Is it really necessary to love the A? @Neptune to confirm... ?Love me, love my Jimmy A.
Let’s not compensate for under rating by over rating. He was effective and benefitted from the kind of support Anderson never had.No way that Anderson comes anywhere near Walsh. Walsh in general an underrated bowler.
Better Jimmy's A than his sour face tbhIs it really necessary to love the A? @Neptune to confirm... ?
Glad that you realized that. But how did you ever think otherwise? Waqar is an undisputed ATG.I never realized how great Waqar's stats were. Never would have really considered him an ATG but he definitely looks the part upon review
Missed his peak I guess. definitely know better nowGlad that you realized that. But how did you ever think otherwise? Waqar is an undisputed ATG.
Yeah but McGrath was more effective in England too thoNot some of what I'm reading. I'm reading that he's inferior to Player X, Y, Z because he is condition reliant. My take is these guys are different bowlers to him therefore perform differently, therefore my idea to explain why the comparison doesn't work. His major effectiveness is his condition reliant bowling, which if he changed would make him a much less effective bowler overall given he plays 50% of his tests in England, is not express pace nor is he overly tall.
Even Anderson acknowledged that when he passed McGrath's record for the most wickets by a quick.Don't think anyone's claiming that he's as good as McGrath in any conditions tbf
He also has a far more well rounded record and was far more successful against the best teams of his time. Simple look at their home and away records really spells out the difference between them tbh.Let’s not compensate for under rating by over rating. He was effective and benefitted from the kind of support Anderson never had.
During Jimmy's peak (2014-18) Jimmy took 225 wickets at 21.49.... During this period he averaged sub 30 in Australia and New Zealand and sub 20 in England, UAE and Windies....Anderson at his best is closer to Waqar at non-peak than Waqar at his peak and Waqar's peak lasted for five years.
Even if you consider Waqar's best decade which is usually what Anderson's 'good' period is considered to be, Waqar averaged around 21 with 5pm over the 90s. The idea that they are comparable is nonsense imo.
Now do Waqar 90-94.During Jimmy's peak (2014-18) Jimmy took 225 wickets at 21.49.... During this period he averaged sub 30 in Australia and New Zealand and sub 20 in England, UAE and Windies....
A peak of 4-5 years means all those averages are probably from just one tour to each of those places. Not sure you can glean much from that.During Jimmy's peak (2014-18) Jimmy took 225 wickets at 21.49.... During this period he averaged sub 30 in Australia and New Zealand and sub 20 in England, UAE and Windies....
The filter also cuts off the first four tests of the 2013-14 series where he averaged 44 overall and includes the SCG match which was on a bowling friendly pitch IIRCA peak of 4-5 years means all those averages are probably from just one tour to each of those places. Not sure you can glean much from that.