Mitchell Johnson v Jimmy Anderson

[Howsie]

In a pure bowling sense, James Anderson.... by a mile.

And how have you come to that conclusion. Johnson's had a far better career in both forms of the game.

 

[TumTum]

And I don't think this thread asks who is the better bowler

 

[rahuldravidfan]

@ Howsie.. The keyword would be "swing".

 

[TumTum]

@ Howsie.. The keyword would be "swing".

Is it on the title?

 

[piriyanth]

Johnson is a better swing bowler than Anderson when he gets it right.

 

[TumTum]

Johnson is a better swing bowler than Anderson when he gets it right.

If RDF doesn't remember, he bowled both Viru and Gumby in the 1st over :hpraise

 

[rahuldravidfan]

Johnson is a better swing bowler than Anderson when he gets it right.

Yes, but when he gets it right is the key term here.

If RDF doesn't remember, he bowled both Viru and Gumby in the 1st over :hpraise

Yes. That was awesome.

 

[Howsie]

@ Howsie.. The keyword would be "swing".

So Anderson's a good swing bowler, that doesn't make up for the fact that Johnson's just a far better bowler. In 2009 for example

Mitchell Johnson 63 wickets at 27 with a SR of 47.8
James Anderson 40 wickets at 33 with a SR of 66

I used 2009 because it's pretty unfair to compare both players full careers as Anderson was picked far too soon.

Howsie added 0 Minutes and 53 Seconds later...

Johnson is a better swing bowler than Anderson when he gets it right.

That's very debatable.

Howsie added 0 Minutes and 54 Seconds later...

Yes, but when he gets it right is the key term here.

Sounds like someone describing James Anderson to me.

 

[rahuldravidfan]

Good work with the stats.

 

[TumTum]

Good work with the stats.

Not Owzat quality tbh

I think you should be good enough to check those stats RDF.

 

[rahuldravidfan]

My bad, master

 

[King Pietersen]

So Anderson's a good swing bowler, that doesn't make up for the fact that Johnson's just a far better bowler. In 2009 for example

Mitchell Johnson 63 wickets at 27 with a SR of 47.8
James Anderson 40 wickets at 33 with a SR of 66

I used 2009 because it's pretty unfair to compare both players full careers as Anderson was picked far too soon.

Interestingly, in ODi's in the last 12 months, Jimmy's got a better record.

Mitchell Johnson: 46 wickets at 30.06 with a strike rate of 34.1 and an economy of 5.28
Jimmeh Anderson: 34 wickets at 23.61 with a strike rate of 28.5 an an economy of 4.97

Jimmeh = win.

 

[piriyanth]

Johnson still got more wickets though

 

[rahuldravidfan]

Not Owzat quality tbh

I think you should be good enough to check those stats RDF.

Read this-

Interestingly, in ODi's in the last 12 months, Jimmy's got a better record.

Mitchell Johnson: 46 wickets at 30.06 with a strike rate of 34.1 and an economy of 5.28
Jimmeh Anderson: 34 wickets at 23.61 with a strike rate of 28.5 an an economy of 4.97

Jimmeh = win.

This is why I didn't dig up the stats. I knew I wasn't the only Jimmy fan around

 

[King Pietersen]

That wasn't to support an argument in favour of picking Anderson in the comparison. I'd gladly take Johnson ahead of Jimmeh in bowling terms, much better bowler that takes far more wickets. Jimmy's far too hot and cold to be considered ahead of Johnson. When Anderson's on form there are few better bowlers in the world, unfortunately he's not on form often enough.