Saker: Swann, Anderson as good as McGrath/Warne

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/cricket/international/england/9298418/James-Anderson-and-Graeme-Swann-as-good-as-Glenn-McGrath-and-Shane-Warne-says-England-bowling-coach.html

In Saker's mind for sure but statistically they have a long way to go. Also at times Anderson seems to have that saturnine disposition when things aren't going his way as if he's about to drop his head.

Saker's a Victorian right?

Deary me. Tell him he's dreamin'.

PhaPhuk is well named

Did he also add a rider? "And it's all because of me."

JGK wrote:Saker's a Victorian right?

he is an ex Victorian, no longer welcomed in this State

Seems to be one or two remarks coming out like that in recent months, always risks a big fall.

I know we strived for ages to knock them off the top, but no need to act all quntish like them now we occupy the no.1 slot.

I honestly hope you stay there a while, JKL. The dark years can be long and gloomy (a fact I don't really need to remind you of).

Well, I reckon they're as good as anything South Africa can put on the park, at least.

Henry wrote:Well, I reckon they're as good as anything South Africa can put on the park, at least.

Nice one Horrie

Saker's right.

For the past eighteen months, these guys have been as good as anything in Test Cricket for a very long time. Unfortunately, eighteen months isn't a decade, the kind of time-frame for which McGrath and Warne dominated. But even statistically, in that time-frame I quoted, they compare favourably to almost anyone as a foursome:

James Anderson - 62 wickets @ 25.11
Stuart Broad - 62 wickets @ 22.74
Graeme Swann - 62 wickets @ 29.06
Tim Bresnan - 32 wickets @ 23.65

Chivalry Augustus wrote:Saker's right.

For the past eighteen months, these guys have been as good as anything in Test Cricket for a very long time. Unfortunately, eighteen months isn't a decade, the kind of time-frame for which McGrath and Warne dominated. But even statistically, in that time-frame I quoted, they compare favourably to almost anyone as a foursome:

James Anderson - 62 wickets @ 25.11
Stuart Broad - 62 wickets @ 22.74
Graeme Swann - 62 wickets @ 29.06
Tim Bresnan - 32 wickets @ 23.65

Suppose Philander's 51 at 14 isn't bad. Pity he doesn't have a support cast.

Saw this, thought to post it but then I knew he was bonkers:

“The Australians were stand-out bowlers, a great group for a long time. McGrath was the true great among the quicks but they had Brett Lee, Jason Gillespie and Andy Bichel as well - they were all fantastic bowlers. We should be saying our group is as good as them.”

Riiiiiggghhhhhtto. I thought.

After years of roads, pop-gun attacks and a bowling average of low 30s being world class, things really seem to have swung back the way of the ball in the last couple of years. Is it DRS, livelier pitches, or just the emergence of some better bowlers and some of the top batsmen retiring or declining in form? A combination of all of the above?

Don't both Anderson and Broad have averages in the low 30s?

taipan wrote:Don't both Anderson and Broad have averages in the low 30s?

Well in overall career terms they do, but both were pushing 40 two or three years ago... let's say their Test careers didn't exactly have flying starts. It's remarkable how quickly those averages have come down recently.

beamer wrote:

taipan wrote:Don't both Anderson and Broad have averages in the low 30s?

Well in overall career terms they do, but both were pushing 40 two or three years ago... let's say their Test careers didn't exactly have flying starts. It's remarkable how quickly those averages have come down recently.

Yep, there's no doubt that DRS has tilted the scale towards the bowlers somewhat. Not that I disagree with that.