Jimmy Anderson: Imminent revival or terminal decline?

[Hooksey]

Yeah. Often 2nd innings bowling in these situations are entirely meaningless - as has been the case in basically all three Tests before this one (4th innings are never meaningless). The English bowling as a unit has done its job, their main problem has been their inability to dislodge Haddin and the tail.

Anderson-Broad-____ should still run rampant against most sides at home.

England's biggest problem with the Aussie batting has probably been Haddin and the partnerships he has been part of.

However, if we look through the Aussie batting lineup in batting order they have been pretty solid - barring perhaps Smith & Bailey - and a long way better than their English counterparts:

1 Warner 491 runs at 70.1
2 Rogers 333 runs at 41.6
3 Watson 293 runs at 41.9
4 Clarke 347 runs at 49.6
5 Smith 205 runs at 34.2
6 Bailey 136 runs at 27.2
7 Haddin 390 runs at 65.0
8 Johnson 149 runs at 37.3
9 Siddle 34 runs at 8.5
10 Harris 82 runs at 27.3
11. Lyon 53 runs and not dismissed yet.

[3703]

Anyone who thinks Anderson needs to be mindful of his place in the side is an idiot, frankly.

Agreed, there's no way he'll be dropped. He'll be in the wickets again at home.

[Spark]

6/135, 5/240, 5/140, 5/120 is not my idea of "solid". My concern is first innings runs here.

[MrPrez]

knee.gif
Kevin-Pietersen_10.jpg

[Hooksey]

6/135, 5/240, 5/140, 5/120 is not my idea of "solid". My concern is first innings runs here.

2nd innings runs are worth one run just like 1st innings runs are.

Have a look through the English figures. Pietersen has their highest series average and about 6 of the Aussies exceed it.

[Spark]

You're not actually trying to argue that 2nd innings runs when you have a massive lead already are worth an equal amount to 1st innings runs, are you?

Come on. This is a pretty simple point that is being made here, and rehashing statistics which everyone can see is not exactly a counterargument.

[GIMH]

Jesus

[the big bambino]

You'd be surprised if you got an answer to that post.

[Ponting is King]

They should ditch the dud now.

[wpdavid]

I don't think anyone is seriously suggesting he should be asked to call it a day. But it's also pretty disingenuous to pretend that there isn't a longish term trend here, albeit not to the extent that we've seen over the last 4 tests. Even allowing for the reasons behind his 2nd innings performances, that doesn't explain his impotence in the first innings, and 4 out of the 5 tests in England.

Yes, I'd keep him for our home tests against SL and India in 2014. But I don't think Aus will be worried about the prospect of facing him in 2015.

[FBU]

England have not been able to bowl dry to create any pressure. A plan to go after Swann worked and he's gone home. Finn was dropped in 2010 because he was too expensive. We only created pressure in the 1st innings at Melbourne. Field placings not helping either. Dropped catches. Broad got most of his wickets at Brisbane bouncing out players and going for runs. England didn't just bowl as a unit. Anderson bowling more as a stock bowler and trying to cut down runs and having only 2 slips when most of his wickets have been caught keeper/slips.

Econ Rates 10/11 - 2013
Broad 2.30 - 3.56
Bresnan 2.60 -3.29
Anderson 2.93 - 3.24
Swann 2.72 - 3.94
Finn 4.30 - Stokes 3.80

[wiff]

They should ditch the dud now.

A bit harsh on Hooksey, he's just trying to say that 90% of statistics are good 50% of the time.

[Tangles]

Doesn't understand their context though.

[wiff]

Doesn't understand their context though.

Maybe you're not getting my context?

[Furball]

60% of the time, it works every time.