james anderson averages 35 with the kookaburra

[Fuller Pilch]

He's obviously a pretty decent bowler (quite probably one of the top 10 of the last decade), but lots of Poms go on like he's one of the top 10 of all time.

 

[Red_Ink_Squid]

lots of Poms go on like he's one of the top 10 of all time.

Do they really though? His teammates do because they're his teammates. Michael Vaughan does because he's a compulsive liar. I don't think anyone on here ever talks like that, except maybe occasionally for banter.

 

[GIMH]

(quite probably one of the top 10 of the last decade)

I mean it's this sort of comment that just prods the reactions. The idea that it's anything other than definitive he's been one of the very best in the last decade is laughable and yet we get it worded in this way.

It's a bit odd really.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Do they really though? His teammates do because they're his teammates. Michael Vaughan does because he's a compulsive liar. I don't think anyone on here ever talks like that, except maybe occasionally for banter.

I reckon GIMH might claim he's top 10 of all time

 

[GIMH]

wrong

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

Longevity is something you should count for a player - not against them. It's why LeBron has a very good case to be the best basketball player of all time. Regardless of the advancements in medical treatment - to play at the very highest level of your chosen discipline for nearly 20 years is something to be lauded, and should count in your favour when discussing your rankings in the pantheon. The mental strength it takes to do that is beyond most people.

 

[Adders]

He's obviously a pretty decent bowler (quite probably one of the top 10 of the last decade), but lots of Poms go on like he's one of the top 10 of all time.

Yeah as GIMH just said, this is the **** that get's the reaction. Dire ****ing post.

I doubt there is any English fan on this forum that would say Jimmy is top 10 of all time. We keep hearing how we "Poms" keep claiming he's ATG category but it's fundamentally untrue (here I'm talking about)

But "quite probably" top 10 of the decade??? Get in the bin.

 

[cnerd123]

Top 10 of the decade? Anderson is the 4th leading wicket taker of all time and number 1 amongst pace bowlers.

Slice and dice those stats all you want, you can't take that away from him. Remarkable achievement. Legend.

 

[Adders]

Always loved you nerd

 

[honestbharani]

A great bowler with a great career, not quite ATG but definitely the level below it and probably on the upper end of that level too.

 

[trundler]

I mean it's this sort of comment that just prods the reactions. The idea that it's anything other than definitive he's been one of the very best in the last decade is laughable and yet we get it worded in this way.

It's a bit odd really.

It's what makes the Pilch method of subtle trolling way more effective than Flem's brashness.

 

[Adders]

A great bowler with a great career, not quite ATG but definitely the level below it and probably on the upper end of that level too.

This.

Plenty of names you can put in the mix of that tier below and plenty of ways you can rank them, but he's there and any of the antipodean muppets that want to argue otherwise are just, well......muppets tbh.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Let's be real though, you probably could name a few bowlers in the 2010s who were as good or arguably better than Jimmy at any given point, but didn't have his longevity. Depends on the metrics you choose to give weight to. Not sure about 10 though.

Just playing devil's advocate, obviously he's a great of the game for several reasons.

 

[Adders]

It's what makes the Pilch method of subtle trolling way more effective than Flem's brashness.

I don't know Pilch well enough to comment so take his post at face value, I don't see the troll effort there at all tbh.

Phlegm however, is blatant, is diabolically poor.......but he always has been, for some very odd reason we still seem to love him, got me ****ed why but there ya go.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Just for lols:
Harris - definitely better when on the field, but horrific fitness
Steyn - definitely better, not quite as long a career
Mohammad Asif - probably better, but a ****
Boult & Southee - don't think they're as good but Kiwi posters will disagree
Wagner - as above
Philander - not as good, even more conditions reliant and faked injuries to get away from roads
Johnson - not as good except for a very brief period
Broad - pretty close, hard to split the too on form

*edit*:
Cummins - probably better, still in progress
Hazlewood - had his own thread v Anderson

@FullerPilch who are the other ones (edit: that's 11, but at least half of them are objectively worse than Jimmy IMO)

 

[trundler]

Let's be real though, you probably could name a few bowlers in the 2010s who were as good or arguably better than Jimmy at any given point, but didn't have his longevity. Depends on the metrics you choose to give weight to. Not sure about 10 though.

Just playing devil's advocate, obviously he's a great of the game for several reasons.

I saw the entirety of the SL summer in 2018 when Jimmeh was outbowled by Stokes. In the same season Vern Philander was reduced to being a hopeless containing bowler. I recall that there was an expectation of runs from him as his bowling was a non-factor. Whilst phrases like 'skilled toiler' and 'great holding bowler' do righteously give me the ****s, it is a bit odd that a guy like Philander isn't held to the same standard. Steyn and Cummins are ahead, of course but the only other guy I can think of is Big Vern and it would be silly to have any other contemporaries of theirs ahead of Jimmy.

 

[honestbharani]

The only fast bowlers I can rank above Jimmy will be Steyn and Cummins, tbh. And even Cummins has an asterisk as he probably has more than half his career ahead of him.

 

[TheJediBrah]

it is a bit odd that a guy like Philander isn't held to the same standard.

I would say he definitely is. We used to give him a lot of **** back in the day. If he had somehow managed 600 Test wickets I can guarantee he'd be getting the same treatment

 

[Adders]

Let's be real though, you probably could name a few bowlers in the 2010s who were as good or arguably better than Jimmy at any given point, but didn't have his longevity. Depends on the metrics you choose to give weight to. Not sure about 10 though.

Just playing devil's advocate, obviously he's a great of the game for several reasons.

This is actually a good post.

Yes, there's Cummins, Rabada, Hazelwood, Philander, Harris and probably others I'm not thinking about off the top of my head. But in the last decade for me you can only really rank Steyn higher than JA. You have to give longevity some weight here surely? For eg Harris was ****ing outstanding.......if he had of had a full career we could have been talking about him in the top tier discussion. But he didn't.

Theres unproven or not enough miles in all of them to say yep....they were definitely better than JA. So I'm voting for the guy with 600 poles if that's ok.

 

[GIMH]

Tbh Anderson has not always been in the World XI over the last 10 years but has there ever been a time you wouldn't have him in the discussion? Ever a time he wouldn't be in your top 10 pacers? Genuinely don't think there has been such a time since 2008ish. So to say he only scrapes in across the whole decade, honestly I'm flabbergasted.

If you take the 2010s as a whole then IMO you open the bowling with Steyn and Anderson.