-
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.
A comparison of seam bowlers with 700 Test wickets
- Thread starter GIMH
- Start date
RossTaylorsBox
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Anderson far and away the worst of them.
OverratedSanity
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Wow what a loser
Hungry Llama
Cricket Spectator
Hes the oldest as well. Past it? Probably.
CricAddict
Cricketer Of The Year
Anderson is the worst seam bowler ever in 100+ years of test history to take 700+ wickets.
_00_deathscar
International Regular
And the best
But crucially, he’s also the worst for 600 and 500.
Think he might not be the worst for 400, and definitely not for 300.
Coronis
Cricketer Of The Year
_00_deathscar
International Regular
I forgot that ****er had taken so many wickets. ****.
CricAddict
Cricketer Of The Year
Is Kapil a HTB in your opinion?
Sunil1z
International Regular
Anderson is definitely better than Kapil even if it is marginally.
GIMH
Norwood's on Fire
As bowlers it’s not marginal
Sunil1z
International Regular
Lol . How much did he average in the recent Ashes series and current Indian series?
Red_Ink_Squid
Cricketer Of The Year
Took more wickets in them than Kapil iirc.
Owzat
U19 Captain
good but not great wickets per Test, most top bowlers retire well before longevity gives them records of "most" but recency effect will mean he's placed in lofty standing against better English bowlers.....
Owzat
U19 Captain
seen a dig at Bairstow, "worst player ever to reach 100 caps" - you don't get to 100 caps by being a terrible player, he may not be as great as most or all but it's a rather silly way of swiping at JB - and he played more innings as a batsman keeper than just batsman, being moved up and down the order, given gloves and then taken away etc was bound to knock his average a bit.
averages 38 at #5 and #6 as a Batsman, 40 at #6 and #7 as a keeper, for those can't come to terms with WHY he got picked a lot....
may take a few decades before anyone plays like 20 (?) years as a quick and gets 600 let alone 700 Test wickets, very good bowler no doubt but 3.74 wickets per Test average shows longevity has been more of a factor than brilliance, sure he has his Tests where he rips up sides but "only" 32 5wi and a more telling/lacking THREE 10wm is a Test-ament to that
Botham 27x 5wi and 4x 10wm (in 85 less Tests)
Hadlee 36x 5wi and 9x 10wm (in 101 less Tests)
Steyn 26x 5wi and 5x 10wm (in 94 less Tests)
could probably go on, find a lot more who would have got to 700 had they played for 20+ years, not forgetting injury 'fortune' that playing 20+ years and 9.5 Tests a year average takes durability, his type probably helped ie not out and out pace
Sunil1z
International Regular
Woakes took more wickets than both
Socerer 01
International Captain
are you related to Bairstow or someone close to him?
even in a thread that has nothing to do with him you end up sucking him off with half baked statistics that hide more than they reveal
Coronis
Cricketer Of The Year
I would consider a batsman who averages 10+ more at home or a bowler who averages 5+ less at home to be a HTB.
This ofc doesn’t preclude them from having an excellent record - e.g I would call Sobers a HTB technically, but he still has a great away record.