There was a period when the slips were dropping catch after catch off Flintoff, he was one of those unlucky bowlers but his aggression got the other bowlers pots of wickets.

Flintoff has the same bowling avearge as Kallis.
Proof that stats don't always tell the truth.

the worst example of dropped catches i ever saw was a session from gough against the australians. i think gilchrist was dropped 5 times off gough's bowling in about a session and a half. from memory i think at least 3 of them were by mark butcher. goughie just gave up the ghost in the end, and noone could blame him.

totally agree that flintoff was a great "other end" bowler.

Remember Kallis vs Flintoff in '08? Proof in itself that even though he was injured every other game flintoff was still a great player

Gough before his injuries, he had a great spirit, averaged 28, and got 229 test wickets, Englands leading one day bowler. Injury ravaged Goughie, he could have to English legendary status.

Well take this as you will:

Hoggard 67 tests 248 wickets
Anderson 63 tests 240 wickets
Harmison 63 tests 226 wickets
Flintoff 79 tests 226 wickets

Pretty incredible stats I think. Anderson only needs 9 more wickets and he has been Englands most prolific wicket taker in the modern era. (90's onwards)

There's only a few bowlers ahead of him right now, Botham, Underwood, Willis, Hoggard, can't think of others. Thy being said, Botham had 383 wickets, I see no reason why Anderson cannot beat that, he certainly is Englands beat bowler right now, can swing it round corners, not only that, he has developed himself to still bowl well even when conditions are not suitable for swinging it.

Holden. Add Gough, 229 wickets only 58 tests.

Caddick
62 tests - 234 wickets at 29.

like Harmy, unplayable on his day.

I always bring up Frank Tyson in these debates.

One of the fastest bowler to have played test cricket. 76 wickets @ 18.56 in 17 tests.

Another thing, with the amount of cricket played these days, it stands to reason that bowlers will take more wickets, you need to look more at the averages than the total wickets.

Yes and strike rates.

Of course the naked eye is the best way to gauge an opinion.

When he retired from county cricket he played for a time in the Coventry & Warwickshire league. My brother in law's, brother in law opened against him once and said he was still something to behold.
A true unsung hero of England.

I was of course talking of Frank Tyson!!!

Is Jimmy Anderson England's best ever?

Not as a bowler. Not even in contention. There are far too many ahead of him - Trueman, Larwood, Barnes, Statham, Tyson, Willis, Snow,....the list of bowlers better than Jimmy is long.

Hoggard's bowling stats are very similar to those of Anderson. Other bowlers in his class were Geoff Arnold and Chris Old.

The long list of English bowlers that were better than Anderson, in addition to the ones named above, includes Lohmann, Bedser, Bailey, and of course, Botham.

Anderson will become Englands leading ever wicket taker if he continues his form for a couple more years.

leading wicket taker does not equal best ever bowler.

Goes along way towards it, shows how. Consistent you were. Will be other bowlers with better averages or strike rates, but they wnt have as many wickets, and that's possibly the most important figure.

Strike and average are the two most imortant stats IMO. Of course a minimum amount if tests played is a must.
Anderson is possibly the best English bowler that I have seen when it comes to bowling in typical English conditions, ie grey skies.
Hoggard bowled well in England, the sub con and Aus from what I remember.
Highly underatted that Hoggard.

His average and strike rate is nearly as good or is as good as the bowlers ahead of him. It would be interesting to see what his figures are 2008-2011 cos I imagine their significantly better than 2003-2008

Hoggard bowled well in England, the sub con and Aus from what I remember.
============

it's funny that. i remember hoggard as being outstanding in the subcontinent. his test match stats dont reflect it though.

certainly not the best england bowler ever, but the fastest spell of bowling i have ever seen was from devon malcolm. it was in an evening session against australia. that's all i can remember. fast, accurate and deadly. although it's not devon malcolm, for me the best bowler has to be fgenuinly fast and menacing.

I am not seeing thew mighty Derek Pringle getting any mentions here.

well, if you want a swing bowler then the spell of bowling which swumg more than any other in history was courtesy of none other than dermott reeve.

then the spell of bowling which swumg more than any other in history was courtesy of none other than dermott reeve.

................

You might want to look up Bob Massie from Australia. I remember him swinging it from one side of the track to the other at Lords. At a fair pace as well.

i dont need to look anyone up pal. ive told you the spell with most swing and it was dermott reeve