The continual rhetoric in the Sky commentary box (filled with ex-England captains) regarding James Anderson and the fact that he is apparently the best bowler in the world is comical.
It’s about time someone challenged this flawed assumption and set them straight.
Anderson isn’t even the best seam bowler in this series. Much to the dismay of an ex-England captain, one can substantiate this claim with facts and draw your attention to the series stats:
Name M Wkts Ave Econ SR BBI Won Lost
Siddle 3* 15 22.60 2.81 48.1 5/50 2
Anderson 3 15 26.06 3.03 51.5 5/73 2
(compiled before the recent second innings was bowled)
So from the above stats, despite being two down in the series and against England’s vaunted top-order (as per the commentary team from Sky), one can assume that Peter Siddle has outperformed Anderson on the same surface against better batsmen.
He has a better average and a better strike rate and all of that after his captain lost the toss in the first two Tests and he had to bowl in conditions more favourable to the batting side.
Lets go a step further and consider the respective Ashes careers of Anderson and Siddle, for they follow a similar trend as the above:
Name Matches Wkts Ave Econ SR BBI Won Loss Draw
Siddle 13 49 29.36 3.35 52.5 6/54 2 8 3
Anderson 16 56 35.19 3.32 63.5 5/73 7 6 3
Again, one can see that Siddle has a better Ashes career average and strike rate. It is also worth noting that Siddle has only ever been in the winning side in an Ashes Test twice, and yet he manages to outperform Anderson.
As it is clearly illustrated above, the world rankings don’t lie. Siddle was rated 5 and Anderson 7 at the beginning of this series.
Anderson is undoubtedly a quality bowler in English conditions, it is worth reminding the Sky commentary team that Siddle has outperformed Anderson in England, on surfaces prepared specifically to Anderson’s strengths and has shown, over a sustained period, that he is a more consistent performer than Anderson and for my money is deservedly ranked higher.
Best bowler for England doesn’t equal best bowler in the world.
The claim that Anderson is at the top of the pile is even more comical when you compare his record to Dale Steyn, who’s record overshadows Anderson’s, against all opposition and anywhere in the world:
Name Matches Wkts Ave SR BBI 5wkts 10wkts
Steyn 65 332 22.65 41.1 7/51 21 5
Anderson 85 322 28.95 58.2 7/43 15 2
In Australia: Matches Wkts Ave SR BBI 5wkts 10wkts
Steyn 6 30 28.03 48.1 5/67 2 1
Anderson 8 29 35.79 63.4 4/44 0 0
In sub-continent: Matches Wkts Ave SR BBI 5wkts 10wkts
Steyn 11 57 21.33 34.7 7/51 4 1
Anderson 11 33 33.45 66.6 5/72 1 0
jameswm
Roar Guru
Anderson is the best performed English bowler this series, marginally ahead of Swann.
jameswm
Roar Guru
It's a comparison of how they have gone this series. Pasts and futures are irrelevant to that comparison.
Chris
Guest
After the first test England were apparently over reliant on Anderson. Now he's not very good. Well done chaps.
pope paul v11
Guest
I would not say Anderson's rating is comical. He is a very fine bowler, notwithstanding Siddle and Harris going great guns. England also go hard on their 4 bowlers as they don't employ a fifth bowler generally. Also Steyn and Philander had an extended holiday in Australia being anything but the best while poor old Morkel did all the hard work for two tests, until their eyes lit up at Perth.
Felix
Guest
Though we'll never know, that first cherry Bell got straight up after lunch that leapt off a length and beat him all ends up (and would have beaten any batsman in the world to be fair) indicated that the rain had juiced things up a lot. I think it would have been ask, given a full day's play, for any team to hang around in those conditions.
Minz
Guest
Not sure about the English papers, but the English commentators this series have been a heck of a lot better than any Australian TV commentary I've heard (the ABC radio guys are good). There have been a number of genuine laughs in each test out of them, and they provide interesting banter.. and stop the banter when they should, unlike the bunch on channel 9.
Minz
Guest
Not sure about the English papers, but the English commentators this series have been a heck of a lot better than any Australian TV commentary I've heard (the ABC radio guys are good). There have been a number of genuine laughs in each test out of them, and they provide interesting banter.. and stop the banter when they should, unlike the bunch on channel 9.
jammel
Guest
Siddle's been outstanding - just as expected. Why Lyon and Watson get a bowl before him sometimes, I just cannot fathom. Harris has been incredible too - even better than expected. Imagine if we had these two, and Pattinson on fire??? I've got to say, Bird must play the Fourth Test, instead of Starc.
JimmyB
Guest
It is fairly unique in this era, especially as he does it without any discernible change in action.
Jayden
Guest
Funny thing looking a that, siddle has half the amount of wickets, in half the amount of games... wonder if he'll catch him? And if you put harris up to 84 (12*7 - 324) Suggests theyre all kinda similar, albeit thas noy taking form etc; into account
JimmyB
Guest
Hutch, you can say a lot about the English media and the Sky team, but I don't think one eyed is a fair assessment . Having watched British coverage and read British papers all my life, I've often been frustrated how balanced and unbiased they generally are, a little bit of one eyed jingoism never hurt anyone, as most posts on this site show.
JimmyB
Guest
Philander is quality, but again it's probably best to judge him after a few years of playing Test cricket (he doesn't play ODIs or T20s), if we judged bowlers on 1 series or year then Jackson Bird is the best bowler in the world.
JimmyB
Guest
+2
Hutch
Guest
Not an Aus vs Eng thing I am neutral observer, I do find it laughable how the English biased Sky commentary believe Eng are the best side in the world and that Anderson is the de-facto #1 bowler ... he isn't even in the Top 5 the rankings don't lie. One relatively good series in India (though Cook and KP's runs played a bigger part in winning that series) doesn't catapault him to #1 nor does running through a very ordinary Aus batting line-up and Lords. While Steyn and Philander are light years ahead of Jimmy on current form and ranking points .... I used Siddle as an example to highlight how one-eyed and lob sided the viewsof the English media are
Hutch
Guest
and that was the crux of my argument .... would appear the Sky commentary team has forgotten their is a Test sides outside this Ashes series that have claims to be #1 in the world and they have beaten both Eng and Aus in the past 12 mths. and have: Steyn and Philander the #1 and #2 ranked bowlers in the world Amla and AB de Villiers and Kallis the #1, #4 and #7 ranked batsmen in world (Clarke #2 and Cook #8) Jaque Kallis the #1 all-rounder I was making the reference to Siddle to support that far from Anderson being the "best in the world" or "best in his era" as per Wasim Akram who claimed Steyn only has 1 ball with the old ball (must be a fairly useful delivery that considering his record against India in India) that while an undoubtedly very talented bowler their other bowlers in this series who have been performing just as well as if if not better. The hype claiming him as #1 is plainly ridiculous
Disco
Roar Guru
+1
Disco
Roar Guru
Perhaps not in that match (though Swann still outbowled Lyon) but generally Australia's attack has suffered against quality opposition in part due to the average spinner merry-go-round. As for the result, indeed, we'll never know. Bear in mind England's top order also failed at Lord's and that the English team has salvaged draws from dire positions on at least four occasions in the past four years.
Disco
Roar Guru
Believe that if it makes you feel better.
fadida
Guest
Is this article subtitled "my dad's bigger than yours", hence the immature responses? Anderson is top quality. When I first saw him years ago I thought he was another rubbish English seamer. Now I have genuine fear when he has the ball. Siddle is having a fine series but I'd rank him just behind Anderson. Why? If we needed to bowl a team to victory Anderson is the man. Gut instinct, no stats. Who's the best in the world? Don't care :)
Nudge
Guest
3rd reply. Back up?