What's new

James Anderson's bowling average to drop below 30 soon (Countdown)

"Jimmy's" average has now dropped to 30.18 after that good innings with a 5-fer.

If his career and this thread's theme is anything to go by, expect it to bottom out and rise up again in the next one, or the one after that.
 
World class bowler, once again rises to the occasion when England needed him. Has been a really decisive bowler for England for years which matters more than average and strike rate. :14:

Smooth action, great wrist position and swings it both ways. Very good looking as well.
 
Mamoon said:
World class bowler, once again rises to the occasion when England needed him. Has been a really decisive bowler for England for years which matters more than average and strike rate. :14:

Smooth action, great wrist position and swings it both ways. Very good looking as well.
Click to expand...
When Anderson was trundling in the last two Tests you were saying He is past it . Now he has put a good performance in he is world class again.
 
Whatever happens b/w now and the end of his career, he will go down as world class bowler for me for what he has achieved for England over the years.

It is true that he's past it now and such performances are rare now and it will only get worse from this point.
 
Few days ago Mamoon say he is past it. Now world class again. Wow. Just Mamoon being Mamoon.
 
He is past it and I think will retire in a couple of years, why does that mean he is not world class?
No offense but I just don't understand some people.
 
Mamoon said:
He is past it and I think will retire in a couple of years, why does that mean he is not world class?
No offense but I just don't understand some people.
Click to expand...
Its slightly oxymoronic to call someone Past it and World Class. By saying that they are Past it you are writing off their capability to continue delivering World Class performances
 
When a world class player is in decline, you don't refer to him as ordinary or average. He remains who he is and neither do you write off their capability of producing world class performances but the frequency certainly decreases. You don't lose your skills overnight.
 
Mamoon said:
When a world class player is in decline, you don't refer to him as ordinary or average. He remains who he is and neither do you write off their capability of producing world class performances but the frequency certainly decreases. You don't lose your skills overnight.
Click to expand...
So would you say YK is a World Class Test Batsman
 
I have never considered him a world class batsman. He's good but never world class.
 
What's his average right now? Higher or lower than 30?

I think only Broad and Anderson had these below 30 countdowns.
 
He is an ok bowler; nothing special. He is a minnow basher and a clounderson.
 
I think Jimmy's average will remain at 30 for his career. It means he's good but not great, like Lee and Harmison.
 
Comfortably better than both. He's more skillful than Steyn but the latter is much quicker which has helped his cause considerably.
 
Funny how people were calling him a great a year or so ago and saying that he'll get his average down to about 25, lol.

Past his best now anyway and England should start looking for a replacement. The English weather might improve with him not carrying clouds around everywhere. :mc
 
He is a very special bowler with COMPLETE skill set.
I don't think anyone can bowl that many overs with that pace and quality.

An asset for English skippers

Stats are over rated :yk
 
Robert said:
5-50 off 25 overs today and yesterday, under blazing blue skies on a good batting wicket.
Click to expand...

Lol you chaps up north don't know what a real summer is like. 28 degrees C and people start fainting :p
 
lilFlip said:
He is a very special bowler with COMPLETE skill set.
I don't think anyone can bowl that many overs with that pace and quality.

An asset for English skippers

Stats are over rated :yk
Click to expand...

Is also very handsome, speaks good English and is English. Also more skilled than Steyn. ATG!
 
lilFlip said:
He is a very special bowler with COMPLETE skill set.
I don't think anyone can bowl that many overs with that pace and quality.

An asset for English skippers

Stats are over rated :yk
Click to expand...

so what stops him from becoming a better bowler than Glen77 Mcgrath?
 
Robert said:
5-50 off 25 overs today and yesterday, under blazing blue skies on a good batting wicket.
Click to expand...

This 'clouderson' name is more of a dig at his performances in the SC or lack of it for that matter :inzi
 
Anderson can swing the new ball both ways unlike Steyn, is equally good with reverse swing and has a slightly better yorker.

Steyn on the other hand has the best outswinger I've ever seen and is much quicker, due to which he's more adaptable and hence a better bowler but yeah, Anderson is more skillful in my opinion.
 
Mamoon said:
Anderson can swing the new ball both ways unlike Steyn, is equally good with reverse swing and has a slightly better yorker.

Steyn on the other hand has the best outswinger I've ever seen and is much quicker, due to which he's more adaptable and hence a better bowler but yeah, Anderson is more skillful in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Steyns yorkers way better than Andersons
 
Not quite, but they look better because of the extra pace.
 
Yorker without great pace is not the best option unless it's reversing.
 
Yes. Good pace is an asset on any surface and in any conditions.
 
Mamoon said:
Comfortably better than both. He's more skillful than Steyn but the latter is much quicker which has helped his cause considerably.
Click to expand...

For the last few years, I think Steyn has been bowling 135-140 odd in normal times and destroying all teams.

When the going gets tough, he ramps up his pace.
 
Jimmy looked extremely pacey this Test match.

Was bowling around 138.

Awesome bouncer too.

Always a threat.
 
sensible-indian-fan said:
For the last few years, I think Steyn has been bowling 135-140 odd in normal times and destroying all teams.

When the going gets tough, he ramps up his pace.
Click to expand...

This. Steyn is a 140kph test bowler and when required can hit 150kph.

Plus Steyn does reverse the ball :waqar
Steyns yorker>Andersons

If anderson had pace he could be one of the most complete pacers of all time.
 
Then why isn't Lee a great bowler.

Why Steyn is a better bowler than Anderson is not because of pace.
McGrath was a better bowler than Akram and Waqar and Wasim despite not bowling fast.

It is shocking that people think that pace makes one adaptable.
 
Yes Steyn isn't that express anymore but he's quicker than Anderson and can has much higher upper limit. He has cut down on his pace which will help him prolong his career.
 
It doesn't matter which side of 30 his average is, he'll remain a top bowler for England.
 
Glen McGrath bowled slower than Akram and had fewer trucks than Akram but ended up better. Pace doesn't make anyone better. He didn't have great yorkers. He didnt reverse swing it.
 
When did I say pace is everything? Lee was a hack who had no brain and little skill, but a skillful bowler's effectiveness is doubled if he has the gift of pace provided he can use it and Steyn can. McGrath was one of a kind, his accuracy was inhuman.
 
Anderson would have been twice the bowler if he could bowl at 90 MPH.
 
You said Anderson was more skillful but Steyn had pace which made him adaptable. So it is the pace that makes Steyn better? according to you.
 
Yes. If you swap their pace, Anderson would've been a better bowler.
 
Haz95 said:
This. Steyn is a 140kph test bowler and when required can hit 150kph.

Plus Steyn does reverse the ball :waqar
Steyns yorker>Andersons

If anderson had pace he could be one of the most complete pacers of all time.
Click to expand...

Though I find Anderson fascinating, if someone does a complete analysis and checks, I think

Steyn at (135-140) has destroyed lineups far more than Anderson (135-140).

I could be wrong but that's what it looks from what I have seen. Don't want to take into account the wickets Steyn got ramping up his pace. I don't think lack of pace is the ONLY thing separating Anderson from Steyn.

Steyn does something else that allows him to average low 20 odd in this era. What I don't know.
 
Last edited:
sensible-indian-fan said:
Though I find Anderson fascinating, if someone does a complete analysis and checks, I think

Steyn at (135-140) has destroyed lineups far more than Anderson (135-140).

I could be wrong but that's what it looks from what I have seen. Don't want to take into account the wickets Steyn got ramping up his pace. I don't think lack of pace is the ONLY thing separating Anderson from Steyn.

Steyn does something else that allows him to average low 20 odd in this era. What I don't know.
Click to expand...

Exactly. His 6-8 vs Pak was all 135-40 deliveries.
 
Haz95 said:
Exactly. His 6-8 vs Pak was all 135-40 deliveries.
Click to expand...

sensible-indian-fan said:
Though I find Anderson fascinating, if someone does a complete analysis and checks, I think

Steyn at (135-140) has destroyed lineups far more than Anderson (135-140).

I could be wrong but that's what it looks from what I have seen. Don't want to take into account the wickets Steyn got ramping up his pace. I don't think lack of pace is the ONLY thing separating Anderson from Steyn.

Steyn does something else that allows him to average low 20 odd in this era. What I don't know.
Click to expand...
[MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION] - Can you explain this phenomena?

Steyn bowls at 135-140 and outbowls Anderson worldwide INSPITE of not having a genuine inswinger like Anderson. Yorker is also not going to be that great cos the pace is same.

I am considering ONLY the wickets taken with 135-140 pace.

So there must be something Steyn is doing that Anderson is not, right?
 
Steyn operates in 130s for a few years now and he is still as good as he was before. Pace is not what makes Steyn better. It is his mastery of outswing, accuracy and his cricket mind that makes him better. Anderson could be as good as Steyn if he adds aggressiveness and accuracy.

Lillee, after coming back from injury, bowled better than ever albeit slower. Pace was not what made him great either.
 
Glen77 said:
Steyn operates in 130s for a few years now and he is still as good as he was before. Pace is not what makes Steyn better. It is his mastery of outswing, accuracy and his cricket mind that makes him better. Anderson could be as good as Steyn if he adds aggressiveness and accuracy.

Lillee, after coming back from injury, bowled better than ever albeit slower. Pace was not what made him great either.
Click to expand...

Yeah probably. Accuracy is probably the thing. Also finding what kind of deliveries a batsman finds uncomfortable and exploiting that weakness.

As Graeme Swann once said, many times it might be appear like a batsman finds certain deliveries uncomfortable and others easy while in reality it might be the other way round. So what Swann would do was bowl to batsmen in nets and ask them for feedback on what balls they found tough and what balls they didn't give a damn about.

Genius stuff. Never heard any bowler talking about this before. Atleast I never did.
 
sensible-indian-fan said:
[MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION] - Can you explain this phenomena?

Steyn bowls at 135-140 and outbowls Anderson worldwide INSPITE of not having a genuine inswinger like Anderson. Yorker is also not going to be that great cos the pace is same.

I am considering ONLY the wickets taken with 135-140 pace.

So there must be something Steyn is doing that Anderson is not, right?
Click to expand...

Steyn bowls the best out-swingers in history. He can even put it on leg stump and then moves it away. He does that consistently. Batsmen have to play those deliveries and those deliveries are very risky to play. Anderson bowls regular out-swingers like anyone else. Puts it on 3rd/4th stump and then moves it away. Those can be left most of the time. There is a huge difference in two situations. Most bowlers will keep getting clipped for runs on the leg side if they try to do what Stey does.

To do what Steyn does, you need far better skills and control. Pace has not much to do with it. Sure, he still bowls at good pace but it's those out-swingers which makes him so dangerous. Watch any highlights and you will notice it. And then Steyn is naturally aggressive. Anderson just tries to be aggressive.
 
Last edited:
Buffet said:
Steyn bowls the best out-swingers in history. Puts it on leg stump and then moves it away. He does that consistently. Batman have to play those deliveries and very risky for them to play. Anderson bowls regular out-swingers like anyone else. Puts it on 3rd/4th stump and then moves it away. Those can be left most of the time. There is a huge difference in two situations.
Click to expand...

Yes but those are jaffas.

He bowls those deliveries quite a bit.

But I don't think Steyn takes most of his wickets with unplayable deliveries. Yes some of them are. He just gets people out with good deliveries.

I agree with what you say. That leg stump to outside off swinging really puts batsmen off but I think he also does something like working on a batsmen cos he gets bucketloads of wickets even when conditions don't allow him to bowl those jaffas.
 
Last edited:
When I compare two cricketers, I don't compare their averages and strikes rates - I compare their peak performances. Everything else is secondary.

There is very little that separates Anderson's best spells from Steyn's. The difference exists but it doesn't reflect the massive statistical advantage that Steyn enjoys. This is where I have a problem with people dubbing Anderson a '30 average bowler'. Most bowlers with a similar average can't even dream of the spells Anderson has produced.

Of course, that brings consistency into the discussion. You have to be a consistent to be an ATG. Steyn has that consistency but Anderson doesn't.

As far as Steyn producing great spells at 135-140, that's because Steyn is a more hostile bowler than Anderson and produces more 'aggressive' deliveries per spell than Anderson. Steyn fits the profile of a proper nasty fast bowler while someone like Anderson doesn't. He is a more of a swing bowler with decent pace and plenty of skill.

A batsman is going to be far more uncomfortable facing Steyn at 135 than facing Anderson. Similarly, Lillee post injury cut down on his pace but he was still lethal.

Take Johnson's example as well. Everyone raves about his pace but he's not as quick as he seems. His action, attitude and personality plays into it - in short, his aggression.

But pace, aggression, hostility and attitude are not skills, they are traits. You cannot teach things things to a bowler, it comes naturally to them.

For me, Anderson is the more skilled bowler but Steyn has comfortably the better traits for a fast bowler. A complete package when you take all things into consideration and this what separates a great from an ATG. Small things that make a big impact and difference in the long run.
 
Steyn definitely has the best outswinger I've ever seen, like I mentioned before and its the length and line that he bowls. Batsman are just uncertain whether to play at it or not but I don't think Steyn without his aforementioned 'traits' would have been as successful as he is now and this is what separates him from Anderson.
 
sensible-indian-fan said:
Yes but those are jaffas.

He bowls those deliveries quite a bit.

But I don't think Steyn takes most of his wickets with unplayable deliveries. Yes some of them are. He just gets people out with good deliveries.

I agree with what you say. That leg stump to outside off swinging really puts batsmen off but I think he also does something like working on a batsmen cos he gets bucketloads of wickets even when conditions don't allow him to bowl those jaffas.
Click to expand...

Even if you don't take wicket on those deliveries, it ensures that batsman is always in two minds and not really moves his feet. He doesn't bowl them rarely actually. Go and see what he bowled to Rohit in ODIs in SA. The best display of swing bowling in ODI I saw that day. Rohit knew exactly what was happening and he tried to connect but couldn't touch even one ball. Steyn bowled those Jaffas one after another. It was like 20-25 balls one after another.
 
Anderson didn 't have the peaks Steyn has. I think even Broad 's peaks are better than Anderson's. Broad's bowled some absolute top quality spells in recent times against good teams. I can't remember Anderson ripping apart a good batting line up in a session.
 
Mamoon said:
When I compare two cricketers, I don't compare their averages and strikes rates - I compare their peak performances. Everything else is secondary.

There is very little that separates Anderson's best spells from Steyn's. The difference exists but it doesn't reflect the massive statistical advantage that Steyn enjoys. This is where I have a problem with people dubbing Anderson a '30 average bowler'. Most bowlers with a similar average can't even dream of the spells Anderson has produced.

Of course, that brings consistency into the discussion. You have to be a consistent to be an ATG. Steyn has that consistency but Anderson doesn't.

As far as Steyn producing great spells at 135-140, that's because Steyn is a more hostile bowler than Anderson and produces more 'aggressive' deliveries per spell than Anderson. Steyn fits the profile of a proper nasty fast bowler while someone like Anderson doesn't. He is a more of a swing bowler with decent pace and plenty of skill.

A batsman is going to be far more uncomfortable facing Steyn at 135 than facing Anderson. Similarly, Lillee post injury cut down on his pace but he was still lethal.

Take Johnson's example as well. Everyone raves about his pace but he's not as quick as he seems. His action, attitude and personality plays into it - in short, his aggression.

But pace, aggression, hostility and attitude are not skills, they are traits. You cannot teach things things to a bowler, it comes naturally to them.

For me, Anderson is the more skilled bowler but Steyn has comfortably the better traits for a fast bowler. A complete package when you take all things into consideration and this what separates a great from an ATG. Small things that make a big impact and difference in the long run.
Click to expand...

I agree with what you say but what do you mean by aggressive balls?

Does Steyn bowl a barrage of bouncers? Not exactly.
Does he bowl with intense pace? We have taken pace wickets out of discussion.
Does he sledge more? Anderson sledges a LOT too. In fact, unanimous view (among all teams) is that Anderson is crossing the line too many times.

So what is aggressive?

The thing that you are calling aggressive is actually bowling balls that are pitched in AREAS that trouble the batsmen the most. Its finding a weakness and exploiting it to the fullest.

That's skill. Not aggressiveness per se.
 
Last edited:
Buffet said:
Even if you don't take wicket on those deliveries, it ensures that batsman is always in two minds and not really moves his feet. He doesn't bowl them rarely actually. Go and see what he bowled to Rohit in ODIs in SA. The best display of swing bowling in ODI I saw that day. Rohit knew exactly what was happening and he tried to connect but couldn't touch even one ball. Steyn bowled those Jaffas one after another. It was like 20-25 balls one after another.
Click to expand...

Agree but I am talking about conditions that doesn't allow Steyn to bowl jaffas and he STILL gets people out.
 
Anderson has more RANGE (with great skills) while Steyn has INCREDIBLE skills to do great stuff with his limited range.

He gets wicket even when conditions don't allow him to bowl those outrageous jaffas.
 
It's the line and length.. Like McGrath, he knows which line and length to ball at.. McGrath is the most fascinating bowler.. You can even call him one dimensional but what a bowler he was.
 
sensible-indian-fan said:
I agree with what you say but what do you mean by aggressive balls?

Does Steyn bowl a barrage of bouncers? Not exactly.
Does he bowl with intense pace? We have taken pace wickets out of discussion.
Does he sledge more? Anderson sledges a LOT too. In fact, unanimous view (among all teams) is that Anderson is crossing the line too many times.

So what is aggressive?

The thing that you are calling aggressive is actually bowling balls that are pitched in AREAS that trouble the batsmen the most. Its finding a weakness and exploiting it to the fullest.

That's skill. Not aggressiveness per se.
Click to expand...

Just one thing. Steyn wants a wicket every delivery that he bowls while Anderson is happy to be a container when things are not going to his way. This is why Steyn is easily frustrated when things do not go his way. He lacks patience for things to happen which is both a good thing and a bad thing.

I've never seen Steyn bowl a negative line or look to just stem the flow of runs.
 
Last edited:
Glen77 said:
It's the line and length.. Like McGrath, he knows which line and length to ball at.. McGrath is the most fascinating bowler.. You can even call him one dimensional but what a bowler he was.
Click to expand...

I agree on McGrath. He had no special delivery but yet he was so successful because his ability to bowl in the same spot over and over again was remarkable.

Very boring to watch though.
 
Mamoon said:
When I compare two cricketers, I don't compare their averages and strikes rates - I compare their peak performances. Everything else is secondary.

There is very little that separates Anderson's best spells from Steyn's.
Click to expand...

Steyn has 5+ wickets within 40 runs so many times. Anderson has only once despite Anderson playing more tests. Anyway, I don't think peak of bowler is one spell in a match. Peak is defined as bowler's performance in some extended period.

Anderson has averaged sub 25 only two years in his entire career. 2011 and 2012. If we take his best two years as peak then he averages 23-24 in that period. Steyn has multiple two consecutive 2 years where he averages sub 20.


In fact for years when they played at least 3-4 tests,

Anderson's Best consecutive 2 years avg is similar to Steyn's worst consecutive 2 year period.

This should kill any notion that both have similar peaks.
 
Last edited:
I'm referring to their best spells, individually. I don't see any difference in terms of quality of bowling when it comes to Steyn's great spells and Anderson's.

Of course when you take extended periods, Anderson falls behind because he doesn't have the consistency of Steyn. They have produced the best spells in their era by far and bowlers with lesser average than Anderson like Siddle etc don't come close to him.
 
Mamoon said:
I'm referring to their best spells, individually. I don't see any difference in terms of quality of bowling when it comes to Steyn's great spells and Anderson's.

Of course when you take extended periods, Anderson falls behind because he doesn't have the consistency of Steyn. They have produced the best spells in their era by far and bowlers with lesser average than Anderson like Siddle etc don't come close to him.
Click to expand...

Steyn has still bowled more threatening spells regularly than Anderson. Check their 8+ in match or 5+ in inning. You can see how many runs they give for their wickets. Steyn has bowled a lot more where he gave very little runs and picked up 5+ in inning or 8-9 in test.

I agree about Anderson bowling better spells than some one like Siddle. He was the reason for Eng doing so well 2 years ago. He did very well even in India and Aus in that period.
 
Last edited:
Apart from pace,skill and accuracy another asset that steyn has is his deceptive bounce. He's a skiddy bowler which I think is partly because of his height and the amount of backspin he puts on the ball. Even though he has mainly bowled in the 135-140 range, he has been successful because of his combination of late swing,accuracy and bounce. Of course he can still bowl spells in the 90+ mph range but they are rare nowadays.
 
Pace itself is a skill and probably the most important skill for a fast bowler. Anderson lacks this and cannot be called more skilled than Steyn.

Steyn's outswinger > Anderson's out/inswinger. All of their other skills are pretty equal.
 
If you give me Steyn at his absolute best as well as Anderson, whom to pick will be a hard decision for me. Same cannot be said about any other bowler of this generation compared Steyn.

I'm a firm believer of the argument that over the course of last 5-6 years, Anderson has been a clear number two.
 
Nikhil_cric said:
Apart from pace,skill and accuracy another asset that steyn has is his deceptive bounce. He's a skiddy bowler which I think is partly because of his height and the amount of backspin he puts on the ball. Even though he has mainly bowled in the 135-140 range, he has been successful because of his combination of late swing,accuracy and bounce. Of course he can still bowl spells in the 90+ mph range but they are rare nowadays.
Click to expand...

I forgot to mention this earlier. Steyn gets late swing lot more frequently than Anderson. That's more deadly and gets him more wickets.
 
Buffet said:
I forgot to mention this earlier. Steyn gets late swing lot more frequently than Anderson. That's more deadly and gets him more wickets.
Click to expand...

Yep. When in rhythm, he can swing the ball very very late. I've not seen another bowler get such late conventional swing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

FearlessRoar
[PICTURES] Is the Border-Gavaskar Trophy (2024-25) the final frontier for Virat Kohli's Test career?
2
Replies
91
Views
2K
The Bald Eagle
The Bald Eagle
A
Per Ardua Ad Astra (Pakistan Cricket)
Replies
41
Views
538
Abid Z
A
FearlessRoar
Big Bash League 14th Edition (2024/25)
Replies
7
Views
726
BouncerGuy
BouncerGuy
mominsaigol
Why has Pakistan's bowling declined in white-ball cricket?
2
Replies
106
Views
2K
pratiktc
P
N
Is it possible that Pakistan is suffering from an excess of talent?
Replies
50
Views
1K
BouncerGuy
BouncerGuy
Back
Top