Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
James Anderson Vs Dale Steyn
145 views
Skip to first unread message
munag...@gmail.com
May 22, 2013, 4:17:05 AM5/22/13
to
England bowling coach David Saker pointed out that Anderson was 'better' than Steyn as Anderson became only the fourth Englishman to take 300 Test wickets.
But, if we look at their statistics, Steyn looks superior than Anderson. Wonder why David saker made such comment without knowing the facts right.
Steyn v Anderson in Test Matches:
ICC Ranking: 1 v 6
No of Tests: 65 v 81
Wickets taken: 332 v 305
Average: 22.65 v 30.14
Economy: 3.30 v 3.08
5 wkt haul: 21 v 13
10 wkt haul: 5 v 1
But, if we look at their statistics, Steyn looks superior than Anderson. Wonder why David saker made such comment without knowing the facts right.
Steyn v Anderson in Test Matches:
ICC Ranking: 1 v 6
No of Tests: 65 v 81
Wickets taken: 332 v 305
Average: 22.65 v 30.14
Economy: 3.30 v 3.08
5 wkt haul: 21 v 13
10 wkt haul: 5 v 1
jzfredricks
May 22, 2013, 4:32:39 AM5/22/13
to
Who would you rather watch?
I'd pick Jimmy.
I'd pick Jimmy.
willsutton
May 22, 2013, 5:37:33 AM5/22/13
to
On 22/05/2013 6:32 PM, jzfredricks wrote:
> Who would you rather watch?
> I'd pick Jimmy.
>
if you were the batsman.... yes
> Who would you rather watch?
> I'd pick Jimmy.
>
Luke Curtis
May 23, 2013, 12:07:14 PM5/23/13
to
On Wed, 22 May 2013 01:17:05 -0700 (PDT), munag...@gmail.com wrote:
>England bowling coach David Saker pointed out that Anderson was 'better' than Steyn as Anderson became only the fourth Englishman to take 300 Test wickets.
>
>But, if we look at their statistics, Steyn looks superior than Anderson. Wonder why David saker made such comment without knowing the facts right.
>
Statistics can be misleading, early on is his career there was a
>England bowling coach David Saker pointed out that Anderson was 'better' than Steyn as Anderson became only the fourth Englishman to take 300 Test wickets.
>
>But, if we look at their statistics, Steyn looks superior than Anderson. Wonder why David saker made such comment without knowing the facts right.
>
frankly disastrous and almost career destroying attempt to change his
bowling action, for some time Jimmy looked incapable of landing the
ball on the pitch let alone getting anybody out.
Thankfully they went back to his original action and it all clicked
back into place.
>
>
>Steyn v Anderson in Test Matches:
>
>ICC Ranking: 1 v 6
>No of Tests: 65 v 81
>Wickets taken: 332 v 305
>Average: 22.65 v 30.14
>Economy: 3.30 v 3.08
>5 wkt haul: 21 v 13
>10 wkt haul: 5 v 1
those stats suggest.
-
XBox 360 GT: Broton69
--
ButIstillneedtoknowwhat'sinthere! Thekeytoanysecurity
systemishowit'sdesigned! Thatdependsonwhyitwasdesigned!
Ihavetoknowwhatwhoeverdesigneditwastryingtoprotect!
(Blakes 7, City on the Edge of the World - Vila in typical panic mode)
tendulkar.com
May 23, 2013, 12:53:57 PM5/23/13
to
Anderson is in the league of Brett Lee, J Srinath and Zaheer Khan.
If you can't take 4 WPM, you are not a legend.
If you average 30+, you are not a legend.
Sure, stats don't mean anything, but ICC ratings which normalizes a lot of things do and Anderson is a 750 rating bowler and Steyn is 900
CaraMia
May 23, 2013, 1:56:37 PM5/23/13
to
On 5/23/2013 9:37 PM, Luke Curtis wrote:
> Statistics can be misleading, early on is his career there was a
> frankly disastrous and almost career destroying attempt to change his
> bowling action, for some time Jimmy looked incapable of landing the
> ball on the pitch let alone getting anybody out.
>
> Thankfully they went back to his original action and it all clicked
> back into place.
When exactly did this happen?
> Statistics can be misleading, early on is his career there was a
> frankly disastrous and almost career destroying attempt to change his
> bowling action, for some time Jimmy looked incapable of landing the
> ball on the pitch let alone getting anybody out.
>
> Thankfully they went back to his original action and it all clicked
> back into place.
Last 20 matches
Anderson has 74 wickets at 28.55 SR 64.1
Steyn has 100 wickets at 21.15 SR 44.4
Last 30 matches
Anderson 120 wickets at 27.24 SR 60.1
Steyn 154 at 21.11 wickets at 3.02 SR 41.8
These 2 really shouldn't be compared.
jzfredricks
May 23, 2013, 4:41:25 PM5/23/13
to
On Friday, May 24, 2013 2:53:57 AM UTC+10, tendulkar.com wrote:
> Sure, stats don't mean anything, but ICC ratings which normalizes a lot of things do and Anderson is a 750 rating bowler and Steyn is 900
What's your take on the ICC ratings for Brandman and, say, Tendulkar?
> Sure, stats don't mean anything, but ICC ratings which normalizes a lot of things do and Anderson is a 750 rating bowler and Steyn is 900
tendulkar.com
May 23, 2013, 5:06:34 PM5/23/13
to
Bradman is definitely a better test batsman than Sachin, but Sachin didn't have the luxury of indulging only in Easy Batting, aka Test Batting.
OTOH, Anderson and Steyn have pretty much played with the same constraints.
tendulkar.com
May 23, 2013, 5:15:02 PM5/23/13
to
PS: This defense apply to Ponting & Kallis too. (So, it's not just Sachin puja here)
Message has been deleted
Andrew Dunford
May 24, 2013, 7:17:52 PM5/24/13
to
"Hils" <hi...@saynotospam.net> wrote in message
news:knn8am$l7f$1...@speranza.aioe.org...
> On 23/05/13 17:53, tendulkar.com wrote:
>> Anderson is in the league of Brett Lee, J Srinath and Zaheer Khan.
>
> Anderson's far better than all three of those. In recent years he's also
>> Anderson is in the league of Brett Lee, J Srinath and Zaheer Khan.
>
> learned how to bowl on lifeless tracks, perhaps the result of dumping the
> bureaucrat's bowling action.
>
>> If you can't take 4 WPM, you are not a legend. If you average 30+,
>> you are not a legend.
>>
>> Sure, stats don't mean anything, but ICC ratings which normalizes a
>> lot of things do and Anderson is a 750 rating bowler and Steyn is
>> 900
>
> Anderson's a fine bowler, but I'd choose Steyn and Philander ahead of him.
>> If you can't take 4 WPM, you are not a legend. If you average 30+,
>> you are not a legend.
>>
>> Sure, stats don't mean anything, but ICC ratings which normalizes a
>> lot of things do and Anderson is a 750 rating bowler and Steyn is
>> 900
>
> Maybe also Morkel.
>
> Britain is a place where anyone in the public eye who do not say that
> everything British in inherently better than everything else, even when it
> palpably isn't, is likely to be accused by the crypto-fascist media of a
> lack of patriotism. David Saker's comment was intended for the
> crypto-fascist media.
It really depends on whether one is intent on misquoting or misunderstanding
David Saker's comments.
He didn't say Anderson was a better bowler, but that he has "more skills".
I'm not saying I agree with him, but it's clear he's talking about
Anderson's ability to swing the ball both ways.
Where Saker's comments fall down is that he seems to imply that while
swinging the ball is a skill, being able to bowl fast like Steyn is not,
which is clearly not correct.
Andrew
Venkat
May 24, 2013, 8:01:33 PM5/24/13
to
On Friday, May 24, 2013 4:17:52 PM UTC-7, Andrew Dunford wrote:
> "Hils" <hi...@saynotospam.net> wrote in message
>
> ....
> "Hils" <hi...@saynotospam.net> wrote in message
>
> <snip>
>
> He didn't say Anderson was a better bowler, but that he has "more skills".
>
> I'm not saying I agree with him, but it's clear he's talking about
>
> Anderson's ability to swing the ball both ways.
>
>
>
> ... <snip>
> He didn't say Anderson was a better bowler, but that he has "more skills".
>
> I'm not saying I agree with him, but it's clear he's talking about
>
> Anderson's ability to swing the ball both ways.
>
>
>
>
>
> Andrew
Reminds me of a pearl from Brian Johnston. A dog, a dachshund, running on the field and B. J. commentating (w.r.t. the dog) about 4 short legs and the ball swinging both ways - a fast bowler!
--Venkat
0 new messages