• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Ryan Sidebottom

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Whoever would have thought, back in 2001, when he made his Test debut despite there being 4, 5, even 6, better seam-bowlers at his own county, that he'd one day be (maybe) on the road to becoming the country's leading seam-bowler?

I certainly wouldn't have.

Yet if he can replicate the success of his most recent Test season and ODI series (or at least the last 4 games), that'll be exactly what he'll have done.

And yet at one time there were Goughs, Silverwoods, Hamiltons, Whites, Hoggards, even Hutchisons, who were superior bowlers. Amazing to look at the contrasting fates if Sidebottom does indeed manage to become the next Angus Fraser.
 

jammay123

State 12th Man
he is very good and has come on leaps and bounds but i reckon hes still behind hoggard, anderson and flintoff as englands best seamer and harmison is better when he is firing
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
If Flintoff ever gets back on the park for more than 5 minutes again in his career then we can start counting him again.

And I honestly think Sidebottom, with that bit of extra height and greater consistency of length, has it in him to be better than Hoggard. I'd certainly already have him > Anderson on the evidence of last summer.

I'll leave the Harmison question this time. :)
 

jammay123

State 12th Man
sidebottom will never be better than hoggard. hoggard has been consistently englands best seamer for a long time now and just because he has missed a summer everyone seems to forget just how good he was. and i disagree with you regarding anderson having a worse summer than sidebootom. i think that sidebottom only performed better than anderson in the odi series against sri lanka and if anderson played in the matches against the west indies he would have filled his boots with wickets just like sidebottom did.
 

skipper

School Boy/Girl Captain
Well, I have my reservations on this bowler. He may be quite good on swing bowler assisting pitches but will come up a cropper on flat pitches.
 

Neil Pickup

Cricket Web Moderator
Well, I have my reservations on this bowler. He may be quite good on swing bowler assisting pitches but will come up a cropper on flat pitches.
All of which convincingly explains why he has been almost unfailingly the best of England's seam attack no matter what the pitch or overhead conditions.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Well, I have my reservations on this bowler. He may be quite good on swing bowler assisting pitches but will come up a cropper on flat pitches.
The whole reason swing-bowling is so useful is because it has nothing to do with the pitch. Sidebottom has bowled excellently on flat pitches by his use of swing - in both directions.

Let's hope his reverse-swing is as good as his conventional.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
sidebottom will never be better than hoggard. hoggard has been consistently englands best seamer for a long time now and just because he has missed a summer everyone seems to forget just how good he was. and i disagree with you regarding anderson having a worse summer than sidebootom. i think that sidebottom only performed better than anderson in the odi series against sri lanka and if anderson played in the matches against the west indies he would have filled his boots with wickets just like sidebottom did.
As regards Anderson - the only time last summer in Tests that Anderson bowled really well was the first-innings at Lord's - he also gave a pretty good account of himself in the second-innings at The Oval. Sidebottom, meanwhile, almost always offered a threat - even when he didn't take wickets (which he only really did to great effect at Headingley and Lord's) he always looked like he could pretty much any minute, and could justly be called extremely unfortunate, more than ever in the Old Trafford game. Sidebottom's consistency of length, too, has always been far better than Anderson's.

As regards Hoggard - I certainly haven't forgotten how good he is, but I also haven't forgotten how good he isn't. It's well-known that your stock tends to rise most in your absence, and while he'd almost certainly have enjoyed himself this summer, possibly more than at any time in his career as for the first time since he became a Test regular England played in proper English conditions with a proper English ball.

Nonetheless, Hoggard is no superman - his control of length (especially - but line too) does go missing of times, something that has rarely to date happened with Sidebottom. He has also always had the problem of being fairly short for a seam-bowler, as Darren Gough did before him, meaning his length always has to be spot-on to be neither driveable or pullable. Now, Hoggard's control is usually good, but rarely exceptional. Sidebottom's control seems to me to be even better, and as I say he has the advantage of the extra few inches of height and decidedly longer arms, meaning he has greater margin-for-error in length.
 

Goughy

Hall of Fame Member
Nonetheless, Hoggard is no superman - his control of length (especially - but line too) does go missing of times, something that has rarely to date happened with Sidebottom. He has also always had the problem of being fairly short for a seam-bowler, as Darren Gough did before him, meaning his length always has to be spot-on to be neither driveable or pullable.
Would point out here that Hoggard is not little and is considerabley bigger than Gough.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Would point out here that Hoggard is not little and is considerabley bigger than Gough.
Yep, but 6"2' is hardly massive for a seam-bowler, and that's what Hoggard and Anderson are. Hoggard especially is also fairly short-limbed. All three are tiny compared to a Fraser or Caddick.

Sidebottom is 6"4' and also has longer arms.
 

funnygirl

State Regular
Sidebottom is a good prospect . He bowled extremely well against India ,again those figures(stats didn't tell the whole story ).
 

headhunter

International Vice-Captain
Dont know much about him before this summer but was very consistant througout the WI and India serise.Looks like he has made he way onto the 1st XI and another good series should really put him up there as a quality bowler.
 

NZTailender

I can't believe I ate the whole thing
I don't think of Sidebottom as a "replacement" for the injured English seamsters anymore. For mine, he should be part of the top 5 (if you include an all-rounder) English bowlers in the country.
 

FBU

International Debutant
There have not been many left arm bowlers in the last 10 years but suddenly we have RP Singh, Khan, Bracken, Johnson, Franklin, Pathan, Tanvir, etc.

Captains like having the left/right hand opening batsmen and now they are having more left/right arm opening bowlers as well. I can see Sidebottom being around for a while but he won't be going on and getting 400 wickets. Although he has his height and accuracy it is still his first year and as Anderson found out batsmen do get to know your bowling and after that it becomes much harder but I think Sidebottom will always have good economy and be first choice because of his difference.

Richard, don't forget Anderson is 5 years younger but Sidebottom at the same age in first class cricket

Anderson 66 matches - 228 wickets at 29.56 econ 3.51 s/r 50.40
Sidebottom 51 matches - 131 wickets at 25.05 econ 2.84 s/r 52.90

(Anderson 51 matches 190 wickets at 27.11 econ 3.49 s/r 46.48)
 

shortpitched713

International Captain
The whole reason swing-bowling is so useful is because it has nothing to do with the pitch.
DWTA. Different pitches wear the ball differently and thus may make it harder to keep the shine on one side. In addition some may wear the ball more and make it more conducive to reverse swing. Pitch has almost as much to do with swing bowling as atmospheric conditions, imo.
 

Craig

World Traveller
DWTA. Different pitches wear the ball differently and thus may make it harder to keep the shine on one side. In addition some may wear the ball more and make it more conducive to reverse swing. Pitch has almost as much to do with swing bowling as atmospheric conditions, imo.
TBH I was surprised Goughy missed that, unless he agrees :wacko:
 

Top