Are Anderson and Broad's away records good enough to be considered ATG Test bowlers?

[Firebat]

Performances of top 8 Test wicket takers away from home:

Murali: 60 matches, 307 wickets, Avg 27.8

Warne: 76 matches, 389 wickets, Avg 24.6 (home average is actually worse: 26.4)

Kumble: 69 matches, 269 wickets, Avg 35.9

Anderson: 67 matches, 216 wickets, Avg 32.1

McGrath: 58 matches, 274 wickets, Avg 20.8 (home average is also worse: 22.43)

Walsh: 74 matches, 290 wickets, Avg 25.0

Broad: 61 matches, 180 wickets, Avg 31.6

Steyn: 41 matches, 178 wickets, Avg 24.9

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Are their away records going to prevent Broad and Anderson being talked about in the very top league of ATG Test bowlers?

(On a side note, McGrath's numbers are ridiculous)

 

[Manunited18]

Performances of top 8 Test wicket takers away from home:

Murali: 60 matches, 307 wickets, Avg 27.8

Warne: 76 matches, 389 wickets, Avg 24.6 (home average is actually worse: 26.4)

Kumble: 69 matches, 269 wickets, Avg 35.9

Anderson: 67 matches, 216 wickets, Avg 32.1

McGrath: 58 matches, 274 wickets, Avg 20.8 (home average is also worse: 22.43)

Walsh: 74 matches, 290 wickets, Avg 25.0

Broad: 61 matches, 180 wickets, Avg 31.6

Steyn: 41 matches, 178 wickets, Avg 24.9

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Are their away records going to prevent Broad and Anderson being talked about in the very top league of ATG Test bowlers?

(On a side note, McGrath's numbers are ridiculous)

McGrath is unreal

 

[therealAB]

No

 

[sweep_shot]

I think they are ATG.

I know they haven't done that well in Asia but that's also true for many Asian players.

If you have 500+ wickets, you are an ATG in my book.

 

[Buffet]

Nope, combined away avg of 31-32 is not really good enough for pacers. Some countries are fine, but not aggregate.

 

[MenInG]

ATG debate is always difficult but the fact is that Broad/Anderson have played a huge role to get their team to where they are in Test rankings and that must account for something.

 

[Varun]

They're English ATGs (Anderson is at least).

Then again, it doesn't take much to be an England great compared to other countries.

 

[Firebat]

One thing that has to be considered is Anderson's astonishing fitness and longevity. At the age of 38, he's running in like he's 32. Just last year in SA at the age of 37, he bowled so many overs (37) that he broke a rib from effort in the Cape Town Test, and that ended his tour.

No one in the top 34 Test wicket-takers has played as many Tests as Anderson (156), and he's still taking mostly top order 5-fers in his 156th match. Considering he does the most physically gruelling role in cricket as a Test match fast bowler, it truly is remarkable.

 

[Robert]

No.

 

[Kenpachi]

I think they are ATG.

I know they haven't done that well in Asia but that's also true for many Asian players.

If you have 500+ wickets, you are an ATG in my book.

Agreed.

Stating Anderson isn't an all time great is Sour grapes in my opinion. He is about to take 600 wickets which is a record that could stand for a generation.

Class, skill, control, determination. I would take Anderson in my team any day.

 

[ishtiaq_ctg]

One thing that has to be considered is Anderson's astonishing fitness and longevity. At the age of 38, he's running in like he's 32. Just last year in SA at the age of 37, he bowled so many overs (37) that he broke a rib from effort in the Cape Town Test, and that ended his tour.

No one in the top 34 Test wicket-takers has played as many Tests as Anderson (156), and he's still taking mostly top order 5-fers in his 156th match. Considering he does the most physically gruelling role in cricket as a Test match fast bowler, it truly is remarkable.

playing two thirds of your tests in England helps.

 

[sweep_shot]

playing two thirds of your tests in England helps.

Well, that's not Anderson's fault. Is it? That's like saying Shakib's wickets are irrelevant because most of his wickets came on turning BD pitches.

The man deserves respect not just for his number of wickets but also for his dedication.

 

[MenInG]

One thing that has to be considered is Anderson's astonishing fitness and longevity. At the age of 38, he's running in like he's 32. Just last year in SA at the age of 37, he bowled so many overs (37) that he broke a rib from effort in the Cape Town Test, and that ended his tour.

No one in the top 34 Test wicket-takers has played as many Tests as Anderson (156), and he's still taking mostly top order 5-fers in his 156th match. Considering he does the most physically gruelling role in cricket as a Test match fast bowler, it truly is remarkable.

Fitness is phenomenal. Could have been forgiven to give up on fitness as approaching the end of their careers.

 

[notAgainPlease]

They are great but not ATG. There are not many ATG anyway.

 

[Savak]

One thing that has to be considered is Anderson's astonishing fitness and longevity. At the age of 38, he's running in like he's 32. Just last year in SA at the age of 37, he bowled so many overs (37) that he broke a rib from effort in the Cape Town Test, and that ended his tour.

No one in the top 34 Test wicket-takers has played as many Tests as Anderson (156), and he's still taking mostly top order 5-fers in his 156th match. Considering he does the most physically gruelling role in cricket as a Test match fast bowler, it truly is remarkable.

I would love to know his fitness regime. Yes the ECB has kept him away from ODI's and T-20 and he hardly plays county cricket but it is still gruelling to bowl so many overs in test cricket.

 

[Ab Fan]

They are not ATGs but will find place in England's all-time XI of last 50 years.

 

[AAli98]

They will be remembered like Kumble very good at home, competent away.

Not in the league of murli warne McGrath

 

[The Viper]

They are both England legends, but you cannot be an ATG with those away numbers. Longevity is important, yet I would categorise performances in multiple places higher.

 

[majiz]

no

 

[IMMY69]

Longevity wise they’re great

 

[Bhaijaan]

First of all, 31-32 are very good averages for touring bowlers.

Secondly, who cares? One guy is closing in on 600 test wickets (1st ever), the other guy will get there in 2 years. These are unbelievable numbers already.

Any nation would love to have had these two play for them.

 

[Firebat]

First of all, 31-32 are very good averages for touring bowlers.

Secondly, who cares? One guy is closing in on 600 test wickets (1st ever), the other guy will get there in 2 years. These are unbelievable numbers already.

Any nation would love to have had these two play for them.

The question isn't whether you'd want them in your team. "Very good" away averages doesn't make them all time greats, look at the other averages on the list.

Of course you have to be a truly great bowler to get the number of wickets they have, but to be considered in the top league of all time greats, surely they would have to be a bit better when not bowling on green pitches with overcast conditions and a brand new Duke ball.

 

[Bhaijaan]

The question isn't whether you'd want them in your team. "Very good" away averages doesn't make them all time greats, look at the other averages on the list.

Of course you have to be a truly great bowler to get the number of wickets they have, but to be considered in the top league of all time greats, surely they would have to be a bit better when not bowling on green pitches with overcast conditions and a brand new Duke ball.

600+ test wickets will ensure Anderson and Broad will be remembered way more than a lot of so called 20 averaging bowlers with 200,300,400 test wickets.

After a mountain of achievements, these two do not depend any recognition.

 

[Firebat]

600+ test wickets will ensure Anderson and Broad will be remembered way more than a lot of so called 20 averaging bowlers with 200,300,400 test wickets.

After a mountain of achievements, these two do not depend any recognition.

I agree they may be remembered more than anyone with 200 test wickets, that's why the lowest on the list I put has 439 wickets. Not sure why you think someone with 200 wickets would be considered in the top league of all time greats, no one here has suggested that.

Once again, I couldn't care less about if they depend on my recognition. They will live very comfortable lives being remembered as absolute legends of England cricket. You seem afraid of answering the question though.

 

[Bhaijaan]

I agree they may be remembered more than anyone with 200 test wickets, that's why the lowest on the list I put has 439 wickets. Not sure why you think someone with 200 wickets would be considered in the top league of all time greats, no one here has suggested that.

Once again, I couldn't care less about if they depend on my recognition. They will live very comfortable lives being remembered as absolute legends of England cricket. You seem afraid of answering the question though.

They are not English greats but world greats and opinions of no one including you or me changes that fact.

500 + test wickets isn't a joke and we are talking about two 600+ wicket takers.

To not recognise them.as greats isn't merely unfair but desrepectful and disgraceful.

 

[Firebat]

They are not English greats but world greats and opinions of no one including you or me changes that fact.

500 + test wickets isn't a joke and we are talking about two 600+ wicket takers.

To not recognise them.as greats isn't merely unfair but desrepectful and disgraceful.

I completely agree with that. They have achieved truly truly remarkable things, and believe me I am not disputing that. They are greats of Test cricket, and no one can take that away from them.

My point is, when one picks an all-time Test XI for example, names such as Warne, Murali, McGrath, Steyn, Akram, Walsh, Hadlee, Ambrose etc etc etc would all make it over Broad and Anderson due to the quality of their performances all around the world in all different conditions. Bags of wickets in home favourable conditions and longevity in the game to allow one to take so many wickets, while astonishing (especially in the case of Anderson), is not enough to be put in that bracket of bowlers in my opinion.