http://www.ja606.co.uk/articles/viewArticle/220284
If the coaches hadnt been obsessed with changing Andersons action early in his career he would have been comfortably our leading wicket taker of all time by now.
Broads economy rate is bound to be better as the majority of the time batsmen rarely see the ball on their side of the pitch.
For the record in the Steyn/ Anderson debate id take Steyn every time, but seriously is this Anderson v Broad thing really keeping you up at night lad
anderson is just more consistant imo, maybe not in this series but the last few years he was getting 3-4 wickets a innings, where as broad would get the same amount of wickets in total but he would get his in a bunch like 6-7 in a innings then get literally nothing for the next 3 innings then the same again
Broad tends to get quite a few wickets in a test match then hardly does anything in the rest.
By that i mean in 1 test he could take 8/9 wickets and in the others will just get 2/3 whereas Anderson gets around 4/5 each test bar the recent ashes series.
Also i feel when Broad comes on to bowl the Batsmen take alot more risk when facing him. They see him as a target to get runs off and wil often play shots against him that they wouldnt do against Anderson.
Also they Steyn vs Anderson comparison is pathetic. Steyn averages around 21/22 in tests Anderson 30. Not even a fair comparison.
Hell Even Kallis bowling average was 32 and that only went down in the last few years.
joblytheismywife, I was talking about bowling strike rates, not economy rates.
Broad bags a wicket every 58 balls and Anderson every 59 balls.
In test cricket, the important quality for a bowler is his ability to take wickets. In this regard, Anderson and Broad are about the same.
Overall, the stats dont lie and well done youve used them to your advantage well. As said above Broad only seems to bowl well when i feels like it, Anderson is a much more consistent bowler but he has been flogged to death over this last 12-18 months and hasnt looked the same since the 2nd/3rd test last summer.
Other nations seem to handle/look after their fast bowlers better than we do, Anderson could easily have been rested for either NZ series last year.
As far as Broad is concerned, i believe he should be first change bowler rather than strike bowler , basically our answer to Siddle, his best spells have been when the ball is a bit older
" when he feels like it "
Strike rates of bowlers for the past 20-year period:
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?bowling_pacespin=1;class=1;filter=advanced;opposition=1;opposition=2;opposition=3;opposition=4;opposition=5;opposition=6;opposition=7;opposition=8;orderby=bowling_strike_rate;qualmin1=50;qualval1=wickets;spanmax1=06+Jan+2014;spanmin1=07+Jan+1994;spanval1=span;template=results;type=bowling
Here is the same list sorted by bowling average. Anderson remains at the bottom of the page.
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?bowling_pacespin=1;class=1;filter=advanced;opposition=1;opposition=2;opposition=3;opposition=4;opposition=5;opposition=6;opposition=7;opposition=8;orderby=bowling_average;qualmin1=50;qualval1=wickets;spanmax1=06+Jan+2014;spanmin1=07+Jan+1994;spanval1=span;template=results;type=bowling
Anderson is more reliant on swing.
In non-swinging conditions, Anderson struggles. However, he is probably up there with the best of them, when the ball does swing.
Jimmy looked a shadow of his former self in this series. One more home series in him before he retires to the after dinner speakers circuit where we will enthrall the next few generations with his stories on how we used to beat the Aussies at cricket.
Anderson a very good bowler, but not great.
Although when he bags 400 pundits will label him as great.
Think andersons wickets tend to look better if you get what I mean, seems to get more jaffas than broad.
Good article didnt actually realise there stats were that close, will be interesting to see how they shape up if broad reaches similar amount of games
Davidoff, I guess we tend to like a bowler who beats the batsman often. Anderson is that kind of bowler.
There are others who bowl a few overs of utter tripe and suddenly produce an unplayable ball.
Ultimately, in test cricket, what matters is the ability of the bowler to grab wickets.
Anderson give the impression that he is clever, crafty, and consistent. Broad comes across as, well Broad. I suspect that Broad will finish his career with more wickets and a better bowling average than Anderson.
Page 1 of 1
First
Previous
1
Next
Latest
Sign in if you want to comment
Anderson vs Broad
Page 1 of 1
posted on 6/1/14
http://www.ja606.co.uk/articles/viewArticle/220284
posted on 7/1/14
If the coaches hadnt been obsessed with changing Andersons action early in his career he would have been comfortably our leading wicket taker of all time by now.
Broads economy rate is bound to be better as the majority of the time batsmen rarely see the ball on their side of the pitch.
For the record in the Steyn/ Anderson debate id take Steyn every time, but seriously is this Anderson v Broad thing really keeping you up at night lad
posted on 7/1/14
anderson is just more consistant imo, maybe not in this series but the last few years he was getting 3-4 wickets a innings, where as broad would get the same amount of wickets in total but he would get his in a bunch like 6-7 in a innings then get literally nothing for the next 3 innings then the same again
posted on 7/1/14
Broad tends to get quite a few wickets in a test match then hardly does anything in the rest.
By that i mean in 1 test he could take 8/9 wickets and in the others will just get 2/3 whereas Anderson gets around 4/5 each test bar the recent ashes series.
Also i feel when Broad comes on to bowl the Batsmen take alot more risk when facing him. They see him as a target to get runs off and wil often play shots against him that they wouldnt do against Anderson.
Also they Steyn vs Anderson comparison is pathetic. Steyn averages around 21/22 in tests Anderson 30. Not even a fair comparison.
Hell Even Kallis bowling average was 32 and that only went down in the last few years.
posted on 7/1/14
joblytheismywife, I was talking about bowling strike rates, not economy rates.
Broad bags a wicket every 58 balls and Anderson every 59 balls.
In test cricket, the important quality for a bowler is his ability to take wickets. In this regard, Anderson and Broad are about the same.
posted on 7/1/14
Overall, the stats dont lie and well done youve used them to your advantage well. As said above Broad only seems to bowl well when i feels like it, Anderson is a much more consistent bowler but he has been flogged to death over this last 12-18 months and hasnt looked the same since the 2nd/3rd test last summer.
Other nations seem to handle/look after their fast bowlers better than we do, Anderson could easily have been rested for either NZ series last year.
As far as Broad is concerned, i believe he should be first change bowler rather than strike bowler , basically our answer to Siddle, his best spells have been when the ball is a bit older
posted on 7/1/14
" when he feels like it "
posted on 7/1/14
Strike rates of bowlers for the past 20-year period:
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?bowling_pacespin=1;class=1;filter=advanced;opposition=1;opposition=2;opposition=3;opposition=4;opposition=5;opposition=6;opposition=7;opposition=8;orderby=bowling_strike_rate;qualmin1=50;qualval1=wickets;spanmax1=06+Jan+2014;spanmin1=07+Jan+1994;spanval1=span;template=results;type=bowling
posted on 7/1/14
Here is the same list sorted by bowling average. Anderson remains at the bottom of the page.
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?bowling_pacespin=1;class=1;filter=advanced;opposition=1;opposition=2;opposition=3;opposition=4;opposition=5;opposition=6;opposition=7;opposition=8;orderby=bowling_average;qualmin1=50;qualval1=wickets;spanmax1=06+Jan+2014;spanmin1=07+Jan+1994;spanval1=span;template=results;type=bowling
posted on 7/1/14
Anderson is more reliant on swing.
In non-swinging conditions, Anderson struggles. However, he is probably up there with the best of them, when the ball does swing.
posted on 7/1/14
Jimmy looked a shadow of his former self in this series. One more home series in him before he retires to the after dinner speakers circuit where we will enthrall the next few generations with his stories on how we used to beat the Aussies at cricket.
posted on 7/1/14
Anderson a very good bowler, but not great.
Although when he bags 400 pundits will label him as great.
posted on 8/1/14
Think andersons wickets tend to look better if you get what I mean, seems to get more jaffas than broad.
Good article didnt actually realise there stats were that close, will be interesting to see how they shape up if broad reaches similar amount of games
posted on 8/1/14
Davidoff, I guess we tend to like a bowler who beats the batsman often. Anderson is that kind of bowler.
There are others who bowl a few overs of utter tripe and suddenly produce an unplayable ball.
Ultimately, in test cricket, what matters is the ability of the bowler to grab wickets.
Anderson give the impression that he is clever, crafty, and consistent. Broad comes across as, well Broad. I suspect that Broad will finish his career with more wickets and a better bowling average than Anderson.
Page 1 of 1