James Anderson versus Andy Roberts: Who is the better Test bowler?

[Ted123]

Who is the better Test bowler of the two?

James Anderson has an impressive 700 Test wickets at an average of 26.5, while Andy Roberts claimed 202 Test wickets at an average of 25.5.

Both were the lead bowlers for their respective teams, but they are celebrated for different reasons. Roberts is widely appreciated and highly praised by his peers for his skill and impact. He was an all-conditions bowler and the trailblazer for the great West Indies fast bowlers who followed.

Anderson, on the other hand, is renowned for his longevity and success, particularly in home conditions where he has thrived. He is often regarded as the best swing bowler in the game’s history, but his performance outside favorable conditions has been a topic of debate.

So, who do you think is the better bowler? Discuss!

 

[Buffet]

Are they even comparable in quality to get into discussion? HTB does not make anyone great otherwise Jadeja will go down as the top 3-4 test spinners in history with lower career avg than Warne against non-minnows.

To put it in centext of gulf between Robert and Anderson,

Anderson has played 2-3 times than Robert away and still did not catch up with Roberts in 5-fers.

Anderson has SR of mid 60s with avg of 30-31 away. Gap is massive in class to look at anything else in more detail.

No amount of volume will compensate for the lack of quality.

 

[Fanboy375]

Yeah Anderson away records will holds him down

 

[jnaveen1980]

Both are very different types of bowlers. One an outswing bowler. Other one was brutal with bouncer catching batsmen at awkward heights. If you want to make a like for like comparison it has to be between

Anderson vs Terry Aldermann

One could compare with Geoff lawson as well. But he was more an inswing bowler

 

[Buffet]

Both are very different types of bowlers. One an outswing bowler. Other one was brutal with bouncer catching batsmen at awkward heights. If you want to make a like for like comparison it has to be between

Anderson vs Terry Aldermann

One could compare with Geoff lawson as well. But he was more an inswing bowler

I think you can use swing, seam, yorker whatever.

Output can be still compared for various bowlers even if they used different skills to produce those outputs. You can use context in comparing by seeing away, top teams etc but it hardly matter what skills were used to pick up those wickets.

All bowlers are trying to do the same thing. Take wickets cheaply and quickly. That's their output.

 

[moghul]

Never understood the sense behind comparing two random bowler or batter , from different era , what we going to learn from that.

 

[Justcrazy]

Andy Roberts is better bowler , I would have him in my team over Anderson , on any given day , pitch , opposition , format.

 

[BouncerGuy]

Never understood the sense behind comparing two random bowler or batter , from different era , what we going to learn from that.

Excatly.. It really makes no sense to compare players who are years apart...

 

[kron]

Random comparison tbh. But yes Roberts easy. No question
He was the original spear head for the West Indians quicks.

 

[Ted123]

Random comparison tbh. But yes Roberts easy. No question
He was the original spear head for the West Indians quicks.

Anderson was also original spear head for England for 20 years.

 

[Ted123]

Andy Roberts is better bowler , I would have him in my team over Anderson , on any given day , pitch , opposition , format.

In England or similar conditions, Anderson should be picked above Roberts. He mastered those conditions and was invincible for many more years as compared to Roberts who bowled his bouncers to batters not wearing helmet.

 

[atreus]

will personally go Anderson.

Roberts was incredibly docile on home pitches, and sadly you don't get cookie points for failing in your own home.

Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

plus Anderson has this stretch, which is actually insane and his away record is also fixed.

 

[Ted123]

will personally go Anderson.

Roberts was incredibly docile on home pitches, and sadly you don't get cookie points for failing in your own home.

Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

plus Anderson has this stretch, which is actually insane and his away record is also fixed.

The great part about this is he still has longevity covered with 550+ wickets.

If I specifically point out his peak phase which was between 2014-2022, here are the stats:-

335 wickets@21.5
Away average - 24.9

Great performance in most places and as a lead bowler. He was arguably the best in the world during this period.

Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

Rabada averaged 22, Cummins 21, Bumrah 22 during this period but Anderson had longevity.

Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

 

[atreus]

The great part about this is he still has longevity covered with 550+ wickets.

If I specifically point out his peak phase which was between 2014-2022, here are the stats:-

335 wickets@21.5
Away average - 24.9

Great performance in most places and as a lead bowler. He was arguably the best in the world during this period.

Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

Rabada averaged 22, Cummins 21, Bumrah 22 during this period but Anderson had longevity.

Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

Yeah

also, his pre 2010 Career should definitely be discarded, ECB changed his action and he became a garbage bowler, he got it back in 2010 and suddenly he was a world beater

 

[Cricket Warrior]

without any 2nd thought its Anderson.. his stats speak for himself.

 

[Buffet]

In England or similar conditions, Anderson should be picked above Roberts. He mastered those conditions and was invincible for many more years as compared to Roberts who bowled his bouncers to batters not wearing helmet.

Yes, Anderson was very very good in English conditions. With volume and effectiveness, Anderson over Roberts in English conditions.

 

[Buffet]

If I specifically point out his peak phase which was between 2014-2022, here are the stats:-

Great performance in most places and as a lead bowler. He was arguably the best in the world during this period.

I don't think Anderson was too threatening outside Eng even during his peak period against top sides.

Below is away performance of pacers in tests involving top 5 sides during 2014 to 2022( Anderson's peak).

Avg of 28 is fine, but SR of 72 is just poor. A bowler can bowl 25 overs and pick just 2 wickets with this SR. That's 5 spells for a pacer.



You can see how others did during Anderson's peak to ensure that it was not an unusual condition faced by Anderson.


Sorted by Avg:





Sorted by SR:



Sorted by 5-fers:


I see a comment that Roberts was docile at home. Well, if you take the top 5 sides during his career, he was striking at 57 balls per wicket at home and striking at 51 balls per wickets away. Anderson away in tests involving top 5 sides beomes far more docile with SR of 72. I will surely not call Roberts docile due to higher average at home because he was still striking in 50s home and away both.

I always felt that Anderson was premium test bowler who could go toe to toe at home against the best, but I did not feel the same when he was playing outside even during his peak. Anderson did improve a lot after 2010 so all credit to him. It's not easy to keep playing for so long with his effectiveness and keep getting better. A great career and a giant of the game. He was so much fun to watch in swinging conditions.


Question in this thread was for a better bowler, I will say Roberts.

But if you ask me who had a greater career, I will say Anderson.

He had enough period as you pointed where he was very very good. That's a very large volume of wickets with a very good output.

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

Yeah

also, his pre 2010 Career should definitely be discarded, ECB changed his action and he became a garbage bowler, he got it back in 2010 and suddenly he was a world beater

That cannot be done, you need to count the whole career.

Anderson even at his peak was a stock bowler in away conditions and not a spearhead, at his best we can say he reached Gillespie level away from home at his peak, that's about it.

 

[Sher Khan]

I never saw Andy Roberts bowl live. But even then I think this comparison is absurd.

Longevity is also a factor in greatness. Anderson's 700 wickets tower over Andy Roberts achievements.

 

[atreus]

That cannot be done, you need to count the whole career.

Anderson even at his peak was a stock bowler in away conditions and not a spearhead, at his best we can say he reached Gillespie level away from home at his peak, that's about it.

I don't really think I need to when there is a big factor like that, that can hinder performance, Bowling action for a pacer is everything.

He wasn't a spearhead true but he managed to output in the 2010 Ashes well enough to win us a series and had fairy memorable performances in South Africa/New Zealand/West Indies/UAE, he wasn't much of a stock bowler (and obviously far superior to Gillespie lol) but moreso was impacted by the fact he was bowling often with trash from the other end and thus often fell to "block away Anderson, feast on everyone else" tactic, something Roberts never had to face.

 

[Varun]

Yeah

also, his pre 2010 Career should definitely be discarded, ECB changed his action and he became a garbage bowler, he got it back in 2010 and suddenly he was a world beater

You can't do that. If you do it for Anderson, you do it for every batsman/bowler around.

eg: discard Kohli's career from 2020 - 2025.

 

[atreus]

I see a comment that Roberts was docile at home. Well, if you take the top 5 sides during his career, he was striking at 57 balls per wicket at home and striking at 51 balls per wickets away. Anderson away in tests involving top 5 sides beomes far more docile with SR of 72. I will surely not call Roberts docile due to higher average at home because he was still striking in 50s home and away both.

That doesn't really make sense to me, Roberts averages 29 at home and strikes at 57, his strike rate is decent but Cricket isn't about strike rate, it's about runs and wickets and his average of 29 at home was always high.

Andy's career is basically

1. Feasting with three fifers and a tenfer in India against a Gavaskarless India, only notable batsmen being Gundappa Vishwanath who played a match winning inning in that game anyway. His work in India is a bluff
2. One match winning spell in Australia, failure in everything else in Australia.
3. ATG work in England.
4. average work at home
5. only lasted nine years, did not even play 50 tests

objectively speaking, Roberts is an underachiever, was he a more skilled bowler? maybe, but his career doesn't hold a candle here and that's all that really matters at the end of the day.

 

[atreus]

You can't do that. If you do it for Anderson, you do it for every batsman/bowler around.

eg: discard Kohli's career from 2020 - 2025.

give me a good reason to and I will.

make a case for why Kohli's decline was influenced by anything out of his control/not applicable to his earlier variants.

 

[Varun]

give me a good reason to and I will.

make a case for why Kohli's decline was influenced by anything out of his control/not applicable to his earlier variants.

Unless Anderson literally bowled blindfolded and with an arm tied around his back, your reason for him isn't good enough.

He was an average bowler starting out his career is a fact of his cricketing life.

 

[atreus]

Unless Anderson literally bowled blindfolded and with an arm tied around his back, your reason for him isn't good enough.

And you don't decide what reason is good enough, Bowling action is everything for a pacer.

 

[Varun]

And you don't decide what reason is good enough, Bowling action is everything for a pacer.

Well, one of the facts I keep mentioning is that England find it the hardest to produce a batsman who averages 50+ or a bowler who averages 25-, while the rest of the world has churned out Tendulkar/Ponting/Lara/Kallis/Sanagakkara/Wasim/Warne/McGrath/Murali/Steyn/Ambrose/Walsh etc.

None of them needed reasons good or bad to achieve the heights they did in their cricketing career.

 

[atreus]

Well, one of the facts I keep mentioning is that England find it the hardest to produce a batsman who averages 50+ or a bowler who averages 25-, while the rest of the world has churned out Tendulkar/Ponting/Lara/Kallis/Sangakkara/Wasim/Warne/McGrath/Murali/Steyn/Ambrose/Walsh etc.

None of them needed reasons good or bad to achieve the heights they did in their cricketing career.

The rest of the world kept churning them out...and still kept losing, other than Windies and Australia no side has a positive winrate against England since 1970, South Africa gets packed up all the time and loses even at their home, India lost multiple consecutive serieses, Windies cricket is on the verge of dying etc, It's just England always has good depth and make up for lack of one great option via a number of good ones. Anyway I don't know what England struggling to have bowlers average X or batters average Y have to do with Anderson or Roberts, lol.

that doesn't mean their is some inability to produce ATG cricketers considering one is literally playing right now, the rest of the world just isn't preassuring enough even with their stars...tho, Root is better at batting than the three names I highlighted.

 

[Varun]

The rest of the world kept churning them out...and still kept losing, other than Windies and Australia no side has a positive winrate against England since 1970, South Africa gets packed up all the time and loses even at their home, India lost multiple consecutive serieses, Windies cricket is on the verge of dying etc, It's just England always has good depth and make up for lack of one great option via a number of good ones.

And yet you're down there:

 

[sweep_shot]

Never understood the sense behind comparing two random bowler or batter , from different era , what we going to learn from that.

Yes. It is pointless.

Players from different eras shouldn't be compared.

 

[atreus]

And yet you're down there:

lol because England played Australia relentlessly and West Indies relentlessly in their golden age. here is a better stat, direct comparison with England:


Only Australia and Windies, two greatest teama ever, have a winning record. Seethe.

 

[Varun]

lol because England played Australia relentlessly and West Indies relentlessly in their golden age. here is a better stat, direct comparison with England:

View attachment 149635
Only Australia and Windies, two greatest teama ever, have a winning record. Seethe.

So why were only two out of those three teams (A/W/E) great? What held and continues to hold England back?

 

[atreus]

So why were only two out of those three teams (A/W/E) great? What held and continues to hold England back?

Windies just had a freakish amount of natural talent, the difference between Australia and England arrives from.

1. Australia wasn't as destroyed by the second world war as England was, it took England decades to recover from the Second World War.
2. Cricket is a lot more accessible in Australia and India than it is in England, in England Cricket is exclusively viewed as the rich man's game, almost played exclusively in big private schools, thus minimizing the talent pool by a large margin.

It's honestly impressive English Cricket even managed to survive the second world war with the clear class divide, we've seen how easy it is for a great team to decline, look at South Africa, Pakistan and West Indies of modern age.

Regardless, this has nothing to do with the thread on hand.

 

[kron]

Windies just had a freakish amount of natural talent, the difference between Australia and England arrives from.

1. Australia wasn't as destroyed by the second world war as England was, it took England decades to recover from the Second World War.
2. Cricket is a lot more accessible in Australia and India than it is in England, in England Cricket is exclusively viewed as the rich man's game, almost played exclusively in big private schools, thus minimizing the talent pool by a large margin.

It's honestly impressive English Cricket even managed to survive the second world war with the clear class divide, we've seen how easy it is for a great team to decline, look at South Africa, Pakistan and West Indies of modern age.

Regardless, this has nothing to do with the thread on hand.

Same with india.average person can't even afford cricket gear.

Only a few come from poor families or scholarships.

Cricket is a rich man's sport in India too.

Most kids don't even see red ball till they are in their teens or older.

 

[atreus]

Same with india.average person can't even afford cricket gear.

Only a few come from poor families or scholarships.

Cricket is a rich man's sport in India too.

Most kids don't even see red ball till they are in their teens or older.

the difference in my eyes is, in India the public schools atleast try to promote Cricket for their teen students, and in India/Pakistan Cricket almost is a day of life.

in England it's just another sport, one far less accessible to the poorer classes too

 

[kron]

the difference in my eyes is, in India the public schools atleast try to promote Cricket for their teen students, and in India/Pakistan Cricket almost is a day of life.

in England it's just another sport, one far less accessible to the poorer classes too

But we also have internal politics and caste that affect selections.

 

[Varun]

Regardless, this has nothing to do with the thread on hand.

So back to topic, please elaborate on Anderson's bowling action pre-2010 and how it was outside his control.

 

[atreus]

So back to topic, please elaborate on Anderson's bowling action pre-2010 and how it was outside his control.

ECB asked him to change his action and reworked his action after some stress fractures, his output immediately went to great tier in 2010.

that's not a coincidence lol

 

[Mamoon]

As per PakPassion experts, Anderson is the worst fast bowler in history. It is one of the great mysteries of the world why and how the worst fast bowler in history ended up with 700 Test wickets.

You can compare any fast bowler with Anderson on PakPassion and the experts here would vote in favor of whoever was being compared with Anderson.

 

[kron]

As per PakPassion experts, Anderson is the worst fast bowler in history. It is one of the great mysteries of the world why and how the worst fast bowler in history ended up with 700 Test wickets.

You can compare any fast bowler with Anderson on PakPassion and the experts here would vote in favor of whoever was being compared with Anderson.

Anderson either gets extremely underrated or extremely overrated. He is a great bowler. I would say 3rd best English bowler of all time. Barnes
Trueman
Then Anderson

Could put in bedser or Willis at 3 too. All pretty equal there.

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

lol because England played Australia relentlessly and West Indies relentlessly in their golden age. here is a better stat, direct comparison with England:

View attachment 149635
Only Australia and Windies, two greatest teama ever, have a winning record. Seethe.

Nah, you still changed the filter from 1970 to 1965.


Australia wasn’t amongst the two best teams of the 80s, England just chokes against them because of the rivalry, this is random stats filtering .

The strength of the team is estimated by their overall win ratio not by checking wl ration vs individual team, a team can do well against a strong one and fail against a weaker one.

The problem is English team has never been relentless, even nowadays they regularly drop tests against Wi and Srl.

 

[Buffet]

That doesn't really make sense to me, Roberts averages 29 at home and strikes at 57, his strike rate is decent but Cricket isn't about strike rate, it's about runs and wickets and his average of 29 at home was always high.

28-29 avg with SR in 70s is far more docile than 28-29 avg with SR of 50s.

Can you name a single great pacer in peak having away SR of 70-80 against top teams taken together? I am not sure if I can name anyone.

Yes, teams will try to see off the best bowler in team but no best bowler in world has gone with SR of 70-80 against good teams in his peak. Bowler is not really a strike bowler if he is going to pick 2 wickets in 25 overs during his peak.

 

[Buffet]

The great part about this is he still has longevity covered with 550+ wickets.

If I specifically point out his peak phase which was between 2014-2022, here are the stats:-

He was arguably the best in the world during this period.

That would be cummins.

I was just curious to see if Anderson grabbed the rank 1 for a big duration after Steyn retired.

During Anderson's peak, Cummins was ranked at 1 in test for 30 consecutive tests. Anderson was never rank 1 for more than few consecutive tests any time. Ranking has flaws by taking home and away at same weight and also heavily penalizing bowlers for missing tests. So not really always accurate. Not sure if Anderson was missing tests.


But Cummins and Anderson have played 13-14 tests together during 2014-2022 when Anderson was at his peak.

When both bowled in the same pitches, the gap is wide in output with Cummins avg 20 with SR 43 and Anderson avg 27 with SR 71. The gap is also wide if you look at away tests against good sides for both during 2014-2022. Here as well Anderson avg 28 with SR 70 and Cummins Avg 21 with SR 45.

All this when we are cherry picking the best period for Anderson. All bowlers can have different best periods. He wasn't a stand out in world even in his best periods.

 

[Mamoon]

Anderson either gets extremely underrated or extremely overrated. He is a great bowler. I would say 3rd best English bowler of all time. Barnes
Trueman
Then Anderson

Could put in bedser or Willis at 3 too. All pretty equal there.

Anderson is laughably underrated on this forum. As per PPers, every T, D and H with 200-300 wickets is better than him.

 

[Varun]

lol because England played Australia relentlessly and West Indies relentlessly in their golden age. here is a better stat, direct comparison with England:

Only Australia and Windies, two greatest teama ever, have a winning record. Seethe.

I just realized because the other poster pointed out - that you have changed the date from 1970 (your own call) to 1965. I went back and flicked the switch, and here we are:



Pakistan has a 1.0 W/L record, and India is just a test away.

 

[Buffet]

As per PPers, every T, D and H with 200-300 wickets is better than him.

Not true,

Pacers with 200-300 wickets in recent years. All of them are confortably below Anderson.

Roach
Wagner
Hazlewood
Shami
Harminson
Siddle

There will be tons of pacers in earlier years with 200-300 wickets who are comfortably below Anderson.



Issue is, Anderson was not a stand out even during his peak. Tier 1 pacer in home conditions for sure, but not outside. So as soon as you start comparing him with tier 1 pacers, he is going to fall short. His volume of wickets can't make him better than tier 1 pacers.

 

[atreus]

Nah, you still changed the filter from 1970 to 1965.


Australia wasn’t amongst the two best teams of the 80s, England just chokes against them because of the rivalry, this is random stats filtering .

The strength of the team is estimated by their overall win ratio not by checking wl ration vs individual team, a team can do well against a strong one and fail against a weaker one.

The problem is English team has never been relentless, even nowadays they regularly drop tests against Wi and Srl.

That's nonsensible.

Australia not being top 2 in 1980s doesn't mean much, the teams were objectively on par with Australia being stronger at points, England at one point played ten continuous tests with the mighty windies. England played full strength Windies 24 times in 80s, 5 more than Australia and double anyone else.

Team records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

in the 90s, England played windies most as well

Team records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

England played Australia the most in 2000s

Team records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

and in the 1990s

Team records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

again, England just played the two strongest teams of all time more than anyone else.

 

[atreus]

28-29 avg with SR in 70s is far more docile than 28-29 avg with SR of 50s.

Can you name a single great pacer in peak having away SR of 70-80 against top teams taken together? I am not sure if I can name anyone.

Yes, teams will try to see off the best bowler in team but no best bowler in world has gone with SR of 70-80 against good teams in his peak. Bowler is not really a strike bowler if he is going to pick 2 wickets in 25 overs during his peak.

the part of his career which I count had him averaging 26 away with 60 SR

Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

considering he bowled the 2013 Ashes horror series with broken ribs, his stats are clearly good enough.

again, Anderson cooks Roberts in half their games (home games) and even away from home he has been more successful in certain nations, the only advantage Roberts has is one big series in England and bullying a Gavaskar less india, that's it.

 

[atreus]

I just realized because the other poster pointed out - that you have changed the date from 1970 (your own call) to 1965. I went back and flicked the switch, and here we are:

View attachment 149664

Pakistan has a 1.0 W/L record, and India is just a test away.

considering next 5 tests of India vs England are in England, and Pakistan are probably gonna face England in England at some point too, being down one test in your golden age of Cricket is not something to be celebrated lmao

 

[Varun]

considering next 5 tests of India vs England are in England, and Pakistan are probably gonna face England in England at some point too, being down one test in your golden age of Cricket is not something to be celebrated lmao

Sure, but that's the unwritten future.

The written past has England being a mid-tier side at best.

 

[Varun]

considering next 5 tests of India vs England are in England, and Pakistan are probably gonna face England in England at some point too, being down one test in your golden age of Cricket is not something to be celebrated lmao

By the way, I just want to add that at this point we have a better chance of winning a test in England or Australia than in India lol where any random spinner can bundle us out.

 

[atreus]

Sure, but that's the unwritten future.

The written past has England being a mid-tier side at best.

if England is a mid tier side.

what does that make India who have a losing record against England? or Pakistan who manage a tie? or South Africa who are in downright negative.

 

[Varun]

if England is a mid tier side.

what does that make India who have a losing record against England? or Pakistan who manage a tie? or South Africa who are in downright negative.

India and Pakistan over the course of test history are mid-tier sides too. Though they have produced more greats than England have, and have also experienced far more LoI success.

 

[atreus]

India and Pakistan over the course of test history are mid-tier sides too. Though they have produced more greats than England have, and have also experienced far more LoI success.

Far more LOI success? my guy England and Pakistan are one world cup each, what world are you living in?

And Nah, if England is mid tier, Nobody except windies for 15 years and Australia is a good side.

 

[Buffet]

the part of his career which I count had him averaging 26 away with 60 SR

Keep it to the top 5 test nations in any period.

Anderson has played 46 away tests in period( since 2010) you are citing in Aus, Ind, SA, NZ. How is it a good record?

Anderson: Avg 29-30 & SR 65 with 3 5-fers in those 46 tests.





Just to put it in context what other pacers did away in top 5 test nations when Anderson was at his peak





Anderson's record against top sides away is neither great stand alone nor great in relative terms even during his peak period.

 

[Varun]

Far more LOI success? my guy England and Pakistan are one world cup each, what world are you living in?

And Nah, if England is mid tier, Nobody except windies for 15 years and Australia is a good side.

Again...

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Man Andy Roberts wrecked India. They had a good team too. What happened?

 

[atreus]

Keep it to the top 5 test nations in any period.

Anderson has played 46 away tests in period( since 2010) you are citing in Aus, Ind, SA, NZ. How is it a good record?

Anderson: Avg 29-30 & SR 65 with 3 5-fers in those 46 tests.

View attachment 149667



Just to put it in context what other pacers did away in top 5 test nations when Anderson was at his peak

View attachment 149668



Anderson's record against top sides away is neither great stand alone nor great in relative terms even during his peak period.

I reckon his record is fine, it's obviously skewed by the 2013 Ashes where he was bowling with a severe injury which obviously impacted his bowling.

other than that one series his average is 28.25 away from home, better than anyone bar Vernon, Cummins and Bumrah.

surely you don't think Vernon is better than Anderson I'm assuming....?

that leaves us with Cummins and Bumrah, and the answer there is relatively simple.

Cummins-

Anderson

Cummins has better numbers in South Africa, Anderson has better numbers in India/Sri Lanka/NZ etc

but I digress, make your choice between Jimmy and Cummos based on that

 

[atreus]

Again...

View attachment 149669

How many world cups for Pakistan dude?

 

[Buffet]

I reckon his record is fine, it's obviously skewed by the 2013 Ashes where he was bowling with a severe injury which obviously impacted his bowling.

other than that one series his average is 28.25 away from home, better than anyone bar Vernon, Cummins and Bumrah.

surely you don't think Vernon is better than Anderson I'm assuming....?

No, I don't think that.

You neither have to be the best nor any sane person is going to start ranking bowlers based on sorting the away average.

Point I was making - To be the best pacer , you got to have collective away record near the top against good teams. Anderson did not have that even during his peak. He has played 80-90 away tests in his career with only 8 5-fers. Peak, non-peak, entire career, raw stats, relative stats all of away stats against good teams, he falls short of a record of any tier 1 pacer.

On other hands, he was a tier 1 pacer in Eng conditions. No matter how we look.

 

[Varun]

I reckon his record is fine, it's obviously skewed by the 2013 Ashes where he was bowling with a severe injury which obviously impacted his bowling.

other than that one series his average is 28.25 away from home, better than anyone bar Vernon, Cummins and Bumrah.

If you keep snipping away like this, you'll reach an average of 15. But how will that make sense?

 

[atreus]

No, I don't think that.

You neither have to be the best nor any sane person is going to start ranking bowlers based on sorting the away average.

Point I was making - To be the best pacer , you got to have collective away record near the top against good teams. Anderson did not have that even during his peak. He has played 80-90 away tests in his career with only 8 5-fers. Peak, non-peak, entire career, raw stats, relative stats all of away stats against good teams, he falls short of a record of any tier 1 pacer.

On other hands, he was a tier 1 pacer in Eng conditions. No matter how we look.

Well I don't particularly care.

I never said he was a tier 1 pacer, I said he is better than Cummins and Roberts, newsflash, neither of them are tier 1 anything, so there's that, his record is better than Cummins in most countries anyway, it's just Cummins has a great one in ridiculously bowler friendly South Africa.

If you keep snipping away like this, you'll reach an average of 15. But how will that make sense?

ok ..so now broken ribs are not a valid metric for leniance?

 

[Varun]

ok ..so now broken ribs are not a valid metric for leniance?

He wasn't the first bowler to bowl through injury, and won't be the last. Why only amend his statistics?

 

[Buffet]

his record is better than Cummins in most countries anyway

Then Anderson should be apearing near the top in away against good teams, right? He doesn't.

Cummins is simply a better bowler than Adderson.

 

[atreus]

Then Anderson should be apearing near the top in away against good teams, right? He doesn't.

Cummins is simply a better bowler than Adderson.

I'm sorry but he straight up isn't.

worse in Asia, worse in NZ, compareable output at home while Cummins is better in South Africa...that does not make you a great lol.

 

[atreus]

He wasn't the first bowler to bowl through injury, and won't be the last. Why only amend his statistics?

I'll amend any bowler's or batter's statistic whose playing through a severe injury

 

[Varun]

I'll amend any bowler's or batter's statistic whose playing through a severe injury

So Tendulkar for the 2 years he was with a tennis elbow?

 

[RexRex]

Anderson is laughably underrated on this forum. As per PPers, every T, D and H with 200-300 wickets is better than him.

It's not just PPers. Despite his 700 wickets .. you still won't see pundits/ex-players pick him in their world XIs whereas his contemporary Dale Steyn gets a lot of mention.

 

[atreus]

So Tendulkar for the 2 years he was with a tennis elbow?

sure

 

[Varun]

sure

Now you just need to open a new website - atreusinfo.com - where you can list the REAL stats of players.

James Anderson: Average 22

 

[CrIc_Mystique]

aint they two totally different bowlers? One relied on pitching it up, conventional swing and going for lbw's and slips catches and then reverting to reverse and attacking the stumps....the other was generally always off and outside off and having the surprise weapon of about 2-3 different types of bouncers with gun slipsmen and close in fields to support for catches....i mean if you wanted to compare JA - i'd take Hadlee, or steyn or boult/southee, sarfaraz, vaas or someone like damien fleming....but for Roberts the closest would be walsh, ambrose, bruce reid....

 

[atreus]

Now you just need to open a new website - atreusinfo.com - where you can list the REAL stats of players.

James Anderson: Average 22

Real average is probably something you've to look a lot into.

 

[sindhiboy]

Anderson's late career peak right before the 2023 ashes. Averaged 18.5 in Asia during this period. His overall struggle vs Australia was his biggest weakness. He improved dramatically vs every other team.