate Williamson as NZ's best and Root is routinely picked in an English atg XI.

Those are pretty straightforward judgments to make though. It's where it becomes more line ball where the potential impact of nostalgia/recency bias comes into play.

 

[Molehill]

Come on, Anderson doesn't even come close to Cummins' rate of wickets which are on par with McGrath even if you limit him to the last few years like Cummins. He's a great beneficiary of Test span and workload management even accounting for his improvements. Cummins handily clears him and isn't too far off McGrath at similar stages in their careers (in matches played).

I thought Cummins had bowled superbly last year to take his wickets on those Pakistan roads at 22.5, but then Anderson came along and did it at 4 runs less. Cummins entire Test career is matched by Anderson aged 34-40, just let that sink in....

Also worth remembering that in his 'average' years, Anderson was also becoming by far and away England's highest ODI wicket taker too. He's not a beneficiary of workload management, he's a freak.

Like I'm all for there's ATG bowlers in the 10s and 20s but it's ****ing McGrath. Arguably the best of all time.

As an Englishman, it pains me to say it, but this.

 

[ZK$]

Steyn is the only real ATG bowler and McGrath is somewhere nearby, every plodder averages <25 when the wickets are conducive to pace bowling.

Steyn had some really bowler friendly pitches at home tbf.