Attn Trev, Vilks and other Doubting Thomases .....

lardbucket wrote:how many turns of the cycle in 43 Tests?

Depends on his cadence

When he's good, he's very good. When he's bad, he's 'meh'. There isn't such a marked discrepancy. He's 'found a way'

He's been better since he scored his first duck, and relaxed.

Maybe that's all that was needed to break the Anderson cycle?

vilkrang wrote:Maybe that's all that was needed to break the Anderson cycle?

How DARE you. Do you know how much black magic and general beastiality I had to perform to make him the bowler he is today? No f*cking gratitude.

Henry wrote:Swanny has enough time to get 300. He's probably got another five years left in him.

Finn is the guy who could really challenge Fred Trueman's record if he improves and stays fit.

I don't know, I fancy those whipper-snappers Beefy Botham and Bob Willis might also fancy their chances.

Henry wrote:Yeah i'd have Gough above Jimmy. If only Gough and Caddick had been fit and firing for England more often during the 90s, and with some solid backup from Angus Fraser and Dean Headley...geez, we could have had a very decent attack indeed.

Well, wasn't that our bowling attack in the late 90s? They didn't win all that often, especially away from home as we lacked a quality spinner or even a hostile bowler who could intimidate the opposition, except for Devon Malcolm who rarely located the cut strip. Fraser was often overlooked for Mullally, Cork, etc because of poor county form.

The only time they played Gough, Caddick and Headley together they lost by 268 runs!

Caddick basically only bowled well in the second innings, often when the match was gone and Headley usually flattered to deceive except for that one marvellous match at Melbourne. So yes, Goughy was great because he had less support and always charged in and tried his best.

I think you've got to remember that English pitches were much greener in the 90s - Lords always swung, Headingley ditto, Edgbaston sometimes resembled the surface of the moon. So that means the career stats flatter our bowlers somewhat - Dominic Cork career average = 29.81, Dean Headley = 27.85, Angus Fraser = 27.32, Alan Mullally = 31.24. That's the same reason why some very good batsmen - Athers, Stewart, Hussain, etc. averaged less than 40. I think Thorpey only got his average upwards of 40 when the 'Chief Executive's Pitches' became common in the 00's. So that's why its harsh to compare bowlers like Hoggard, Flintoff and Anderson with these stats - they wouldn't recognise some of the pitches we have now - where Sri Lanka can make close to 600 following on at Lords. In the 90s that same team wouldn't have made 200. The bowlers England played against on these 90s pitches like the 2 W's, Pollock, McGrath and Ambrose often averaged less than 20 in the same conditions.

Brass Monkey wrote:

Gary 111 wrote:
But I don't recall Goughy getting orthadox inswing....Jimmy's skill and Goughy's heart and you'd have an all time great. You'd pretty much have Malcolm Marshall I suppose.

I don't really GAF whether Gough conventionally swung the ball both ways, what simple criteria to try and judge him on. For talent, he shat all over Jimmy. Due to his outswing and reverse at 90+mph plus his heart, he rarely bowled badly for England. Combine that with the totally ignored central contract argument and the fact we're immeasurably better in the field (Gough had 25+ Ashes catches put down, for instance), I think you're talking superbollocks. I reckon you must've seen him in about 2 England games or some such shite.

I remember him very well, better than you it seems who have got the rose tinted specs on. I pretty much watched every match he ever played for England. He rarely, if ever, bowled over 90mph (I don't know if those old Cornhill speed guns were the same but they never registered England bowlers much over 85mph, I do remember when C4 started regularly putting on the bowling speeds everyone was surprised that Craig White actually bowled faster than him as Chalky had a much shorter run-up).

Goughy also never got as much orthadox swing as Jimmy. Yes, he got a healthy amount of away swing - but not the crazy banana swing Jimmy gets on an overcast day. Compare their records in England it backs up my instinct that Jimmy is a much more skillful swing bowler - Gough only actually took 5 5-fors in England, and three of those were at a cost of 100+ runs, Jimmy already has 9 5-fors exploiting swinging English conditions. This despite England having arguably a much stronger line-up of bowlers when Jimmy played - Flintoff, Hoggard, Harmsion, Jones, Onions, Tremlett, Sidebottom, Swann, Panesar, Broad, etc all being in the reckoning.

I think Goughy rarely played a full season for Yorkshire too, if ever. We were certainly disappointed and regarded him more as an England bowler than a Yorkshire one for several seasons - though after David Byas retired he was suddenly a lot more keen to play - read into that what you will. Perhaps he caused problems for himself by bowling through injuries - but he certainly did skip Yorkshire games or eased off when he did play for us.

Also I don't think Goughy ever got much reverse swing in England (except with the white ball), definitely not until near the end of his career with the red ball. I don't think the England players understood it that well in the 90s and tended to only try and use the tactic on the abrasive overseas pitches - his hat-trick at Melbourne being a classic for this. They would still be trying for orthadox swing at home after 60 overs, leading to the 'cheat' claims when Waqar and Wasim used it so well in 1996. We simply didn't understand how reverse worked - though eventually Gough and White learned to master it.

Goughy had his lean spells, I remember a particularly insipid performance against the Windies at Edgbaston or the 1999/00 tour of South Africa where he generally bowled very poorly. But they were few and far between - unlike Jimmy pre 2008 who was mainly lows with the odd high. He had a tendancy to get carried away and overuse the bouncer at times like Broad, if anything that was his biggest failing. But he usually corrected himself during a match and would often bowl much better in his next spell.

But you seem to have overlooked the main attributes Gough had, just alluding briefly to his heart - in favour of the myths of 90mph plus pace and hooping swing - the reason why he would walk into any England side of the last 50 years - namely, his big match temprament and his ability to bowl his third, fourth and fifth spells of the day with as much aggression as his first. Mentally he's probably the best cricketer we've ever produced along with Len Hutton - not surprisingly with both being Yorkshiremen.

The fact most of his greatest performances came away from home on flat pitches where he would use plenty of variations, and great stamina. Or he never hid in the field and always wanted to bowl - unlike say a Caddick or a Harmison. If the team were up against it he would raise his performance, and when we most needed him in England, e.g. at Headingley vs South Africa in 1998 or Ashes series away from home he would always deliver. That match at Edgbaston Dello mentioned being a classic example too - its easy to forget that Blewett and Taylor almost saved that game. Gough had gone for tap, but then at 400/3 and Gough having already gone for 100 he ripped out the Waugh's and Bevan in a spell that won us the match.

I think he was one level below an All Time Great - e.g. Allan Donald, which was probably due to not quite being quite quick enough to unsettle top batsmen.

He achieved plenty of swing and it came incredibly late too. It's clear to see from any footage you wish to watch that he bowled a yard faster than Jimmy. The highest he recorded was 151, but there was plenty of times he 'looked' that without there being a speed-gun.

He did get plenty of reverse with the red ball, if the ball was looked after. What I find a little 'funny' is the way you've excused away Jimmy's inadequate performances to others yet you're highlighting two of Gough's as a whole detrimental paragraph.

Yeah, maybe he dodged some Yorkshire games - but here are some stats: Some of his seasons in balls bowled in his England career (be they CC or away tours): 2876, 1337, 2489, 3441, 2008, 2043, 1598, 1585, 1930, 1627. I've discluded injured seasons. Not monumental I suppose, but it is quite a bit.

And while i'm dominating this thread with incrasingly rambling and incoherent posts, here's a rather startling stat:

Bowlers to dismiss Tendulkar 4 or more times in Tests

Pos	Name	Dismissals	Tests Played vs Tendulkar	Matches per dismissal
1	Muttiah Muralitharan	8	19	2.37
2	Jimmy Anderson	6	7	1.16
3	Jason Gillespie	6	8	1.33
4	Glenn McGrath	6	9	1.50
5=	Allan Donald	5	11	2.20
5=	Hansie Cronje	5	11	2.20
7	Brett Lee	5	12	2.40
8	Daniel Vettori	5	15	3.00
9=	Chris Lewis	4	8	2.00
9=	Makhaya Ntini	4	8	2.00
11	Shaun Pollock	4	12	3.00

Aside from his well known weakness against Cronje and the surprise appearance of 'the prat with no hat' Chris Lewis its amazing how well Jimmy has done against Tendulkar.

More famous bowlers who have struggled against him are Warne - 3 dismissals from 12 matches, Shoaib - 3 from 9, Steyn - 3 from 8, Flintoff - 2 from 11, Walsh - 2 from 7, Akram 1 from 7, Ambrose 0 from 5.

Another surprising stat is that Darren Gough never played a Test Match against India.

No bowler has ever really mastered him on an Atherton vs Ambrose / McGrath scale, but Jimmy could well be top of that list by the end of this series.

Incase you want to relive these days (and why wouldn't you?) here's a compilation:

[youtube][/youtube]

Brass Monkey wrote:He achieved plenty of swing and it came incredibly late too. It's clear to see from any footage you wish to watch that he bowled a yard faster than Jimmy. The highest he recorded was 151, but there was plenty of times he 'looked' that without there being a speed-gun.

He did get plenty of reverse with the red ball, if the ball was looked after. What I find a little 'funny' is the way you've excused away Jimmy's inadequate performances to others yet you're highlighting two of Gough's as a whole detrimental paragraph.

Yeah, maybe he dodged some Yorkshire games - but here are some stats: Some of his seasons in balls bowled in his England career (be they CC or away tours): 2876, 1337, 2489, 3441, 2008, 2043, 1598, 1585, 1930, 1627. I've discluded injured seasons. Not monumental I suppose, but it is quite a bit.

I'm just pointing out its easy to remember olden players at their best - there were times he was just as frustrating as Jimmy. He wasn't a McGrath style machine bowler who never bowled a bad spell. I mention his best performances were often away from home, but like Jimmy he had bad matches and bad tours (what I took umbrage with earlier in the thread was the West Indies in 2009 being described as a bad tour for Jimmy - he was the most effective pace bowler in that series when selected on pitches not meant for fair cricket.)

I don't understand the point you're getting at in quoting the balls bowled. Its not really an objective statistic, both bowled sparingly in the context of other county bowlers at the time. How does this prove Gough was better / worse than Anderson?

Gough (English FC Season)
1994 = 2876
1995 = 2489
1996 = 3441
1997 = 2008
1998 = 2043
1999 = 581
2000 = 1945
2001 = 1930
2002 = 114
2003 = 1627
Average = 1905

Anderson (English FC Season)
2003 = 1997
2004 = 1087
2005 = 3076
2006 = 60
2007 = 1905
2008 = 2086
2009 = 1743
2010 = 2132
Average = 1761

Gough bowled on average 144 more deliveries a season, that's 24 overs, basically 1 more match, or over the course of a 5 month season that equates to less than 1 ball a day more. Nothing like what say, Caddick, would have bowled in a year. But he thrived on it.

Brass Monkey wrote: It's clear to see from any footage you wish to watch that he bowled a yard faster than Jimmy. The highest he recorded was 151, but there was plenty of times he 'looked' that without there being a speed-gun.

I'm not so sure, they were both bowlers who weren't express - never consistently 90mph plus, although occasionally both have exceeded 90mph with occasional deliveries. I think Gough's fastest recorded delivery was 94.4mph, Anderson's was 95.4mph in an ODI vs Australia last year - both those figures seem suspect to me, personally.

Its very hard to track down old speed guns stats - but here's one. For example in 2000 in the 5th Test at the Oval Gough bowled the 'fastest ball recorded in the match' according to the text commentary - 89.1mph. He was 30 then, Jimmy is 29 and bowled a best of 89.6mph in the latest Test at Lords.

I would say Anderson is generally at the 83-85mph mark while Gough was probably 85-86mph. But Gough never bowled a spell where the majority of deliveries were over 90mph like Harmison or Lee. Another text commentary mentions a Gough spell 'averaging 86mph' which would be slightly faster than a typical Jimmy Anderson spell. But the 'average speed' stats are meaningless as if a bowler bowls 3 or 4 slower balls in a 5 over spell that would knock about 2 mph off the mean. You're really only talking fractions either way.

Well isn't that my point? You took umbrage and hence you felt the need to iron out the nuances in certain series? I could do that with Gough a lot of times. He was an eternally unlucky bowler. But my main point is moot. My point being you can clearly see that Gough was a yard faster and he was easily. He bowled sustained periods over 90. I don't reckon I need speedguns to tell me how fast Bobby bowled, but the matches that had them said he was around 87-88 consistently, approximately the same as Curtly. In some matches the commentators were 'doing a Nicholas' about it. My point is moot because in essence WGAF about pace. Sami bowled like a greyhound, but he bowled like a mentally handicapped greyhound. Therefore it should be stricken from the record. But I don't reckon you'll change my mind (for the time being) that you'll change my mind that Jimmy is a better bowler. You're really dragging him under the microscope of denigration to try and better Jimmy somehow. I know, in my mind's eye, how much greater the Dazzler could've been were it not for certain aspects of total shittitude around him. As it was, he's gained pretty much the utmost respect from most of his peers. He was a constant threat and it's nothing to Jimmy's detriment that, at this stage, I still rate Goughie as the better bowler.

Danny mate, the way I read the exchange between yourself and Gaz, it looks as though rather than challenging the main thrust of your original post, he's actually looking to counter one particular sentence, below .......

Brass Monkey wrote:
For talent, he shat all over Jimmy.

I agree with most of your points about Dazzler, but I do think it's a bit of an exaggeration to say that he shat all over Jimmy. Talent wise I don't believe there's much between them, and such comparisons are naturally subjective rather than objective.

To emphasise that point, it was said a couple of pages back that both JA and Zak Khan had slightly inferior stats to Mitchell Johnson. On current form though, Johnson couldn't hit a barn door with a cows' arse and I don't believe anyone would seriously have him as first choice of the three in their XI.

Bobby indeed had respect from his peers almost from the start - Australians in particular admired his attitude and ticker. Jimmy is fast gaining the respect of his now. There is one other similarity between the two - you believe DG could have been so much better were it not for certain aspects of total craptitude around him. Agreed - but then I'd contend you could say the same for Jimmy between 2004 - 2007 ish. For all the good things Duncan Fletcher did for English cricket he truly fooked Anderson over. As for Troy Cooley ....... nuff said.

Growler wrote:Danny mate, the way I read the exchange between yourself and Gaz, it looks as though rather than challenging the main thrust of your original post, he's actually looking to counter one particular sentence, below .......

Brass Monkey wrote:
For talent, he shat all over Jimmy.

I agree with most of your points about Dazzler, but I do think it's a bit of an exaggeration to say that he shat all over Jimmy. Talent wise I don't believe there's much between them, and such comparisons are naturally subjective rather than objective.

To emphasise that point, it was said a couple of pages back that both JA and Zak Khan had slightly inferior stats to Mitchell Johnson. On current form though, Johnson couldn't hit a barn door with a cows' arse and I don't believe anyone would seriously have him as first choice of the three in their XI.

Bobby indeed had respect from his peers almost from the start - Australians in particular admired his attitude and ticker. Jimmy is fast gaining the respect of his now. There is one other similarity between the two - you believe DG could have been so much better were it not for certain aspects of total craptitude around him. Agreed - but then I'd contend you could say the same for Jimmy between 2004 - 2007 ish. For all the good things Duncan Fletcher did for English cricket he truly fooked Anderson over. As for Troy Cooley ....... nuff said.

Aye Growler, that sums it up nicely. I think a lot of people will have reservations about Anderson from that 2004-2007 period when he was riddled with doubts and unsure of his action. The fact that as a 21-25 year old and despite all his problems he was still often selected reflects the underlying talent. From 25-28 he has shown just how good he could be.

When Goughy was first selected, a few months shy of 24, he had done most of his learning playing for Yorkshire and was much closer to the finished article. Richie Richardson was a big influence in him developing the mentality of a fast bowler.

The 2 main points I disagree with the Monkey on are that, as you say, Goughy was inherently much more talented than Jimmy. And secondly that Goughy bowled consistently over 90mph. He simply didn't. The only England bowler in the 1990s who did was Devon Malcolm.

embee wrote:

Henry wrote:I'd have Anderson and Zaheer on a par with each other. Their stats must be pretty similar as well.

...their stats are both slightly worse than Mitchell Johnson's

Mitchell Johnson is a funny one, his Test bowling average is under 30, however of the 7 countries he's played against only 2 of them does he average under 30 - NZ (16.6) and SA (25.5). The other 5 countries (Eng, Ind, Pak, Sri, WI) his average is 30-35. I think that reflects that one Australian summer against SA when he bowled (and batted) brilliantly and a lot of average performances and occasional triumphs the rest of the time.

or perhaps the saffers and the shaggers are a duality of gash

Growler wrote:I agree with most of your points about Dazzler, but I do think it's a bit of an exaggeration to say that he shat all over Jimmy. Talent wise I don't believe there's much between them, and such comparisons are naturally subjective rather than objective.
Bobby indeed had respect from his peers almost from the start - Australians in particular admired his attitude and ticker. Jimmy is fast gaining the respect of his now. There is one other similarity between the two - you believe DG could have been so much better were it not for certain aspects of total craptitude around him. Agreed - but then I'd contend you could say the same for Jimmy between 2004 - 2007 ish. For all the good things Duncan Fletcher did for English cricket he truly fooked Anderson over. As for Troy Cooley ....... nuff said.

No, you're probably right, I went overboard with that insinuation. And I agree, Fletch and Cooley utterly f*cked him over. I still maintain that the 'privileges' afforded these current bowlers is something that the likes of Bobby would've thrived under.

Gary 111 wrote:
The 2 main points I disagree with the Monkey on are that, as you say, Goughy was inherently much more talented than Jimmy. And secondly that Goughy bowled consistently over 90mph. He simply didn't. The only England bowler in the 1990s who did was Devon Malcolm.

Well, here you are stating it as fact. You know that Gough wasn't consistently over 90? No. You don't. What you're doing is simply conjecting. I don't actually think his stock was over 90 for the most part, I reckon about 88 - with the effort balls over 90. Or 3 to 5 over spells consistently over 90. Conjecture on my behalf? Maybe. The facts? He was regularly clocked as that fast on those speedguns you reckon were gash. In later ODI matches, on the speedguns that get your certification, he was a yard short of that - that yard had been lost to time, as stated by the world and his mum.

Brass Monkey wrote:

Gary 111 wrote:
The 2 main points I disagree with the Monkey on are that, as you say, Goughy was inherently much more talented than Jimmy. And secondly that Goughy bowled consistently over 90mph. He simply didn't. The only England bowler in the 1990s who did was Devon Malcolm.

Well, here you are stating it as fact. You know that Gough wasn't consistently over 90? No. You don't. What you're doing is simply conjecting. I don't actually think his stock was over 90 for the most part, I reckon about 88 - with the effort balls over 90. Or 3 to 5 over spells consistently over 90. Conjecture on my behalf? Maybe. The facts? He was regularly clocked as that fast on those speedguns you reckon were gash. In later ODI matches, on the speedguns that get your certification, he was a yard short of that - that yard had been lost to time, as stated by the world and his mum.

Here's the evidence (some very tentative) that I could find.....
(incidentally I found Gleen McGrath's fastest recorded ball was 91mph in the 1999 World Cup Final, and the fastest England bowler in a Test before Steve Harmison was Chris Silverwood - 93.1mph at Port Elizabeth vs SA)

1998

But the bowler really might not know. During the series against South Africa, when Donald was confirmed as comfortably the fastest bowler on either side, David Lloyd, the England coach, mischievously suggested that the Speedster ought to be turned down when Darren Gough was bowling to encourage him to try even harder. For most of the summer, Donald regularly clocked 90 mph, and averaged 86. Gough only occasionally touched 90. For other, slower, bowlers, it could all be a trifle embarrassing. There was Donald exploding the ball into the turf, and there was Angus Fraser, steaming in with every ounce of effort he possessed, to get the needle up to about 78. Still, Gough and Fraser had the last laugh: England won the series.

Dominic Cork of England and Suresh Perera of Sri Lanka were timed as delivering the fastest balls during the first three days of the one-off Test being played at the Oval. Cork's quickest delivery was timed at 88 mph and Perera's, at 84 mph.
The highest average speeds for both sides was, 80 by Darren Gough of England and 78 by Perera.
The comparative average speeds of other bowlers:
Pramodya Wickremasinghe (78 mph), Kumara Dharmasena and Sanath Jayasuriya (54 mph each), and Muthiah Muralitharan (49 mph) for Sri Lanka, and Cork and Ben Hollioake (80 mph), Angus Fraser (77 mph) and Mark Ramprakash (52 mph).

1998/99
Gough bowled 'at around' 90mph according to David Lloyd and was the second fastest bowler recorded on the new speed guns in Australia, after Shoaib, though i'm not sure when Shoaib would have played - unless they're referencing the thest series the year after?

1999/00
4th Test vs SA: 89.5mph, 73.9mph (slower ball) and generally bowling in the 'low 140s' i.e. 86-89 mph
5th Test vs SA: 82.6mph, 87.6mph, 80.2mph

2000
The speeds recorded by Gough for individual deliveries according to the ball-by-ball analysis on cricinfo:
1st Test vs Zim: 82mph, 86mph, 88mph, 88.2mph, 86.8mph
2nd Test vs Zim: 84mph
3rd Test vs WI: 90.7mph later 'Gough averaging 86mph today'
5th Test vs WI: 83mph, 89.1mph 'fastest ball of the game',
An article on Brett Lee claims Gough was clocked at 93.7mph at Edgbaston - but I can't find any reference to this in the match reports. There is also reference to a £10,000 prize for the 'fastest ball of the Summer' - but I can't find out who ended up winning this?

ODI Series: (have mainly done only Tests, although most bowlers bowl 2 to 3 mph quicker in ODI's. Gough quickest delivery in this ODI series was 92mph)
vs Zimbabwe (13th July) average pace = 87mph
vs Zimbabwe (15th July) average pace = 88mph
vs West Indies (20th July) average pace = 83.0mph

2001
Individual deliveries:
1st Test vs Pakistan: 83.5mph
2nd Test vs Pakistan: 88mph, 87.1mph, 84.5mph, 86.9mph, 84.9mph, 87.7mph, 83.1mph
4th Test vs Australia: 85.9mph

Lads I guess you'll have to agree to differ.

My own take on the speed issue? I think you're both half right. Bobby was probably a yard faster than Jimmy most of the time, and for sure generally a more hostile bowler.

While DG was capable of 90+, I think it was generally an effort ball, and rarely used more than a couple of times in an over. A 90mph(ish) stock ball is generally accepted as the criterion to classify a bowler as fast. The fact is that of his contemporaries, Devon Malcolm, Allan Donald, Wasim & Waqar, Walsh, Ambrose and Brett Lee were known as genuine fast bowlers. Goughy wasn't ..... not the way those named were ... and yes the two Paksters were also noted for accurate swing besides express pace. Bob was usually classed as fast medium.

The notable thing with Dazzlers quicker ball was that he had the uncanny knack of making the batsman late on the shot ..... especially with his yorker. One of the nicest sights of the late 90s was watching batsmen getting tangled in their own feet & almost falling over digging the ball out a couple of feet from their stumps.

Jimmy on the other hand ...... on top form in swing conditions he can make the best batsmen look little better than schoolboys prodding & poking blindly.

Good stats to pull out Gaz, must've taken you some time. Thanks. Sort of backs up my sh!t really, though. As I reckoned, sort of 87-89.

Growler, Walsh wasn't as quick as the rest you put in that bracket.

Brass Monkey wrote:Good stats to pull out Gaz, must've taken you some time. Thanks. Sort of backs up my sh!t really, though. As I reckoned, sort of 87-89.

Growler, Walsh wasn't as quick as the rest you put in that bracket.

So you're suggesting Walsh and Gough were 90+mph bowlers in the same way Ghastly Piles was a spinner ?



runs & hides to avoid a kicking >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

As chief Jimmykins detractor i'm surprised I didn't get a bollocking off Growler!

Have a quick look back at the opening post of the thread JK, and the link in red - then you'll see why.

By the same token, as someone who generally stood up for Stuart Broad when most of us were having a go, you must be feeling quite pleased after the last match.

Hopefully he can now go from strength to strength from here. What really impressed me was that he finally appealed to the umpires - and his acceptance of a couple of outrageous decisions off Billy.