Is Jimmy Anderson an all time great?

Beardan Roar Guru

By Beardan, Beardan is a Roar Guru

 , , ,

75 Have your say

    Only six bowlers have taken more than 500 Test match wickets.

    Jimmy Anderson, with a second innings seven-wicket haul against the West Indies in last months Lord’s Test became the first Englishman, and the sixth player to reach that milestone.

    However, is Jimmy Anderson on par with the other five greats? Or put simply, Is Jimmy Anderson a great bowler?

    To answer this, let’s look at the other five first.

    The two spinners at the top of the tree were remarkable bowlers. Muttiah Muralitharan took 800 wickets and along with Chaminda Vass, carried the bulk of the bowling duties for his nation for 15 years.

    Shane Warne brought a whole new level of accuracy and quality to a dying art.

    He made leg spin attractive again, and his ability helped Australia into an era of dominance.

    Anil Kumble excelled in home conditions, but as a thinking man’s cricketer, he could still perform admirably in conditions not suited to him. His bounce and accuracy allowed him to go right through any opposition.

    Glenn McGrath was a simple bowler.

    He had an ability to land six balls on the same spot, with his only movement being an off cutter mixed with a straight ball.

    Once he had honed his craft by the Windies tour of 1995, he celebrated 12 years at the top with a simple method not overly affected by injury.

    He ended with 563 Test wickets.

    Courtney Walsh, like McGrath, would combine great length with longevity to be the first bowler ever to break 500.

    He enjoyed success early in his career before being part of the decline of the once great West Indies. However, he was not to be blamed. His 519 wickets were defined by their quality right to the end.

    England's James Anderson (centre) celebrates with Moeen Ali after taking the wicket of West Indies Devendra Bishoo during day two of the the second Investec Test match at Headingley, Leeds. PRESS ASSOCIATION Photo. Picture date: Saturday August 26, 2017. See PA story CRICKET England. Photo credit should read: Nigel French/PA Wire.(Nigel French/PA Wire.)

    Is Jimmy Anderson in the same class as these bowlers?

    Let’s look at one stat that would support the ‘no’ vote:

    Glenn McGrath’s bowling average at home was 22.43, and away it was 21.35. Overall it was 21.64
    Courtney Walsh’s bowling average at home was 23.70 and away it was 25.03. Overall it was 24.44
    Jimmy Anderson’s bowling average at home is 24.29 but away it stands at 35.36. Overall it is 27.39

    Compared to the other two pacemen with 500 plus Test wickets, Anderson doesn’t match up on foreign soil. Thus, there is an argument that he isn’t in the same company as McGrath and Walsh.

    Now let’s look at a stat to support the ‘yes’ vote:

    Jimmy Anderson has taken 50 or more wickets against seven different nations. In a career that has spanned 14 years, he has played a lot, and achieved a lot.

    He has been a superb leader in home conditions, Virat Kohli will vouch for this. 20 of his 24 Test five hauls have been on home soil, and all three ten-wicket hauls have also been on his home turf.

    No matter your opinion of Jimmy Anderson, the 506 wickets he has already taken cannot be taken away from him. He stands as the sixth highest wicket-taker of all time. He has proven to be a super fit fast bowler, and a super competitive one.

    Is Jimmy Anderson a great fast bowler? It’s an opinion based question. He has led his team to victory in an away series against Australia before, and if he is able to do it again, it may just further add to his already impressive legacy.

    Have Your Say

    If not logged in, please enter your name and email before submitting your comment. Please review our comments policy before posting on the Roar.

    Oldest | Newest | Most Recent

    The Crowd Says (75)

    • October 5th 2017 @ 5:15am
      Phast Phil said | October 5th 2017 @ 5:15am | ! Report

      Would he make an all-time great English Team, ahead of Larwood, Trueman or Tyson.
      GIven that England has not had a truly great fast bowler in my lifetime, he is a great of the last 40 years, rather than an all-time great. LIke Courtney Walsh, he would not make a best ever for his country but needs respect for longevity. That may be a bit harsh on Courtney Walsh, but when you have the likes of Marshall, Holding, Roberts, Ambrose et al, the bar is set rather high.
      Warne, McGrath, Kumble and Murali all get in the best ever teams for their country. The other two wouldn’t. So he is an all-time exceptional bowler, but not quite in the top echelon.

      I actually thought a couple of months back that it was a good chance that Australia will be a tour too long. His form against the Windies was good, so I could well be wrong there.

      • October 5th 2017 @ 8:34am
        Onside said | October 5th 2017 @ 8:34am | ! Report

        To be considered Phil; Larwood , Trueman and Tyson were not subject to the current front foot rule.

        • October 5th 2017 @ 9:10am
          Pope Paul VII said | October 5th 2017 @ 9:10am | ! Report

          Not sure whether you mean Larwood, Trueman and Tyson would have been more or less advantaged. They weren’t long draggers I thought?

          • October 5th 2017 @ 9:43am
            Onside said | October 5th 2017 @ 9:43am | ! Report

            Seemed to be an advantage to be able to plonk the front foot a stride closer to the batsman.

            • October 5th 2017 @ 10:27am
              Pope Paul VII said | October 5th 2017 @ 10:27am | ! Report

              Probably. It seems the draggers reached their peak with the notorious Gordon Rorke in the late 50s and early 60s, leading to the rule change. His record was not great though. With a bit of effort I did find a quote saying Lindwall and Larwood dragged. Even slow bowlers like our Richie did. Nevertheless I reckon you could apply the adage of champs being champs in any era.

      • Roar Pro

        October 5th 2017 @ 9:21am
        Mike Huber said | October 5th 2017 @ 9:21am | ! Report

        Phast Phil

        Well said Phil.

        I would rate him the best swing bowler I have seen since Terry Alderman. In the right conditions Anderson is simply sublime. I have seen him many times on English wickets and he can move the ball in the air and off the seam better than any bowlers last 30 odd years. To take 500 test wickets in the era of batter friendly pitches, fields, boundaries and hitting technology is no mean feat – great bowler but not all -time great .

        • October 5th 2017 @ 1:36pm
          spruce moose said | October 5th 2017 @ 1:36pm | ! Report

          Alderman or Anderson better swing bowlers than Akram or Younis? Never. They swung the ball around corners, both ways, at will.

        • October 5th 2017 @ 9:08pm
          Azza said | October 5th 2017 @ 9:08pm | ! Report

          Richard Hadlee was a superior swing bowler to any of them, he is merely forgotten or underrated, due to where he comes from,had minimal support at the other end to keep pressure on, and if it wasn’t swinging he could still get batsman out, and in his era, ie, no 20/20 bs, the batsman didn’t gift their wicket to ridiculous shots!

          • Roar Pro

            October 5th 2017 @ 9:53pm
            Mike Huber said | October 5th 2017 @ 9:53pm | ! Report


            Hadlee was awesome with an incredible motor but did he really swing the ball massively ? I remember him as more of a wicket to wicket bowler who had phenomal accuracy , not swing . In a few ways there are a lot of similarities between Hadlee and McGrath – metronomic pin point craftsman .

      • October 5th 2017 @ 9:35am
        JohnB said | October 5th 2017 @ 9:35am | ! Report

        Would Kumble necessarily get in the all-time Indian team? I wouldn’t have thought he was a shoo-in. There’s a lot of competition for McGrath also, although he’d probably get in as the 3rd pace bowler.

        Has to be said however that the old saying of quantity having a quality all of its own does come to mind in this context. You really can’t be other than very very good to have taken 500+ wickets.

        Whether you’re an all-time great starts to become a question of definition. In the case of Anderson, to me no, to most English observers yes.

      • October 5th 2017 @ 1:44pm
        matth said | October 5th 2017 @ 1:44pm | ! Report

        Phil, what about Alec Bedser as your third seamer there? I guess you have Botham as an allrounder so maybe Bedser wouldn’t be needed, but he was excellent.

      • October 7th 2017 @ 2:47pm
        Brendon said | October 7th 2017 @ 2:47pm | ! Report

        Botham, Underwood and Willis better than Anderson.

    • October 5th 2017 @ 5:54am
      Homer Gain said | October 5th 2017 @ 5:54am | ! Report

      Phast Phil is spot. Like Courtney Walsh, Anderson deserves the utmost credit without ranking amongst the greats. That said, over my 40 odd years of watching English cricket how many genuinely “great” bowlers could I point too? Too young to see Statham and Trueman, perhaps Derek Underwood really only makes that grade in my time. Oh and you can delete Murali from your list; however nice a guy he is, the fact remains that he broke the rules which were then bent further than his arm to accommodate him.

      • October 5th 2017 @ 6:25am
        ozinsa said | October 5th 2017 @ 6:25am | ! Report

        Give the Murali bashing a rest. He played in an era of intense scrutiny and took 800 test wickets. That people didn’t like his action is irrelevant. He’s a great of the game.

        Anderson is bloody good (in England) but I’m glad he’s going to Oz for the Ashes. He hasn’t taken wickets there before and won’t again. They start the series a fast bowler down and with Stokes out they simply don’t have the firepower to win the series.

        Maybe he’ll have an impact in the pink ball match?

        • October 5th 2017 @ 8:49am
          jameswm said | October 5th 2017 @ 8:49am | ! Report

          The rules were changed to make Murali legal. He was previously illegal, but rarely called.

          Such is life. He’s a terrific person.

          But I’m afraid there will always be an asterisk next to his name.

      • October 5th 2017 @ 8:24am
        Simoc said | October 5th 2017 @ 8:24am | ! Report

        Anderson seems to think he has another 100 test wickets in him. In favorable conditions, he is a great bowler but here in Australia and on the subcontinent, he doesn’t get those favorable conditions. I like to think great bowlers average over 4 wickets taken per test match played and Anderson doesn’t.

      • October 5th 2017 @ 9:11am
        Pope Paul VII said | October 5th 2017 @ 9:11am | ! Report

        John Snow was pretty handy, a bit before your time maybe?

        • October 5th 2017 @ 11:16am
          Phast Phil said | October 5th 2017 @ 11:16am | ! Report

          Yes, he was before my time at least from an awareness. I was 7-8 for the 78-70 Ashes, that was my first memory where AB came on the seam.

          • October 5th 2017 @ 11:52am
            Don Freo said | October 5th 2017 @ 11:52am | ! Report

            Snow and Truman were terrific. Snow is England’s greatest.

            The early mention of Larwood was interesting. One series can hype anyone.

            Jimmy has the greatest longevity. I wonder what the greatest Pom side of all time would be. Would Beefy get a gsme? I can’t imagine Jimmy would.

            • October 5th 2017 @ 1:47pm
              matth said | October 5th 2017 @ 1:47pm | ! Report

              Snow better than Truman? Tough call. He was excellent and unfairly treated at times.
              Tyson was a bit like Larwood in that he had a couple of amazing series. But LArwood after Bodyline was pretty much excluded from the team for political reasons.

            • Roar Pro

              October 5th 2017 @ 7:59pm
              Mike Huber said | October 5th 2017 @ 7:59pm | ! Report

              Snow was no where near the great fast bowler Trueman was , not even close !

              Freddy was genuinely terrifying and bowled long spells without ever dropping his pace . If Freddy had not come from Yorkshire he would be rightly heralded as one of England’s greatest ever sportsman . The Toffs at Lords hated him because he was a Northerner who always spoke his mind . In many ways, he was the antithesis of an English Gentleman back then and the prawn sandwich brigade begrudged him . Trueman was a great, great bowler in the same vein as Dennis Lillee .

      • October 5th 2017 @ 1:45pm
        matth said | October 5th 2017 @ 1:45pm | ! Report

        Homer, would you have Botham as a great bowler? He was irresistable in his early days before injuries slowed him down.

        • Roar Pro

          October 5th 2017 @ 10:08pm
          Mike Huber said | October 5th 2017 @ 10:08pm | ! Report

          No bowler in the history of cricket has bowled so much shi$ and taken as many wickets . Half of beefy’s wickets were accumulated through balls a meter outside off stump – thumped to third man, cover, point , extra cover, long off. Most batsman always had a swipe at his bowling because they genuinely didn’t like him.

        • October 10th 2017 @ 6:53am
          Homer Gain said | October 10th 2017 @ 6:53am | ! Report

          Beefy was a great all-rounder but perhaps only a very good bowler.

    • Roar Guru

      October 5th 2017 @ 8:19am
      Chris Kettlewell said | October 5th 2017 @ 8:19am | ! Report

      Agree with the other two, although Walsh’s averages are significantly superior to Anderson, Anderson can probably be compared to Walsh in a lot of ways. If you lined up the best fast bowlers from England in their prime and asked who you’d least like to face, Anderson would be well down the list, as would Walsh for the West Indies, but some credit certainly has to be given for longevity.

      Anderson is the sort of bowler who excels in certain conditions. When the conditions are in his favour he becomes lethal. But outside of those conditions he can become little more than a trundler. That’s the difference with the real great fast bowlers, not only were they lethal when conditions suited them, but they could still make things hard for batsmen and find ways to take wickets when conditions didn’t. To me, that is what sets the great fast bowlers apart from the rest, and that is why Anderson won’t fall into the all-time great category.

      In some ways, that is also where the Anderson – Walsh comparison breaks down. I’d say Walsh wasn’t the bowler who’d threaten to tear a batting lineup apart when the conditions suited, in fact, in those sorts of conditions he might not get a lot of wickets because Ambrose would have taken them all at the other end. But Walsh was always steady, never gave you much, kept it tight and just kept picking up wickets in all conditions, hence still having reasonably even home and away records.

      • October 5th 2017 @ 11:37am
        George said | October 5th 2017 @ 11:37am | ! Report

        Is Warne not a great for always struggling In India? Same with Ponting?

        • Roar Guru

          October 5th 2017 @ 1:16pm
          Chris Kettlewell said | October 5th 2017 @ 1:16pm | ! Report

          It’s certainly a blot on Warne’s record, no doubt, but it’s about the only blot, while Anderson only has England, UAE and West Indies as the only places he averages under 30. And he’s played nearly 60% of his tests at home, by virtue of England often playing more home tests in a summer than most other countries. (By contrast, Warne played less than half his test matches at home!)

          The Walsh example is a good one. While he was a very good bowler, if you were picking a team and had the likes of Walsh, Ambrose, Marshall, Holding, Garner, Roberts, would Walsh even get a look in? Probably not. And the same probably goes for Anderson.

          So how do you define great? Longevity is certainly a big thing, especially for fast bowlers. To be able to maintain a high standard over a long period of time is a major thing. For Anderson to be able to play more tests than any other fast bowler for England is a major achievement. But when comparing to fast bowlers of the past, a lot of that just comes down to more matches being played than back in the old days.

          Of course, when comparing to the older guys people often have rose coloured glasses too. Pitches are often much better for batting these days, so a bowler who managed to average 21 50+ years ago, may have been no better than a bowler averaging 28 now.

          But when it comes down to it, application of the term “great” is such a subjective thing. When Anderson has been retired for a decade or two, people will probably look back on him as one of England’s “great fast bowlers”. But for most people now, there’s this gut feeling we can’t call him great because bowlers we really feel that term applies to generally are more consistently good across a range of conditions and opposition, and the feeling with Anderson is that he just hasn’t been.

        • October 5th 2017 @ 1:53pm
          matth said | October 5th 2017 @ 1:53pm | ! Report

          It’s interesting with Warne and Ponting,both with underwhelming records in India but in Asia overall, Pontings is pretty good (around 41) and Warne’s is very good (around 26). Tells you that it was not just the conditions, but a combination of the conditions and some players that matched up very well against them.

      • October 5th 2017 @ 1:43pm
        spruce moose said | October 5th 2017 @ 1:43pm | ! Report

        I think Anderson’s statistical record suffers a bit because of his very ordinary start to his career.

        A deeper analysis shows his first 20 tests were rubbish, but he has been a figure of excellence since about 2008.

        That he has averaged under 24 since he turned 30 has to be given some weight.

        • Roar Guru

          October 5th 2017 @ 1:51pm
          The Bush said | October 5th 2017 @ 1:51pm | ! Report

          That’s actually pretty interesting and a good argument.

        • Roar Pro

          October 6th 2017 @ 7:44am
          Mike Huber said | October 6th 2017 @ 7:44am | ! Report


          Good point . I remember Anderson in his formative tears running around with dyed pink/red hair – summed up his early career.

      • Roar Guru

        October 5th 2017 @ 1:55pm
        The Bush said | October 5th 2017 @ 1:55pm | ! Report


        I dunno if it is actually entirely fair to compare Anderson and Walsh. Sure, Walsh wouldn’t make the top five fast bowlers of his team’s history, but that’s because he plays for the greatest fast bowling nation ever. The same could be said for Kumble, but with spin.

        In contrast, Anderson plays for a country that wouldn’t rank in the top three for fast bowlers (behind us, Windies and Pakistan) and that is only because South Africa was banned for so long – they’d probably have more fast bowlers of merit by now than England, but for that. Yet despite playing for a weak fast bowling nation, we’re still sitting here talking about how he wouldn’t make it into their top line up.

        That gap between Anderson at home and away is, for a guy that people are trying to debate is an all time great is shocking.

        • Roar Guru

          October 5th 2017 @ 2:03pm
          The Bush said | October 5th 2017 @ 2:03pm | ! Report

          Anderson’s run gap between his average is 11 runs. Using that gap between home and away, you can see that compared to some of the guys beneath him (fast bowlers), he’s not in the ball park:

          Dev – 6 runs difference;
          Adlee – 1 run; and
          Pollock – 4 runs.

          The first guy I come across (fast bowler) that he’s in line with is Ntini on 13 runs.

          For reference in England:

          Botham – 2 runs; and
          Broad – 6 run.

        • October 5th 2017 @ 3:06pm
          spruce moose said | October 5th 2017 @ 3:06pm | ! Report

          “That gap between Anderson at home and away is, for a guy that people are trying to debate is an all time great is shocking.”

          True, and it is very unusual for a bowler to have such a disparity.

          That said, he’s not the first cricketer to have such a disparate H/A average difference and be talked of as a great…

    • Roar Guru

      October 5th 2017 @ 8:32am
      Ryan H said | October 5th 2017 @ 8:32am | ! Report

      Statistics probably say yes. He’s an extremely skillful bowler and always has been – yet the fact he has often been ineffective in Australia, and that he’s really getting on (35) means I could see him struggling in the away Ashes

      • Roar Guru

        October 5th 2017 @ 1:20pm
        Chris Kettlewell said | October 5th 2017 @ 1:20pm | ! Report

        If it was just Australia, that would probably not be enough to drop him off the “great” list. Just as Warne is safely there despite struggling against India. He only averages under 30 in England, UAE and West Indies. That’s it. Everywhere else he averages over 30. In conditions where the ball is swinging around everywhere he can be extremely dangerous. (Mind you, I do find it interesting that batsmen at that level so struggle to pick the inswinger with the new ball as I think he has an obviously different shoulder action to bowl the inswinger, so it should be reasonably easy to pick. I can generally pick it pretty easily from behind, wouldn’t think it would be too hard to pick from in front. Reverse swinging the old ball is different, that will swing both ways with no change in action!)

    • October 5th 2017 @ 8:54am
      jameswm said | October 5th 2017 @ 8:54am | ! Report


      In 2/3 series in Australia, he was poor. In the 3rd, he had 2 or 3 good tests.

      Pretty hard for an Aussie to rate him that highly. I think Broad is better.

      • October 6th 2017 @ 1:52pm
        Johnno said | October 6th 2017 @ 1:52pm | ! Report

        Doing well vs Australia is not the measurement whether your great or not.. The Australian side is not like the great West Indies sides never has been wake up…

        • October 6th 2017 @ 2:16pm
          Jake said | October 6th 2017 @ 2:16pm | ! Report

          If an Australian team has never been as good as the West Indies then he should do very well against them but he hasn’t. wake up

    • October 5th 2017 @ 9:00am
      jameswm said | October 5th 2017 @ 9:00am | ! Report

      Oh Patto.

      I guess we’re relying on the big 3 more now. Patto was in super hot form in England, with bat and ball.

      If one of the big 3 can’t play a test, who is next? Bird? Sayers? Behrendorff? One of those 3 surely?

      A big step down from Pattinson.

      • Roar Guru

        October 5th 2017 @ 9:27am
        JamesH said | October 5th 2017 @ 9:27am | ! Report

        I guess it depends on who they’re replacing. Patto would have been ideal to replace either Starc or Cummins if they broke down, but if it’s Hazlewood that gets injured then those three (probably in that order) would be better suited to filling Josh’s role than Patto would.

      • October 5th 2017 @ 11:35am
        BurgyGreen said | October 5th 2017 @ 11:35am | ! Report

        I’m devastated. Honestly, I think he’s the most talented of the Big Four – with ball and bat.

        My pick would be Behrendorff, although Test selectors seem to have an aversion to playing more than one left-armer.

        • October 5th 2017 @ 12:35pm
          jameswm said | October 5th 2017 @ 12:35pm | ! Report

          Yeah if his bating developed overt the next 2 years he could become a legit test no.7, and if you have a keeper who can bat, that does amazing things to our test team. Imagine Stokes, but batting more consistently and as good a bowler as Anderson or Broad. That’s what we potentially could have had.

        • Roar Guru

          October 5th 2017 @ 12:51pm
          Chris Kettlewell said | October 5th 2017 @ 12:51pm | ! Report

          Yeah, never got the left-arm aversion. I’ve never seen anyone have an aversion to selecting a bowling attack where all the bowlers are right-arm bowlers, yet having more than one lefty seems to be something people struggle with. Just pick the best available bowling lineup, if that means more lefties then pick them.

          • October 6th 2017 @ 7:29am
            dangertroy said | October 6th 2017 @ 7:29am | ! Report

            I don’t know the selectors do have an aversion to picking 2 left armers – Johnson and Starc played together for almost a year leading up to Johnson’s retirement, including the entire 2015 ashes series.
            I think if 2 of our best 3 pace bowlers were lefties they would pick them, they are just less common than right armers, which is why the side always seems stacked with them.
            I also don’t think we should automatically pick a left armer for ‘variety’.

      • October 5th 2017 @ 12:52pm
        Don Freo said | October 5th 2017 @ 12:52pm | ! Report

        Behrendorff and NCN. I’d say Bird is way down the pecking order now that the other quicks are fit and Sayers needs a ball that moves or he becomes fodder.

        • October 5th 2017 @ 1:58pm
          matth said | October 5th 2017 @ 1:58pm | ! Report

          The two Western Australians. What a surprise!
          I pretty much agree, especially if they both start the season well. I think NCN has been back in the pack due to injuries, and surely everyone wants to one day see how good Behrendorff could be.
          However, Bird has a good test record whenever he’s been call on.
          Dark horse is the old banana eater himself, Peter Siddle. He is fit and at least based on the limited overs stuff so far this year, he is firing. He would be a reliable back up.

          • October 5th 2017 @ 2:44pm
            Don Freo said | October 5th 2017 @ 2:44pm | ! Report

            Siddle was very ordinary in the first game against The Warriors.

            • Roar Pro

              October 5th 2017 @ 5:10pm
              Andy Hill said | October 5th 2017 @ 5:10pm | ! Report

              He conceded 18 in the first over, but after that bowled very well. Also bowled well in the recent game against TAS.

              If he has a good start to the Shield, he could be considered as a backup to Hazlewood.

              • October 5th 2017 @ 7:07pm
                Don Freo said | October 5th 2017 @ 7:07pm | ! Report

                Behrendorff, NCN (both swing it more than Siddle), Sayers, Bird, Mennie, …virtually the whole world…are ahead of Carrot Power Pete. 6 West Australians for a start.

              • Roar Pro

                October 6th 2017 @ 12:00am
                Andy Hill said | October 6th 2017 @ 12:00am | ! Report

                6 West Australians! Is that because of their vast test match experience? Oh wait, none of the WA fast bowlers have any test match experience.

                Siddle should not be ruled out. If Starc or Cummins went down, then I would replace with NCN, Behrendorff or Tremain. But Hazlewood plays a different role. If he went down, I would consider Bird, Sayers or Siddle, depending on who shows the best form and fitness in the opening 3 shield games

        • October 5th 2017 @ 3:36pm
          Mike Dugg said | October 5th 2017 @ 3:36pm | ! Report

          Will those two stay fit Don?

          • October 5th 2017 @ 4:42pm
            Nudge said | October 5th 2017 @ 4:42pm | ! Report

            NCN I reckon. Never rated him that highly but geez he was impressive in India. He was operating in the 140’s immaculate line and length with some good out swing. Reminded me a touch of Ryan Harris.

            • October 5th 2017 @ 6:29pm
              Don Freo said | October 5th 2017 @ 6:29pm | ! Report

              He always has bowled like that.

            • Roar Guru

              October 6th 2017 @ 8:56am
              Ryan H said | October 6th 2017 @ 8:56am | ! Report

              Realy wish NCN was about to turn 20 and not 30. Still some time for him to make more inroads at international level

          • October 5th 2017 @ 6:32pm
            Don Freo said | October 5th 2017 @ 6:32pm | ! Report

            NCN’s injury issue was mainly the shoulder injury coming from an impact when diving in the field. That’s not vulnerable soft tissue stuff. He had a tweak after that but he is one strong boy.

            Behrendorff’s injury has just been one injury…not a series of them. His action is so fluent, I would hope he will be fine.

            It doesn’t really matter, though. If one bowler is injured, we just replace them with the next. There is such a wonderful wealth of fast bowling at the moment.

    , , ,