Mitchell Starc versus Vernon Philander: who is more effective in Tests?

[Majestic]

Who is a better test bowler of the two?

Mitchell Starc - 369 wickets, Avg 27
Vernon Philander - 224 wickets, Avg 22

Starc has longevity and was good in most of the conditions but wasn’t really great anywhere. Philander was extremely lethal in specific conditions but mediocre in certain conditions. Starc’s career is still not over and can get to 400+ wickets.

 

[kron]

Who is a better test bowler of the two?

Mitchell Starc - 369 wickets, Avg 27
Vernon Philander - 224 wickets, Avg 22

Starc has longevity and was good in most of the conditions but wasn’t really great anywhere. Philander was extremely lethal in specific conditions but mediocre in certain conditions. Starc’s career is still not over and can get to 400+ wickets.

Would take starc in Australia and nz
Phil trundler in SA, nz and eng. In West indies it's even.

Starc probably in Asia over him

So starc is better overall imo.

Phil trundler is very conditions specific bowler.

 

[FearlessRoar]

Polls added

 

[mominsaigol]

Starc easily.

 

[Hyder]

Philander was like abbas. Yes he was a bit better but needed conditions to support him alot. Meanwhile starc might not be the greatest bowler but he walks into any test team right now even because he has that ability to clean up the tail and bowl with old and new ball

 

[Cricket Warrior]

no comparison with Starc... philander is only effective with a new ball but starc can utilize old ball too.

 

[kron]

Starc easily.

This is why stats alone is never enough. You need qualitative and quantaitivate analysis to judge players.

Phil trundler was such a stat padder of the highest order. I despise stat padders.

 

[sweep_shot]

I go with Starc.

Starc is an ATG.

 

[BouncerGuy]

Starc is an all-conditions bowler while vernon needed some favor from the pitch to get wickets. Starc has had more match-winning performances and impact than vernon.

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

I go with Starc.

Starc is an ATG.

No he is not, how can a bowler averaging 27+ be a test ATG.

He is definitely ATG in Odis though.

I will take Vernon in tests.

 

[mominsaigol]

No he is not, how can a bowler averaging 27+ be a test ATG.

He is definitely ATG in Odis though.

I will take Vernon in tests.

I will take Vernon in tests.

Hahahaha nice joke. And yet you're the same guy who would take Sachin and Kohli over Williamson in tests and use the 54 avg stat pad logic.

Don't get me wrong kohli sucks but he is >>>> Williamson in test cricket pre 2020 and Sachin is > overall, but you're hypocrisy is exposed once again.

 

[atreus]

in pink ball, Starc is a monster averaging 17-18, no contest there.

in red ball, Starc averages nearly 30, Vernon averages 22, Starc would certainly outbowl Vernon on a flattie or an Asian spin pitch but they would both be medicore and Starc would just happen to be less average, on top I don't doubt Philander's ability to keep it tight as long as he has Starc's support. on a wicket with grass or swing aid, Philander was genuinely unplayable, he was like a free cheatcode on those, so I'll take Vern as he becomes a genuine cheat code when the conditions aid him and has a great series in flat-era Australia as well. I don't think it's particularly close in Red ball either, like maybe Starc would be less average in certain situations but Vernon is a huge matchwinner in 70-80% of matches he will play.

Whiteball, no contest, Starc is one of the greatest of all time while Vernon sacrificed that format.