James Anderson vs Kagiso Rabada: Better Test bowler?

[Ab Fan]

Two great bowlers with phenomenal record at home and fairly good away.

Rabada is arguably more destructive while Anderson maintained his condition dominant quality for a long long period.

Here are their stats vs SENAIPS team:-



Rabada - 273 wkts @ 23.9
Anderson - 593 wkts @27.2

Who was the better bowler of the two?

 

[Hitman]

I wish we could produce someone of Kagiso Rabada's caliber after Bumrah's retirement.

Who's better between them? Rabada. Anderson's performance away from home is a major turn off.

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

Rabada is the better bowler, Anderson had the better career(as of now).

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

I consider Anderson the pace bowling equivalent of Kumble.

 

[mominsaigol]

Two great bowlers with phenomenal record at home and fairly good away.

Rabada is arguably more destructive while Anderson maintained his condition dominant quality for a long long period.

Here are their stats vs SENAIPS team:-

View attachment 157458

Rabada - 273 wkts @ 23.9
Anderson - 593 wkts @27.2

Who was the better bowler of the two?

Rabada but Anderson will be remembered more for obvious reasons.

Rabada's legacy is simply a name included in a long list of other ATG bowlers. Which is a terrific achievement but it doesn't make him stand out from other ATG bowler .

Anderson longetivity + Wicket tally makes him stand out and status wise puts him nect to Mcgrath, Hadlee etc etc.

Yes Anderson is nowhere close to the bowler that mcgrath, Hadlee, Marshall are, but in terms of status he will be remembered equally.

When people will search up bowlers, Anderson name will always appear at the top for wicket tally and match count tally.

While rabada's name will be somewhere in the middle of the list obscured by other ATG bowlers.

Rabada is solid but he has not had the career of Anderson or Starc despite being a better bowler then both.

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

Anderson <<<<<<<<<<< Steyn<Ambrose<Mcgrath

Both in terms of career and quality.

No one who has seen both Anderson and Ambrose will ever rate Anderson ahead.

He had a better career than Rabada because Rabada hasn’t finished yet.

If he gets to 450+ wkts, Rabada will overtake him in both career and Quality.

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

On topic, as this thread is just about comparing their bowling abilities, Rabada is on a different level to Anderson. There is absolutely no comparison.

 

[Ab Fan]

I found something on statsguru, which will heaten up this debate further which as of now looks pretty one sided.

The parameter is Avg runs per wickets.

Matches Involving Anderson - 32.9
Matches Involving Rabada - 27.1
Matches Involving Steyn - 32.9
Matches involving Cummins - 30
Matches Involving Bumrah - 28

Aggregate/overall records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

 

[mominsaigol]

So @Ab Fan and his indian stooges have already decided to make Rabada superior?

A testament to which i agree with as well, and only disagree on career as Rabada despite being superior to the likes of steyn, Starc and Anderson will have a lesser career in terms of being remembered.

Same way Joe root will be remembered more then Steve Smith 20 to 30 years down the line despite Steve smith being the superior test batsmen.

So what's even the point of this thread? The op has answered his own question?

What a waste of a thread. Their is no discussion to be had?

 

[Mamoon]

Rabada
Cummins
Anderson
Bumrah
Hazlewood

My top 5 Test pacers of the last 10 years.

It is pretty incredible that Anderson still finds himself in this list even though he was already 32-33 years old 10 years ago.

Amazing longevity, but skill-wise very much comparable to any pacer with below 28 average. Essentially a bowling version of Tendulkar.

Tendulkar skill-wise is not much different to any 50+ averaging Test batsman but his longevity sets him apart.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Rabada is the better bowler, Anderson had the better career(as of now).

Agree with this.

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

Rabada
Cummins
Anderson
Bumrah
Hazlewood

My top 5 Test pacers of the last 10 years.

It is pretty incredible that Anderson still finds himself in this list even though he was already 32-33 years old 10 years ago.

Amazing longevity, but skill-wise very much comparable to any pacer with below 28 average. Essentially a bowling version of Tendulkar.

Tendulkar skill-wise is not much different to any 50+ averaging Test batsman but his longevity sets him apart.

Wont leave you here too, already debunked this in another thread.

The bowling equivalent of 50+ batting average has always been <25 bowling average.

Anderson is not even in that league.

Anderson is basically the pace bowling version of Anil Kumble.

 

[Mamoon]

Wont leave you here too, already debunked this in another thread.

The bowling equivalent of 50+ batting average has always been <25 bowling average.

Anderson is not even in that league.

Anderson is basically the pace bowling version of Anil Kumble.

You have debunked nothing. You are not ready for this conversation, but I will not derail this thread further. I successfully needled Tendulkar fans which was my intention.

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

You have debunked nothing. You are not ready for this conversation, but I will not derail this thread further. I successfully needled Tendulkar fans which was my intention.

Your needling on a Pakistani forum isn’t gonna do squat. Tendulkar is and will remain the greatest since Bradman.

Anderson is at the same level as Kumble, one level below Ashwin.

 

[mominsaigol]

Your needling on a Pakistani forum isn’t gonna do squat. Tendulkar is and will remain the greatest since Bradman.

Anderson is at the same level as Kumble, one level below Ashwin.

Says the indian guy needling another Pakistani guy on said Pakistani forumn. What an immature dope

 

[Ab Fan]

So @Ab Fan and his indian stooges have already decided to make Rabada superior?

A testament to which i agree with as well, and only disagree on career as Rabada despite being superior to the likes of steyn, Starc and Anderson will have a lesser career in terms of being remembered.

Same way Joe root will be remembered more then Steve Smith 20 to 30 years down the line despite Steve smith being the superior test batsmen.

So what's even the point of this thread? The op has answered his own question?

What a waste of a thread. Their is no discussion to be had?

When did I decided that Rabada is already superior?

Read the post of mine just above your post .It is an argument in favour of Anderson. Hope common sense will prevail one day but then I am hoping for you from 4 years.

I found something on statsguru, which will heaten up this debate further which as of now looks pretty one sided.

The parameter is Avg runs per wickets.

Matches Involving Anderson - 32.9
Matches Involving Rabada - 27.1
Matches Involving Steyn - 32.9
Matches involving Cummins - 30
Matches Involving Bumrah - 28

Aggregate/overall records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

 

[Ab Fan]

Rabada
Cummins
Anderson

My top 5 Test pacers of the last 10 years.

Thanks for your answer on this.

Rabada > Anderson. That’s the only part that matters in this thread.

 

[Devadwal]

Rabada is better than Clouderson

 

[mominsaigol]

When did I decided that Rabada is already superior?

Read the post of mine just above your post .It is an argument in favour of Anderson. Hope common sense will prevail one day but then I am hoping for you from 4 years.

4 years? We haven't known each other for that long.

My first interaction with you was early 2024. We never interacted in 2021, 2022 or 2023 despite both of us being active.

Our first ever interaction was in 2024 when we discussed ab legacy and how ab was arguably the greatest Australian and WI basher in history.

 

[Buffet]

Better bowler is Rabada.

 

[Ted123]

Rabada is better especially after the WTC win vs Australia.

 

[atreus]

Wont leave you here too, already debunked this in another thread.

The bowling equivalent of 50+ batting average has always been <25 bowling average.

Anderson is not even in that league.

Anderson is basically the pace bowling version of Anil Kumble.

No because Anderson averages 26 and Kumble averages 30

 

[atreus]

The Clouderson arguments don't work for Rabada vs Anderson, Rabada is just as reliant on pace and bounce as Jimmy was on conventional swing and seam. Outside their comfort zone, in India/Pakistan/Sri Lanka/UAE, Rabada has averaged 35 while Jimmy averages 27 in those countries, basically Jimmy is substantially move proven outside his comfort zone.

Rabada's argument should be that he is way more of a beast in his favourable conditions.

 

[atreus]

Rabada in general has gotten some of the best bowling pitches in history, the bowling average in his games is 26, That is very much unprecedented since the first world war, for Jimmy the number is 32. Since Rabada's debut an absurd amount of Saffer pacers have averaged seriously low.

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

stats.espncricinfo.com

his successful tours of Australia and England came on some very, very spicy pitches. He is definitely a great bowler but his stats seem exponentially better than he is.

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

No because Anderson averages 26 and Kumble averages 30

Spinners usually average higher than pacers.
Warne averages more than Hazlewood, Courtney Walsh, Waqar etc. Still he is a better bowler than all of them.

Btw there’s a difference of 3 points between them 29.6 vs 26.5.

 

[atreus]

Spinners usually average higher than pacers.
Warne averages more than Hazlewood, Courtney Walsh, Waqar etc. Still he is a better bowler than all of them.

Btw there’s a difference of 3 points between them 29.6 vs 26.5.

Spinners can average super low with favourable home conditions like those guys – Murali, Ashwin, Jadeja, Laker etc. That's because Warne had the toughest home conditions for spinners and was a force everywhere in the world (except India), Kumble and Anderson have the same context of having favourable pitches at home and unfavourable pitches abroad so Kumble doesn't get a boost like Warne. Kumble actually averages 30.5 without Bangladesh and Zimbabwe, Anderson averages 26.57 without them anyway, they're not really close.

 

[Buffet]

Spinners can average super low with favourable home conditions like those guys – Murali, Ashwin, Jadeja, Laker etc. That's because Warne had the toughest home conditions for spinners and was a force everywhere in the world (except India), Kumble and Anderson have the same context of having favourable pitches at home and unfavourable pitches abroad so Kumble doesn't get a boost like Warne. Kumble actually averages 30.5 without Bangladesh and Zimbabwe, Anderson averages 26.57 without them anyway, they're not really close.

When all said and done,

Top 10 pacers sorted by avg in history: 200+ wickets






Top 10 spinners sorted by avg in history - 200+ wickets




Lowest avg by pacer is 4 points lower than lowest from spinner group.
The 10th lowest pacers avg is 7 points lower than 10th lowest from spinner group.



Spinners as a group will average higher than pacers as a group at all levels. It's true as average and also for top tier level. I don't have any opinion on Anderson versus Kumble, but comparing avg for spinner and pacers directly is wrong way to go. Better way is to see where they stood in their own category first. There is some issue with that as well, because number of pacers are far more than spinners. So 10th best pacers can be much better than 4th best spinner.

 

[atreus]

When all said and done,

Top 10 pacers sorted by avg in history: 200+ wickets

View attachment 157603




Top 10 spinners sorted by avg in history - 200+ wickets

View attachment 157604


Lowest avg by pacer is 4 points lower than lowest from spinner group.
The 10th lowest pacers avg is 7 points lower than 10th lowest from spinner group.



Spinners as a group will average higher than pacers as a group at all levels. It's true as average and also for top tier level. I don't have any opinion on Anderson versus Kumble, but comparing avg for spinner and pacers directly is wrong way to go. Better way is to see where they stood in their own category first. There is some issue with that as well, because number of pacers are far more than spinners. So 10th best pacers can be much better than 4th best spinner.

I mean duh, Fast bowling is just better than spin bowling so naturally they have better stats, there are 3 ATG spinners, there are 15-20 ATG Pacers, between 1950 and 1990 there were like 10 ATG pacers and 0 ATG spinners. Basically the best three spinners are ATGs and the fourth best spinner is literally below any great pacer from any era, I'm not giving them extra points because they practise a form of bowling that has been inferior to fast bowling for a hundred years.