James Anderson

[Richard]

Hard to see how thats the case when one is a specialist left handed new ball swing bowler, while the other is a quicker right arm bowler that can get the ball to reverse and occasionally get the new ball to swing as well.
The only similarity i see between the 2 is that both have potential, yet both have been especially ordinary at the international level.

Anderson's been far more ordinary than Franklin, really.

The similarity, as I say, is that both can of times be exceptionally dangerous, but you get the feeling that it only takes one small thing to go wrong and both of them can get absolutely belted by even mediocre batsmen.

 

[Richard]

I thought they would be the same height but Franklin is 6'4.

WoW, never realised he was anywhere near that tall TBH. Often looks exceptionally short when things aren't going well for him.

 

[Richard]

To return to this thread, with Anderson having been dropped from the ODI team for the first time, really, in his career (in 2004 he drifted out after being superseded by Wharfs and the like rather than actually being actively axed and stayed out until 2005/06 because of his poor Test bowling), Anderson's ODI record is simply becoming worse and worse and I wonder if anyone is finally waking-up to the realisation that he's just not good enough in the format.

Anderson in the winter of 2002/03, as a 20-year-old, debuted with some vague promise; in 12 games against ODI-standard sides he got plenty of tap plenty of times but also put in two of the best performances you're likely to see in an England ODI shirt - the 10-12-1 against Australia at Adelaide Oval and the 10-29-4 against Pakistan at Newlands. His overall figures, 5.16-an-over at 29.38, flattered him a little but hinted at some promise. And in the summer of 2003, everything went for him: the golden-arm become gold-plated, and despite going for 4.8-an-over against ODI-standard teams he averaged 17.61.

Thereafter, however, all has been far less rosy. He's played 67 games from 2003/04 onwards (drifting out for 18 months along the way, as I say, which was more down to Test inadequacies than anything) and his figures against ODI-standard sides read 5.24-an-over at 37.45. And this flatters him - I reckon in the 65 spells (he was subbed once and sent down just 2 overs for 6 which is neither one thing nor t'other in another) he's bowled genuinely well just 15 times. This is a damning indictment. And not all the times he's bowled badly has he been punished (though mostly he has).

Surely the time must be coming, soon, when Anderson is dropped, not just for a one-off in India, but for good?

And what's so remarkable is that he's gotten so much better as a Test bowler, which I imagine is more important to virtually everyone, in recent times.

 

[GIMH]

And what's so remarkable is that he's gotten so much better as a Test bowler, which I imagine is more important to virtually everyone, in recent times.

Hmm, maybe the two things are connected

 

[ozone]

I said in another thread that I disagree with you over his selection in the ODI side so theres no point going back there again, but do you think England have the strength in depth to completely discard someone who quite clearly has a large amount of talent, at the age of 26?

 

[Richard]

Yes. There are better bowlers around, in my view, even if most of them are less likely to take the 9-28-3-ish figures, they're far more likely to not get absolutely spanked.

 

[Richard]

Hmm, maybe the two things are connected

Well... I don't think so TBH as I don't think Anderson has gotten any worse in ODIs, pretty well all career really. Certainly not at the time he got better at Tests - which was the start of the summer of 2008.

Anyway, for seamers who bowl above 130kph or so (the sort of pace which is too quick for a wicketkeeper to stand up), generally the sort of stuff that helps you bowl well in ODIs helps you bowl well in Tests. Not neccessarily the other way around though, and stuff that helps a Test seamer can even handicap, never mind be of no use to, a ODI one.

 

[andruid]

Had to dig this old codger up to pre-empt anyone starting a brand new thread about him.

 

[FBU]

I found these stats interesting from the 2 Tests that have been played -

74 overs 11 maidens 247 runs 7 wickets econ 3.33 - Flintoff
74 overs 15 maidens 251 runs 6 wickets econ 3.39 - Anderson

I expected Anderson to have gone for far more runs but considering they have bowled the same number of overs there is only 4 runs difference.

Anderson's 6 wickets are the top six batsmen

Hughes
Katich
Ponting
Clarke
Hussey
North

 

[Scaly piscine]

Thought I'd dig up an Anderson thread.

Don't think he should be an automatic pick for England in any format. Most definitely should not be playing in a 4-man attack in a Test match. He's just too innocuous most of the time, you can't rely on him as a main bowler.

 

[Zinzan]

Has come a long way in the last 12-18 months & is currently my favourite English test cricketer. Haven't seen enough of him in the shorter forms to say whether he's a dead-cert in all 3 formats though

 

[Son Of Coco]

Thought I'd dig up an Anderson thread.

Don't think he should be an automatic pick for England in any format. Most definitely should not be playing in a 4-man attack in a Test match. He's just too innocuous most of the time, you can't rely on him as a main bowler.

I agree. From all we'd heard about the world-beater he'd become before The Ashes this year he relies on the conditions way too much to be effective from what I've seen. Is very, very good when the conditions are conducive to his style of bowling, but tends to disappear when they're not.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Has come a long way in the last 12-18 months & is currently my favourite English test cricketer. Haven't seen enough of him in the shorter forms to say whether he's a dead-cert in all 3 formats though

Nah. He averaged *just* under 30 last year because of the tour to NZ where he filled his boots. Averaging over 35 this year. His ODI figures are the other way around, he's averaging 23.61, ER 4.96 (he took a 5-23 in his last match which helped a lot) this year. Last year he averaged 74.70, ER 5.65 in 20 matches.

When he clicks and gets good conditions, he takes very good figures. That is a fairly random thing and is why his figures are erratic. Overall he's still below par, not main bowler standard.

 

[King Pietersen]

Been excellent this year in ODi's. 79 Test wickets at 32 is hardly atrocious either and striking at 59 is good enough. I don't think we've got a better option (Sidebottom's no longer a better option AFAIC), he's one of the best swing bowlers in the world and is capable of ripping through even the best of line-ups on a good day. Anderson's main problem is that he has generally struggled away from home and in conditions that aren't conducive to swing bowling. He averages 28 runs per wicket in England in the last 2 years, but significantly more than that away from home. I definitely wouldn't be considering dropping Jimmeh though, when it's swinging around there aren't many better bowlers in the world for me.

 

[aussie]

Thought I'd dig up an Anderson thread.

Don't think he should be an automatic pick for England in any format. Most definitely should not be playing in a 4-man attack in a Test match. He's just too innocuous most of the time, you can't rely on him as a main bowler.

Not sure why he isn't an automatic pick in our team ATM. He is hands down the leader of our attack in all formats. Although him being the leader is pretty much like when Vanburn Holder was leading the WI attack in the early 70s after Hall/Griffith retired, which kind of gives you an idea of how average the pace stocks are with ENG right now.

But i expect to see Anderson improving though, i reckon he could by the end of his career he'll be a better test bowler than Hoggard.

 

[Zinzan]

. Is very, very good when the conditions are conducive to his style of bowling, but tends to disappear when they're not.

Actually you're right. I call it 'Tim Southee syndrome', although obv Anderson is far > Southee.

 

[GIMH]

The difference in Jimmeh now and two years ago is that he keeps it much tighter when it's not swinging. In days gone by he would be going at 4 or 5 an over when conditions didn't suit whereas now if he isn't running through a side he's still reaosnably economical

 

[aussie]

I agree. From all we'd heard about the world-beater he'd become before The Ashes this year he relies on the conditions way too much to be effective from what I've seen. Is very, very good when the conditions are conducive to his style of bowling, but tends to disappear when they're not.

Reckon that could potentially change TBH, since he has to ability reverse swing the ball which would make him effective on flat decks.

 

[Son Of Coco]

Reckon that could potentially change TBH, since he has to ability reverse swing the ball which would make him effective on flat decks.

Potentially, but it hasn't really yet and he has been able to reverse-swing it for a while. May have more to do with attitude than ability, but time will tell I guess.

 

[Zinzan]

Nah. He averaged *just* under 30 last year because of the tour to NZ where he filled his boots. Averaging over 35 this year.

Yeah, they're hardly world-beating numbers, but I think I just particularly like swing bowlers of his ilk, hence why he's my favourite English player, not to mention the spirit he plays the game.