- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
I ask this question not as a hasty response to his ineffective performances amid consecutive hammerings for England in this Ashes series.
Anderson is a fine cricketer deserving of respect. He is highly-skilled, durable, reasonably consistent and arguably boasts the most complete mastery of swing bowling among current pacemen.
But I have long challenged the common perception among pundits and fans, particularly those from Britain, that he is in the same league as South African dynamo Dale Steyn.
In fact, he now faces serious competition from Stuart Broad just to be considered the most valuable quick in his own team.
England bowling coach David Saker in May labelled Anderson the best fast bowler in Test cricket.
Obviously you would expect Saker to be a shade biased. But he wasn’t the first authoritative cricketing voice to suggest Anderson was as good or perhaps better than the Proteas paceman.
Legendary Pakistan paceman Wasim Akram said in July that the Englishman was the best Test bowler of his era.
Former England captain Michael Vaughan predicted last year that Anderson would soon overtake Steyn.
Yet the 31-year-old English spearhead is not even close to equalling the South African.
His 334 wickets may make Anderson England’s second highest wicket taker in Tests, after Ian Botham, but a career average of 30.39 hardly justifies claims to greatness.
Steyn has taken 340 wickets at 22.65. Pause and consider that statistical disparity.
Further examination of Anderson’s career exposes the damning evidence that he has often struggled against strong opposition.
In Tests against the three best sides of his generation – South Africa, India and Australia – Anderson has averaged 35.
The South African meanwhile, has shone in the big matches, averaging 26 over his career against his three most difficult opponents – India, Australia and England.
Those who defend Anderson’s ordinary average typically argue that it is slanted because of a poor start to his career.
Yet over the past five years, the period during which he has received comparisons with Steyn, his average against those three aforementioned countries has remained high at 33.
Undoubtedly, Anderson at his peak is a beguiling performer.
Capable of curving the ball in either direction with precision, he has made many great batsmen appear inept on occasions.
However, there is no escaping the fact that when conditions are not in his favour or the ball is not swinging he, more often that not, is a significantly diminished player.
His cohort Stuart Broad is now arguably as influential as Anderson.
Broad, too, can wreak havoc with a full length when conditions are conducive to swing.
But when they are not he is more versatile.
The bounce he extracts from his height and tall action allows him, when necessary, to bowl back-of-a-length, Glenn-McGrath style, waiting for a delivery to deviate off the seam.
Or Broad can launch an offensive on the batsmen using his extremely effective short ball.
Since the start of England’s home series against South Africa 17 months ago, Anderson has averaged 32 in Tests compared to Broad’s mark of 29.
In that three-Test series, we were offered a chance to watch Steyn head to head with Anderson.
Despite the advantage of being in home conditions, Anderson could manage only 9 wickets at 41 as England lost the series.
Meanwhile, Steyn proved a match winner, snaring 15 wickets at 29.
The official ICC player rankings have Anderson in 10th place behind the likes of Steyn (1st), Aussie quicks Ryan Harris (6th) and Peter Siddle (7th) and team mate Stuart Broad (8th).
Right now, that order is correct.