What's new

If you could pick 2 fast bowlers from any era to form a new-ball Test pair, who would you chose?

MenInG

MenInG

PakPassion Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 2, 2004
Runs
218,139
Think the Wasim/Waqar seemed so natural to chose but since it can be any 2 then how about Imran/Holding?


Lets see what you chose.
 
malcolm marshall and glenn mcgrath.

cant think of two better exponents of the new ball. skill, accuracy, intelligence in spades. i dont think many openers would like to face these two.

additional merit for being successful in all conditons against all teams.

and just for sake of completness my first and second change would be alan donald and imran khan. bye bye batting order.
 
ElRaja said:
malcolm marshall and glenn mcgrath.

cant think of two better exponents of the new ball. skill, accuracy, intelligence in spades. i dont think many openers would like to face these two.

additional merit for being successful in all conditons against all teams.

and just for sake of completeness my first and second change would be alan donald and imran khan. bye bye batting order.
Click to expand...

Think there would be a few walkovers!
 
I will go with the methodical and meticulous Glenn McGrath to pair alongside the extremely skillful and versatile Wasim Akram.

Allan Donald comes in as a one change fast bowler who will bowl lightning fast and be destructive at the same time.

All boxes ticked I believe.
 
Last edited:
Mcgrath and Akram.

You get the consistent dominance of Mcgrath in all conditions while allowing Akram to dominate as the pressure builds up.

They would be unstoppable.
 
What about Wasim Akram and Curtly Ambrose together opening the attack? No better blending of accuracy ,control,pace and movement.What could be a more lethal combination than the versatility of Wasim taking wizardry to magical proportions and the hostility of Ambrose whose disconcerting bounce from a good length was unplayable?Perfect fusion of reverse swing with bounce.
 
Mcgrath and Anderson.

Wasim wasn't the best new ball bowlers whereas Waqar lived on using old balls. The latter is overrated and made a career out of ball tampering.
 
Last edited:
Wasim used the same ball often as Waqar, and ‘ball tampering’ has always happen in some form from scratching, sun cream, dirt, Vaseline. Waqar at his peak was so good with the old ball that he never concentrated on the new. If reverse swing didn’t exist he would have been able to adapt with both old and new. Btw now reverse swing was called tampering back in the day:
 
Back to the new ball then:
1. Dennis Lillee and Malcolm Marshal.

2. Ambrose and McGrath

Regarding Waqar again, It is sour grapes when it comes to Waqar by many. If everything he did was because of tampering then others with that same ball didn’t achieve that success. You still have to be good to achieve that success.
 
UzmanBeast said:
Wasim Akram and Jimmy Anderson.
Click to expand...

The first thing that came to my mind when I saw this thread.

Wasim and Anderson in their primes with a duke ball in their hands on an overcast English day.

Pure art.
 
Allan Donald
Courtney Walsh

Just my favorites.

Happens to be mere coincidence one them happens to be the undisputed GOAT fast bowler ever.
 
I always think that the bowlers of 2000s & earlier, would struggle today.

They played in old era where batsmen feared them and pitches were spicy/inconsistent. Yet now, it is innovation era, where batsman play with freedom and pitches are stable. Also, the fitness of this era is so much better.
 
someone21 said:
I always think that the bowlers of 2000s & earlier, would struggle today.

They played in old era where batsmen feared them and pitches were spicy/inconsistent. Yet now, it is innovation era, where batsman play with freedom and pitches are stable. Also, the fitness of this era is so much better.
Click to expand...

depends on their mental adaptability, the main issue is that fast bowlers are respected a lot less, so they would need to accept that they would pbly have worse e/r and ave, s/r might still be the same. the bowlers who bowled really well across formats, like joel garner, hadlee or ambrose would pbly not find it difficult to adapt, whereas single format specialists would pbly struggle more.
 
Hitman said:
Dennis Lillee and Malcolm Marshall.
Click to expand...

Yeah. The former had that brilliant record against top order batsmen and averaged five wickets per test, while the latter was the best I ever saw and arguably the best who ever played.
 
someone21 said:
I always think that the bowlers of 2000s & earlier, would struggle today.

They played in old era where batsmen feared them and pitches were spicy/inconsistent. Yet now, it is innovation era, where batsman play with freedom and pitches are stable. Also, the fitness of this era is so much better.
Click to expand...

Modern batters have relatively weak defensive techniques. The old boys would get hit for more sixes, but they would also blow a lot of poles out. It is easier to get a lbw shout in the modern era too.
 
It has to be Curtly Ambrose and Glen McGrath.

Fast, economical and suited to most conditions.

I can see the opposition sweating at 10/3 after 10 overs.
 
Last edited:
Marshall and Akram. Best Right and Left arm fast bowler pair should be lethal.
 
McGrath and Steyn. McGrath cutting it back in off the seam and peak Steyn swinging it away devilishly late at high speed.
 
I dont know about best pairs but Jimmy, wasim and asif would be my fav to watch on overcast conditions. Magic.
 
Robert said:
Modern batters have relatively weak defensive techniques. The old boys would get hit for more sixes, but they would also blow a lot of poles out. It is easier to get a lbw shout in the modern era too.
Click to expand...

Disagree. Without the intimidation, the bowlers of the past era would struggle, have zero momentum and consistency.

I remember how a young Nehra was asking for help and scared when facing Olonga of Zim. Yet, a number 11 batsman today is not scared by any bowlers. There arent any free wickets now.
 
Mamoon said:
The first thing that came to my mind when I saw this thread.

Wasim and Anderson in their primes with a duke ball in their hands on an overcast English day.

Pure art.
Click to expand...

Both could swing it both ways and had good pace.

I'd reckon these two would have most openers back in the hut within minutes.
 
UzmanBeast said:
Both could swing it both ways and had good pace.

I'd reckon these two would have most openers back in the hut within minutes.
Click to expand...

Wasim averages 28 in UK.
Anderson averages 33 & 29 against Australia & South Africa respectively in Uk.
Even in UK I'd pick Mcgrath & Marshall, both of whom treated the English like nobodies in english soil.
 
someone21 said:
Disagree. Without the intimidation, the bowlers of the past era would struggle, have zero momentum and consistency.

I remember how a young Nehra was asking for help and scared when facing Olonga of Zim. Yet, a number 11 batsman today is not scared by any bowlers. There arent any free wickets now.
Click to expand...

What’s “momentum and consistency” ? Lillee would come in at 90 mph all day. He was as fast at 6 pm as he was at 11 am. Hadlee landed every stock ball on a shape the size of a hankerchief.

There are plenty of hopeless tailenders about. Top order batters get the horrors too against the quicks, and go off sick with stress.
 
Imran Khan and Shoaib Akhtar at their peak.

Now that would have been a sight to behold - maybe not for batsmen though.
 
ishtiaq_ctg said:
Wasim averages 28 in UK.
Anderson averages 33 & 29 against Australia & South Africa respectively in Uk.
Even in UK I'd pick Mcgrath & Marshall, both of whom treated the English like nobodies in english soil.
Click to expand...

I'm talking about prime Akram and prime Anderson.

Probably the greatest exponents of swing with the new ball.
 
ishtiaq_ctg said:
Wasim averages 28 in UK.
Anderson averages 33 & 29 against Australia & South Africa respectively in Uk.
Even in UK I'd pick Mcgrath & Marshall, both of whom treated the English like nobodies in english soil.
Click to expand...

You're looking at Akram's career as a whole.

Prime Akram averaged 22 in England and 18 in Australia.
 
Another dream combo

Mathew Hoggard and Irfan Pathan 2004-2007. Genuinely loved watching these two bowl.
 
On second thought, Hadlee and McGrath. What a nightmare that would be. Not giving an inch and extracting any seam movement.
 
From the players I've seen

Akram McGrath
Akhtar Brett Lee would be fun
Steyn McGrath
Anderson and M Asif would be swing galore
 
Malcolm Marshall and Wasim Akram. The best right hand fast bowler ever and left arm swing bowler off all time. Just doesn't get any better then these two:usman
 
UzmanBeast said:
I'm talking about prime Akram and prime Anderson.

Probably the greatest exponents of swing with the new ball.
Click to expand...

Wasim was rarely super effective in England. I think after the umps started checking the ball for scratches regularly, he lost some of the reverse he got in 1992. As he played for Lancs for ten years, the top batters got a lot of practice against him.

Anderson is lucky enough to have played through to a time where T20 has ruined defensive techniques. Had he bowled in the eighties against tighter batters he would have finished with about 200 test wickets.
 
Has anyone here seen Dennis Lillee and Jeff Thomson at their peak? Many regard them as the best fast bowling partnership ever.
 
PakLFC said:
Has anyone here seen Dennis Lillee and Jeff Thomson at their peak? Many regard them as the best fast bowling partnership ever.
Click to expand...

Thompson was like Morkel to Lillee's steyn. I wouldn't say he was a threat on his own but in a partnership he was pretty damn good.
 
Robert said:
Wasim was rarely super effective in England. I think after the umps started checking the ball for scratches regularly, he lost some of the reverse he got in 1992. As he played for Lancs for ten years, the top batters got a lot of practice against him.

Anderson is lucky enough to have played through to a time where T20 has ruined defensive techniques. Had he bowled in the eighties against tighter batters he would have finished with about 200 test wickets.
Click to expand...



Anderson’s career started in 2003.

Over the last 19 years, he has bowled to some of the greatest Test batsmen ever. In fact, it can be argued that no fast bowler has bowled to as many great players as Anderson has.

He has bowled to great batsmen of three generations.

Anderson has dismissed Tendulkar 9 times in 14 Tests - no bowler has dismissed Tendulkar more often in Test cricket, and you are accusing of exploiting the weak techniques of T20 batsmen.

However, this fabrication was expected from someone who has repeatedly tried to prove that bowlers like Caddick and Hoggard were better than Anderson.

I think you ought to show more respect to the greatest fast bowler your country has every produced, with a far greater legacy than all the Snows, Barnes, Truemans, Willis, Goughs, Caddicks, Hoggards etc. that you deem better than Anderson.
 
Mamoon said:
[/b]

Anderson’s career started in 2003.

Over the last 19 years, he has bowled to some of the greatest Test batsmen ever. In fact, it can be argued that no fast bowler has bowled to as many great players as Anderson has.

He has bowled to great batsmen of three generations.

Anderson has dismissed Tendulkar 9 times in 14 Tests - no bowler has dismissed Tendulkar more often in Test cricket, and you are accusing of exploiting the weak techniques of T20 batsmen.

However, this fabrication was expected from someone who has repeatedly tried to prove that bowlers like Caddick and Hoggard were better than Anderson.

I think you ought to show more respect to the greatest fast bowler your country has every produced, with a far greater legacy than all the Snows, Barnes, Truemans, Willis, Goughs, Caddicks, Hoggards etc. that you deem better than Anderson.
Click to expand...

I’ve watched him for most of it. From 2003-2008 he was not effective - against those earlier generation batters with sound techniques.

Had he come up in the eighties he would have been injured half the time and played maybe fifty tests. He would not have played enough to learn much and have been Neil Foster or Phil DeFreitas level.

He has done well in the central contracts era which had helped him stay on the park and gradually improved his skill set, but he has still looked powerless on flat decks, even in England. I rate Gough higher because he was effective on all surfaces, against batsmen who could come to England and reel off centuries instead of today’s T20 bangers who can hit lots of sixes on roads, but cannot cope with lateral movement.
 
Mamoon said:
I think you ought to show more respect to the greatest fast bowler your country has every produced, with a far greater legacy than all the Snows, Barnes, Truemans, Willis, Goughs, Caddicks, Hoggards etc. that you deem better than Anderson.
Click to expand...

You forgot Fraser, who would have taken close to a thousand test wickets if he had been fortunate enough to play in the central contracts era. Ludicrous bias is often pitiful.
 
Last edited:
Robert said:
I’ve watched him for most of it. From 2003-2008 he was not effective - against those earlier generation batters with sound techniques.

Had he come up in the eighties he would have been injured half the time and played maybe fifty tests. He would not have played enough to learn much and have been Neil Foster or Phil DeFreitas level.

He has done well in the central contracts era which had helped him stay on the park and gradually improved his skill set, but he has still looked powerless on flat decks, even in England. I rate Gough higher because he was effective on all surfaces, against batsmen who could come to England and reel off centuries instead of today’s T20 bangers who can hit lots of sixes on roads, but cannot cope with lateral movement.
Click to expand...

Yes, Tendulkar was also a “T20 banger” who could not cope with lateral movement. A bowler who dismissed him 9 times in 14 Tests with classic swing bowling has no chance against premium Test batsmen.
 
PakLFC said:
Has anyone here seen Dennis Lillee and Jeff Thomson at their peak? Many regard them as the best fast bowling partnership ever.
Click to expand...

I have, cricket seemed to be different in those days, more entertainment and much less negativity that seems to be present nowdays. I guess in the 70's and 80's cricket was more inclusive and less sterile.

I dont know about the best fast bowling partnership ever, possibly for Australia but there have been so many good pairs over the decades I cant see how anyone can claim one to be the best.
 
Last edited:
Last Monetarist said:
You forgot Fraser, who would have taken close to a thousand test wickets if he had been fortunate enough to play in the central contracts era. Ludicrous bias is often pitiful.
Click to expand...

I think he would have over 650, at a better average than Anderson. Remember that he was an immediate success in test cricket, home and away, unlike Anderson who took five years to achieve consistency at home and four more to achieve it in most overseas nations.

Fraser played cricket pretty much seven days a week, as did Gough and Caddick. No way could anyone stay fit. That’s why they topped out at 45 or 70 tests instead of 160.

What you call pitifully ludicrous bias, I call understanding cricket history.
 
Robert said:
I think he would have over 650, at a better average than Anderson. Remember that he was an immediate success in test cricket, home and away, unlike Anderson who took five years to achieve consistency at home and four more to achieve it in most overseas nations.

Fraser played cricket pretty much seven days a week, as did Gough and Caddick. No way could anyone stay fit. That’s why they topped out at 45 or 70 tests instead of 160.

What you call pitifully ludicrous bias, I call understanding cricket history.
Click to expand...

You can call it whatever you want, I consider it misguided revisionism borne out of nostalgia-ridden memories of the past. Anyone that has ever played cricket to any level and tried to swing the ball conventionally will recognize that James Anderson is at a completely different level to any bowler that has played cricket for England since Bob Willis and John Snow retired.

Anderson's issues at the start of his career are well-documented and mainly attributed to Rod Marsh and Troy Cooley trying to mess up with his action at the Academy. He was a vastly different bowler when he reverted to his original action.

It is disgraceful disrespect to someone that has taken over 600 test wickets to be compared with middling run-of-the-mill seamers such as Graham Dilley, Neil Foster, and Phil De Freitas. It's only a couple of steps removed from being compared to Martin Bicknell, Ed Giddins, and Peter Martin. I can only conclude that folks holding such opinions have never bothered to pick up a cricket ball in their lives.
 
Last edited:
Last Monetarist said:
You can call it whatever you want, I consider it misguided revisionism borne out of nostalgia-ridden memories of the past. Anyone that has ever played cricket to any level and tried to swing the ball conventionally will recognize that James Anderson is at a completely different level to any bowler that has played cricket for England since Bob Willis and John Snow retired.

Anderson's issues at the start of his career are well-documented and mainly attributed to Rod Marsh and Troy Cooley trying to mess up with his action at the Academy. He was a vastly different bowler when he reverted to his original action.

It is disgraceful disrespect to someone that has taken over 600 test wickets to be compared with middling run-of-the-mill seamers such as Graham Dilley, Neil Foster, and Phil De Freitas. It's only a couple of steps removed from being compared to Martin Bicknell, Ed Giddins, and Peter Martin. I can only conclude that folks holding such opinions have never bothered to pick up a cricket ball in their lives.
Click to expand...

Ah, if you had historical perspective you would know that Snow and Willis relied on pace and bounce, not swing.

A more directly comparable bowler from that period to Anderson would be Chris Old, who swung it both ways at about the same pace for about the same average.

Dilley lost four prime years due to a neck injury, but on his return was subject to the same overwork as his contemporaries.

I’m reading nothing to suggest that Anderson, if he came up in the eighties, would be more successful than these guys.
 
Robert said:
Wasim was rarely super effective in England. I think after the umps started checking the ball for scratches regularly, he lost some of the reverse he got in 1992. As he played for Lancs for ten years, the top batters got a lot of practice against him.

Anderson is lucky enough to have played through to a time where T20 has ruined defensive techniques. Had he bowled in the eighties against tighter batters he would have finished with about 200 test wickets.
Click to expand...

That's an insult to Jimmy Anderson. You're severely discrediting him for his achievements. If that's the case, a Pakistani bowler ought to have reached 600 wickets as well, but unfortunately, we haven't had a bowler cross 200 since Waqar, so I don't think we're in any position to criticize Anderson's performances.

Your point is not making much sense.
 
UzmanBeast said:
That's an insult to Jimmy Anderson. You're severely discrediting him for his achievements. If that's the case, a Pakistani bowler ought to have reached 600 wickets as well, but unfortunately, we haven't had a bowler cross 200 since Waqar, so I don't think we're in any position to criticize Anderson's performances.

Your point is not making much sense.
Click to expand...

‘Insult’ is a bit hyperbolic, don’t you think?

I don’t discredit Anderson. I think he is very good.

Just not England’s best, even in my lifetime.

See, I don’t just go by numbers on a spreadsheet. I consider the quality of opposition.
 
Robert said:
‘Insult’ is a bit hyperbolic, don’t you think?

I don’t discredit Anderson. I think he is very good.

Just not England’s best, even in my lifetime.

See, I don’t just go by numbers on a spreadsheet. I consider the quality of opposition.
Click to expand...



Do you?

You continue to side-step the fact that he dismissed Tendulkar 9 times in 14 Tests with classic swing bowling.

I think the real issue is that Anderson has achieved things that you didn’t expect him to. 10 years back, you would have never be believed that he would take 600+ wickets and have a bigger legacy than every other English pacer.

As a result, you need to downplay his achievements and overrate vastly inferior bowlers who do not have half the legacy Anderson will leave behind in an England shirt,
 
Robert said:
Ah, if you had historical perspective you would know that Snow and Willis relied on pace and bounce, not swing.

A more directly comparable bowler from that period to Anderson would be Chris Old, who swung it both ways at about the same pace for about the same average.

Dilley lost four prime years due to a neck injury, but on his return was subject to the same overwork as his contemporaries.

I’m reading nothing to suggest that Anderson, if he came up in the eighties, would be more successful than these guys.
Click to expand...

I never suggested Anderson was a comparable bowler to Snow or Willis, that's your own patronizing inference. My point was that Anderson is the best bowler that's played for England since that era.

You try too hard to be a defender of history, when in reality you only tarnish it through misremembering it and presenting it inaccurately. I only hope it's not deliberate, as malicious misinterpretation of history is just as bad as disregarding it altogether.

The aesthetic value in Anderson's bowling is a matter of taste and I would be loth to expect everyone to appreciate it, but it's blatantly wrong to belittle his career by comparing him with average bowlers with no legacy in the game.
 
Last edited:
Robert said:
‘Insult’ is a bit hyperbolic, don’t you think?

I don’t discredit Anderson. I think he is very good.

Just not England’s best, even in my lifetime.

See, I don’t just go by numbers on a spreadsheet. I consider the quality of opposition.
Click to expand...

If you went by quality of opposition, you'd also know that Anderson has richly deserved the success he has received due to the performances he has put up against the world's best.

Your point about T20 cricket is quite illogical because you have no evidence to prove that T20 cricket ruined test match techniques. Most batsmen of any standard will know to keep elements of T20 separate from test cricket, so I'm not sure what you mean by that.

If you read what I wrote, I considered Anderson because of his ability to swing the ball both ways when it is new, along with the ability to reverse the ball when it's old as seen in the series against India.

So perhaps you should also consider the quality of the bowler we are talking about rather than asserting that the players Anderson played against weren't that good, it's just that he was far better.
 
English bowler's away record since 1970 (min 100 wickets)
[table=class: grid, align: center]
[tr][td]Player [/td][td]Span [/td][td]Mat [/td][td]Wkts [/td][td]Avg [/td][td]Econ [/td][td]SR [/td][td]5W [/td][td]10W [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]D Gough [/td][td]1994-2001 [/td][td]26 [/td][td]105 [/td][td]26.9 [/td][td]3.08 [/td][td]52.4 [/td][td]4 [/td][td]0 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]RGD Willis [/td][td]1971-1984 [/td][td]49 [/td][td]149 [/td][td]27.2 [/td][td]2.63 [/td][td]61.9 [/td][td]6 [/td][td]0 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]IT Botham [/td][td]1978-1992 [/td][td]43 [/td][td]157 [/td][td]29.63 [/td][td]2.91 [/td][td]60.9 [/td][td]10 [/td][td]2 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]AR Caddick [/td][td]1994-2003 [/td][td]29 [/td][td]106 [/td][td]29.7 [/td][td]3.02 [/td][td]58.9 [/td][td]7 [/td][td]1 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]MJ Hoggard [/td][td]2001-2008 [/td][td]34 [/td][td]126 [/td][td]30.26 [/td][td]3.17 [/td][td]57.2 [/td][td]5 [/td][td]1 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]A Flintoff [/td][td]1999-2009 [/td][td]38 [/td][td]110 [/td][td]30.6 [/td][td]2.85 [/td][td]64.4 [/td][td]1 [/td][td]0 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]JM Anderson [/td][td]2003-2021 [/td][td]65 [/td][td]208 [/td][td]31.94 [/td][td]2.9 [/td][td]66 [/td][td]8 [/td][td]0 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]SCJ Broad [/td][td]2007-2021 [/td][td]58 [/td][td]163 [/td][td]32.75 [/td][td]2.82 [/td][td]69.5 [/td][td]5 [/td][td]0 [/td][/tr]
[/table]
Botham still has most away 5W hall , underrated match winner.
 
jeetu said:
English bowler's away record since 1970 (min 100 wickets)
[table=class: grid, align: center]
[tr][td]Player [/td][td]Span [/td][td]Mat [/td][td]Wkts [/td][td]Avg [/td][td]Econ [/td][td]SR [/td][td]5W [/td][td]10W [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]D Gough [/td][td]1994-2001 [/td][td]26 [/td][td]105 [/td][td]26.9 [/td][td]3.08 [/td][td]52.4 [/td][td]4 [/td][td]0 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]RGD Willis [/td][td]1971-1984 [/td][td]49 [/td][td]149 [/td][td]27.2 [/td][td]2.63 [/td][td]61.9 [/td][td]6 [/td][td]0 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]IT Botham [/td][td]1978-1992 [/td][td]43 [/td][td]157 [/td][td]29.63 [/td][td]2.91 [/td][td]60.9 [/td][td]10 [/td][td]2 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]AR Caddick [/td][td]1994-2003 [/td][td]29 [/td][td]106 [/td][td]29.7 [/td][td]3.02 [/td][td]58.9 [/td][td]7 [/td][td]1 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]MJ Hoggard [/td][td]2001-2008 [/td][td]34 [/td][td]126 [/td][td]30.26 [/td][td]3.17 [/td][td]57.2 [/td][td]5 [/td][td]1 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]A Flintoff [/td][td]1999-2009 [/td][td]38 [/td][td]110 [/td][td]30.6 [/td][td]2.85 [/td][td]64.4 [/td][td]1 [/td][td]0 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]JM Anderson [/td][td]2003-2021 [/td][td]65 [/td][td]208 [/td][td]31.94 [/td][td]2.9 [/td][td]66 [/td][td]8 [/td][td]0 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]SCJ Broad [/td][td]2007-2021 [/td][td]58 [/td][td]163 [/td][td]32.75 [/td][td]2.82 [/td][td]69.5 [/td][td]5 [/td][td]0 [/td][/tr]
[/table]
Botham still has most away 5W hall , underrated match winner.
Click to expand...

Appreciate it if you can post the home record as well.
 
Last Monetarist said:
Appreciate it if you can post the home record as well.
Click to expand...
English bowler's home record since 1970 (min 100 wickets)
[table=class: grid, align: center]
[tr][td]Player [/td][td]Span [/td][td]Mat [/td][td]Wkts [/td][td]Avg [/td][td]Econ [/td][td]SR [/td][td]5W [/td][td]10W [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]RGD Willis [/td][td]1973-1984 [/td][td]41 [/td][td]176 [/td][td]23.5 [/td][td]3.05 [/td][td]46.1 [/td][td]10 [/td][td]0 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]JM Anderson [/td][td]2003-2020 [/td][td]89 [/td][td]384 [/td][td]23.83 [/td][td]2.84 [/td][td]50.2 [/td][td]22 [/td][td]3 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]SCJ Broad [/td][td]2008-2020 [/td][td]82 [/td][td]334 [/td][td]25.54 [/td][td]3.05 [/td][td]50 [/td][td]13 [/td][td]3 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]IT Botham [/td][td]1977-1992 [/td][td]59 [/td][td]226 [/td][td]27.54 [/td][td]3.05 [/td][td]54.1 [/td][td]17 [/td][td]2 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]SJ Harmison [/td][td]2002-2009 [/td][td]32 [/td][td]133 [/td][td]28.47 [/td][td]3.31 [/td][td]51.4 [/td][td]5 [/td][td]1 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]DG Cork [/td][td]1995-2002 [/td][td]27 [/td][td]101 [/td][td]29.26 [/td][td]3.16 [/td][td]55.5 [/td][td]4 [/td][td]0 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]D Gough [/td][td]1994-2003 [/td][td]32 [/td][td]124 [/td][td]29.66 [/td][td]3.49 [/td][td]50.9 [/td][td]5 [/td][td]0 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]AR Caddick [/td][td]1993-2002 [/td][td]33 [/td][td]128 [/td][td]30.07 [/td][td]3.15 [/td][td]57.1 [/td][td]6 [/td][td]0 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]MJ Hoggard [/td][td]2000-2007 [/td][td]33 [/td][td]122 [/td][td]30.73 [/td][td]3.36 [/td][td]54.8 [/td][td]2 [/td][td]0 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]A Flintoff [/td][td]1998-2009 [/td][td]40 [/td][td]109 [/td][td]36.11 [/td][td]3.08 [/td][td]70.2 [/td][td]2 [/td][td]0 [/td][/tr]
[/table]
 
UzmanBeast said:
If you went by quality of opposition, you'd also know that Anderson has richly deserved the success he has received due to the performances he has put up against the world's best.

Your point about T20 cricket is quite illogical because you have no evidence to prove that T20 cricket ruined test match techniques. Most batsmen of any standard will know to keep elements of T20 separate from test cricket, so I'm not sure what you mean by that.

If you read what I wrote, I considered Anderson because of his ability to swing the ball both ways when it is new, along with the ability to reverse the ball when it's old as seen in the series against India.

So perhaps you should also consider the quality of the bowler we are talking about rather than asserting that the players Anderson played against weren't that good, it's just that he was far better.
Click to expand...

I mean learn to play a forward defensive and backward defensive, don’t leave a gate you can drive a truck through. Don’t try to score at four an over, there are times when the bowlers get on top, dig in and wait for them to tire.

England are as guilty as any. How many times have they got rolled for 70? There’s nobody who will dig in to stop a collapse. It’s all aggression. Their performance in India was embarrassing. Boycott, Gower, Gatting, Cook, Pietersen, Bell wouldn’t play for spin against arm balls and get bowled like that. The defensive techniques are not there.
 
Robert said:
I mean learn to play a forward defensive and backward defensive, don’t leave a gate you can drive a truck through. Don’t try to score at four an over, there are times when the bowlers get on top, dig in and wait for them to tire.

England are as guilty as any. How many times have they got rolled for 70? There’s nobody who will dig in to stop a collapse. It’s all aggression. Their performance in India was embarrassing. Boycott, Gower, Gatting, Cook, Pietersen, Bell wouldn’t play for spin against arm balls and get bowled like that. The defensive techniques are not there.
Click to expand...

I'm not gonna comment on the comparisons of Anderson with nobodies like Dilley and Foster but this spin playing ability of past batsmen is overrated too.

I've heard you constantly talk about how spinners benefit from DRS. Batsmen of the past were not given lbw for kicking the ball away. DRS has made it much harder and batsmen have to use their bat. On a turning pitch, facing an accurate left arm spinner who bowls 88kph + average speed is an absolute nightmare . A few k's slower than that and its manageable. The truth is spinners from the past did not have the same combination of speed and accuracy of a jadeja/axcar patel - no not even Derek Underwood/Bedi.
 
jeetu said:
English bowler's home record since 1970 (min 100 wickets)
[table=class: grid, align: center]
[tr][td]Player [/td][td]Span [/td][td]Mat [/td][td]Wkts [/td][td]Avg [/td][td]Econ [/td][td]SR [/td][td]5W [/td][td]10W [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]RGD Willis [/td][td]1973-1984 [/td][td]41 [/td][td]176 [/td][td]23.5 [/td][td]3.05 [/td][td]46.1 [/td][td]10 [/td][td]0 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]JM Anderson [/td][td]2003-2020 [/td][td]89 [/td][td]384 [/td][td]23.83 [/td][td]2.84 [/td][td]50.2 [/td][td]22 [/td][td]3 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]SCJ Broad [/td][td]2008-2020 [/td][td]82 [/td][td]334 [/td][td]25.54 [/td][td]3.05 [/td][td]50 [/td][td]13 [/td][td]3 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]IT Botham [/td][td]1977-1992 [/td][td]59 [/td][td]226 [/td][td]27.54 [/td][td]3.05 [/td][td]54.1 [/td][td]17 [/td][td]2 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]SJ Harmison [/td][td]2002-2009 [/td][td]32 [/td][td]133 [/td][td]28.47 [/td][td]3.31 [/td][td]51.4 [/td][td]5 [/td][td]1 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]DG Cork [/td][td]1995-2002 [/td][td]27 [/td][td]101 [/td][td]29.26 [/td][td]3.16 [/td][td]55.5 [/td][td]4 [/td][td]0 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]D Gough [/td][td]1994-2003 [/td][td]32 [/td][td]124 [/td][td]29.66 [/td][td]3.49 [/td][td]50.9 [/td][td]5 [/td][td]0 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]AR Caddick [/td][td]1993-2002 [/td][td]33 [/td][td]128 [/td][td]30.07 [/td][td]3.15 [/td][td]57.1 [/td][td]6 [/td][td]0 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]MJ Hoggard [/td][td]2000-2007 [/td][td]33 [/td][td]122 [/td][td]30.73 [/td][td]3.36 [/td][td]54.8 [/td][td]2 [/td][td]0 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]A Flintoff [/td][td]1998-2009 [/td][td]40 [/td][td]109 [/td][td]36.11 [/td][td]3.08 [/td][td]70.2 [/td][td]2 [/td][td]0 [/td][/tr]
[/table]
Click to expand...

Thanks.

R.G.D. Willis should definitely be rated higher than he is by most people in the modern era.
 
Nikhil_cric said:
I'm not gonna comment on the comparisons of Anderson with nobodies like Dilley and Foster but this spin playing ability of past batsmen is overrated too.

I've heard you constantly talk about how spinners benefit from DRS. Batsmen of the past were not given lbw for kicking the ball away. DRS has made it much harder and batsmen have to use their bat. On a turning pitch, facing an accurate left arm spinner who bowls 88kph + average speed is an absolute nightmare . A few k's slower than that and its manageable. The truth is spinners from the past did not have the same combination of speed and accuracy of a jadeja/axcar patel - no not even Derek Underwood/Bedi.
Click to expand...

Hmm, let’s see Anderson take an eightfer against a Pakistan side with the likes of Shoaib Mohammed, Miandad, Salim and Imran. Dilley and Foster were bowlers of consequence. With central contracts they would have stayed fit and taken many more wickets.

You haven’t. DRS saves batsmen as well as giving them out. I said spinners have benefitted from the change in the lbw law where batters can be given out by a ball pitching outside the line. And yet Cook still scored 560 runs in four tests in India, unlike the current mob who cannot pick an arm ball and play everything from back on the stumps.

(I don’t particularly rate Jadeja either. He’s a home track bully with the ball and a red ink hunter with the bat.)
 
Robert said:
I mean learn to play a forward defensive and backward defensive, don’t leave a gate you can drive a truck through. Don’t try to score at four an over, there are times when the bowlers get on top, dig in and wait for them to tire.

England are as guilty as any. How many times have they got rolled for 70? There’s nobody who will dig in to stop a collapse. It’s all aggression. Their performance in India was embarrassing. Boycott, Gower, Gatting, Cook, Pietersen, Bell wouldn’t play for spin against arm balls and get bowled like that. The defensive techniques are not there.
Click to expand...

Those examples you mentioned were against spin. India's spinners are world-class, I would expect even the batsmen with the greatest techniques to struggle against the likes of Ashwin on those ripping wickets.

Perhaps you are not seeing the planning that goes into each delivery Anderson bowls, his bowling is of quite a high standard to make even the best batsmen appear foolish.

Yes, players aren't really that willing to grind it out, but I think that test batting techniques have actually improved in recent times through proper training and the availability of data, and also the ability to replicate conditions in different areas of the world.
 
Muhammad Asif & Glen Mcgrath
Wasim Akram & Malcolm Marshall
Imran Khan & Jimmy Anderson
 
Gilly said:
I have, cricket seemed to be different in those days, more entertainment and much less negativity that seems to be present nowdays. I guess in the 70's and 80's cricket was more inclusive and less sterile.

I dont know about the best fast bowling partnership ever, possibly for Australia but there have been so many good pairs over the decades I cant see how anyone can claim one to be the best.
Click to expand...

Coz many who have seen them at their peak say they were an awesome pair!
 
Mamoon said:
[/b]

Do you?

You continue to side-step the fact that he dismissed Tendulkar 9 times in 14 Tests with classic swing bowling.

I think the real issue is that Anderson has achieved things that you didn’t expect him to. 10 years back, you would have never be believed that he would take 600+ wickets and have a bigger legacy than every other English pacer.

As a result, you need to downplay his achievements and overrate vastly inferior bowlers who do not have half the legacy Anderson will leave behind in an England shirt,
Click to expand...

I rate Anderson very highly which is why I also opted for him in this discussion. But you overrate him because England is your second favourite cricket team.

I don't always agree with Robert, as him and Junaids often like to overhype the cricketers from the older era but when it comes to Anderson he makes some very valid points especially in relation to his performance in the 2000s.

He is a legendary conventional swing bowler and is by far the best new ball bowler I've personally seen but with the kookaburra and on flat wickets, he just isn't as good and is hence why he is known by some as "Clouderson".

Anderson falls short of ATG status because firstly his away test bowling average is above 30. I don't think you will find another undisputed ATG fast bowler with such a high bowling average overseas. Secondly, for at least half of his career he was averaging above 30 with the ball and that's simply because he had a lot of bad series.

Anderson is simply not as good as you think.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
Rank the next tier of Pakistan pace bowlers (after the Wasim/Waqar era) in order of their achievements and legacy
Replies
8
Views
1K
Pakpak
Pakpak
N
World Test Championship - The era of doctored pitches & technique-less batters?
Replies
2
Views
347
jnaveen1980
J
The Bald Eagle
"Win is a win, no matter who you win against, if we lose to these teams, then we get criticized too": Hassan Ali
Replies
21
Views
2K
ravisurya
R
BouncerGuy
POTW: DeadlyVenom
Replies
29
Views
936
IMMY69
IMMY69
Ball Blazer
"It was just an off-day for bowlers": Salman Ali Agha
Replies
31
Views
1K
shah9425
shah9425
Back
Top