Rank These 21st Century Pacers

[Shady Slim]

as chief of the big vern fan club i can't agree with the assessment above that anderson > philander. if you are talking athleticism and fitness then definitely it's no question; but philander has won tests for his side here while anderson averages like 1700 in perth and brisbane combined. vern's contribution on a pretty dead waca pitch here last time the saffers toured was a huge part of their win, while you can count on jimmeh to serve up 1/90 when ever the poms come to perth or to the gabba. anderson definitely has better numbers in asia, where philander has played like seven tests or something tiny, and though i don't think that he'd catch anderson's numbers if he played more he would be closer.

likewise, vern has a better average in england and in south africa, as well as, again, in australia. i hate to discount cricket in asia because i love asian pitches that spin and turn and make for compelling cricket, but for an english cricketer non-performance in australia is the biggest black mark you can possibly have against your name. for all of the talk of vern needing the conditions in his favour to be potent i would hardly call south africa a paradise for someone who bowls 130 and swings it around corners!

 

[Daemon]

Harris literally played all his tests in his peak because he was too either too **** or injured for most of his career. If you afford that luxury to any decent Test cricketer they'd have great stats too.

 

[trundler]

Is Ryan Harris the Adam Voges of fast bowling?

 

[honestbharani]

I literally just said this:



So no I don't think it is subjective

Hard to have a better career than 600 wickets. It's not like Harris won a bunch of World Cups and Ashes series either, which I would give "career points" to. He mostly lost Ashes series and didn't even play in a World Cup from what I recall.

I am not disagreeing with you, lol. Just mentioning why most ATG discussions ultimately boil down to who had the better career.

 

[Howe_zat]

Is Ryan Harris the Adam Voges of fast bowling?

Nah, Voges had a lot more in his favour than only playing at his peak - you kinda need the combination of experience, ****** opposition performance and home track bullying to get the stupid stats he was getting at the time. He was a good player too, of course. But Harris had a lot more in his locker as a test cricketer and fewer leg ups.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Of course longevity is important - it's why Jimmy Anderson, who no one really loves on this forum, is objectively better than Mitchell Johnson.

Now, if you could pick a player only from a very specific point in time, sure - but that's not the question.

Maybe that is the question for some people, who are you to say

Nah, Voges had a lot more in his favour than only playing at his peak - you kinda need the combination of experience, ****** opposition performance and home track bullying to get the stupid stats he was getting at the time. He was a good player too, of course. But Harris had a lot more in his locker as a test cricketer and fewer leg ups.

Funny that no one else in his team that was playing the exact same matches had anywhere near as good stats at thim though, not even Steve Smith. It was form more than anything. Voges came in averaging 100 the previous Shield season, made 130 not out on debut on a tricky wicket where no one else made anything and was probably just about the best batsman in the world for that very brief period of time. Not saying that the other factors weren't there, but his form at the time played a bigger role for mine.

 

[vcs]

Roach > Harris TBH

 

[TheJediBrah]

Roach underrated by about as much as Anderson is overrated IMO

 

[trundler]

Abbas better than both + Bumrah

 

[weldone]

Roach underrated by about as much as Anderson is overrated IMO

Both Roach and Anderson are underrated on this forum tbh. But yes, I agree outside this forum Anderson is stupidly overrated.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Both Roach and Anderson are underrated on this forum tbh. But yes, I agree outside this forum Anderson is stupidly overrated.

Yeah it's becoming clear that Anderson is a bit underrated on here. Mostly a reaction to how absurdly overrated he is in general though.

 

[weldone]

Yeah it's becoming clear that Anderson is a bit underrated on here. Mostly a reaction to how absurdly overrated he is in general though.

Yes. Still remember Cook calling him England's best ever bowler - such an insane statement!

 

[Line and Length]

Overrated as he may be outside CW, the attempts to put down Anderson by some members here are, quite frankly, pathetic. No fast bowler has taken more Test wickets ... that is a fact. He may have a far better record on his home tracks but he is no orphan in that respect. I'm not saying he is an ATG but he will, in the future, be rated well above some of the bowlers who biased posters claim are better than him.

 

[TheJediBrah]

I rate him below others because he has, quite frankly, a stupid face

 

[Flem274*]

i'll post the proper in depth reply later because im drunk but suffice to say im entertaining the idea of separating the quality of what someone sent down (how good they were) from how long they were around.

to remove the emotional attachment to some bowlers here and use fresh examples, there's no planet on which a test side takes chris 'hucking it down at age 38' martin over shane bond or for a less egregious example, it's wrong to pick southee or boult over bond.

to pick a more controversial one to get a juicy side war going from the kiwis, im not picking late career vettori's bowling for a test on a turner over ajaz or somerville. vettori has the wickets but it doesn't matter because ajaz and somerville win more games on turners than he does.

martin is a useful squad bowler but to win a game you're picking bond. i just don't see how getting picked a lot factors into making you good since there are loads of reasons that can occur. spamming tests because you play a ridiculous amount and because some people obviously better than you happen to get injured more is the jammiest way to be 'better' since the wc final. it absolutely does not count.

to address howe's crack on him thinking i select based on career averages, it's pretty obvious anderson's career average flatters him because of the huge amount of home tests he plays with duke h4x tbh. put a kookaburra in his hand and he's done.

someone said something about bumrah. by that stage i didn't care enough to split hairs tbh. the top 4 or so are the obvious best and johnson came tenth because how do you even rate that career?

soon you're going to get a thread from me saying rating players is pointless because when trying to judge johnson overall it's a bit impossible given his contrasts.

i am going to watch the test now. enjoy my insights into why you are wrong and i am right.

 

[honestbharani]

Flem is pretty much going all Straight Edge Society CM Punk here... Obvious heel act but enjoyable.

 

[JOJOXI]

as chief of the big vern fan club i can't agree with the assessment above that anderson > philander. if you are talking athleticism and fitness then definitely it's no question; but philander has won tests for his side here while anderson averages like 1700 in perth and brisbane combined. vern's contribution on a pretty dead waca pitch here last time the saffers toured was a huge part of their win, while you can count on jimmeh to serve up 1/90 when ever the poms come to perth or to the gabba. anderson definitely has better numbers in asia, where philander has played like seven tests or something tiny, and though i don't think that he'd catch anderson's numbers if he played more he would be closer.

likewise, vern has a better average in england and in south africa, as well as, again, in australia. i hate to discount cricket in asia because i love asian pitches that spin and turn and make for compelling cricket, but for an english cricketer non-performance in australia is the biggest black mark you can possibly have against your name. for all of the talk of vern needing the conditions in his favour to be potent i would hardly call south africa a paradise for someone who bowls 130 and swings it around corners!

Philander's only bowling innings in Brisbane is a 0-103 but no doubt Philander has a better record in Perth when their careers overlap. Philander has played 16% of his Tests in Asia - it might be a small sample size but that is because his career isn't the biggest sample size ever. For Anderson its 19% in the timespan their careers overlapped and 14% over his whole career. Also over the time these 2 cricketers careers overlap Anderson averages better in England by about 10%. Playing Ashes might be England's biggest Test series but I don't think it defines how good a bowler is, I don't think it would be fair to rate an England cricketer above another cricketer on the basis of Ashes performances either unless you were comparing to an Australian otherwise you end up having a bias to Aussies and England cricketers in conversations about ranking players.

You also look at Anderson's 2010/11 Ashes series in Australia he took 24 wkts @ 26.04 in as many Test matches as Philander has ever played in Australia. Once again it is cherry picked but when you have a shorter career at your peak and in a strong pace attack that undoubtedly helps things for Philander too. I do also think fitness/athleticism is a significant aspect although wasn't a conscious factor in my order but I'd want a bowler to play a reasonable number of Tests for me (in fairness to Philander 64 Tests is a lot more then some on this list) its not much use having someone bowl well for 10 Tests retire and then wait another 10/15 years for another spearhead when you can have someone good enough to sperhead your attack for the best part of 15 years.

Having said all of that I'm not against Philander > Anderson just don't see why the huge disparity in opinion - Philander's biggest success at home and in New Zealand where if Anderson shared similar stats he'd still be viewed no differently and if anything further proof of him being Clouderson

 

[honestbharani]

I am starting to think we should call him Dukerson than Clouderson as apparently (at least to Flem274) he is no good even under clouds with a kookaburra.

 

[stephen]

Much is made of Anderson's 2010 performance in Australia but honestly Tremlett lead the attack in the tests he played. He was almost Johnson- like in that he had that extreme purple patch that ashes series.

 

[SeamUp]

1. Steyn
2. Cummins
3. Rabada
4. Bond
5. Broad
6. Anderson
7. Asif
8. Philander
9. Harris
10. Johnson