• The first stage of the forum upgrades has now been completed but they remain in a degraded state with some features missing, normal posting/reading should now be possible.
    Please read this thread for more details.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.
    Some other features of the forum are also currently disabled.

Anderson finished?

Perhaps it is the end for Jimmy after this match. It’s a strange one to me though. He still bowls the same pace as recent years and you never lose the skill set. He’s just hit his first sticky patch in years. If he was younger he would be considered out of form, like Robinson but at 41 he’s considered finished. I think he’s still a fine bowler who may not have the appetite to continue after this series.
 

rentaghost said:
Perhaps it is the end for Jimmy after this match. It’s a strange one to me though. He still bowls the same pace as recent years and you never lose the skill set. He’s just hit his first sticky patch in years. If he was younger he would be considered out of form, like Robinson but at 41 he’s considered finished. I think he’s still a fine bowler who may not have the appetite to continue after this series.
Click to expand...

He looks fit and capable to me still. TMS said his pace isn’t down on last year, he’s got the same amount of swing this year as he did last year but his seam movement is down (but all are). He’s had these spells in his career before but like you say he’s over 40 so the question changes.

I think Anderson may look at the pitches and England’s style of play and come to the conclusion it’s not for him anymore. Having to bowl bouncers on flat decks and having to bowl most days because of England’s pace of batting attack might not be appealing
 
rentaghost said:
Perhaps it is the end for Jimmy after this match. It’s a strange one to me though. He still bowls the same pace as recent years and you never lose the skill set. He’s just hit his first sticky patch in years. If he was younger he would be considered out of form, like Robinson but at 41 he’s considered finished. I think he’s still a fine bowler who may not have the appetite to continue after this series.
Click to expand...

This all day. Broad went through a similar spell 2/3 years ago and was magnificent at the start of this series.
 
Whatever happens today Jimmy should not be selected for the Oval. Tongue must replace him. His inclusion has made the bowling weak at Edgbaston, Lords and OT.
 
rentaghost said:
Perhaps it is the end for Jimmy after this match. It’s a strange one to me though. He still bowls the same pace as recent years and you never lose the skill set. He’s just hit his first sticky patch in years. If he was younger he would be considered out of form, like Robinson but at 41 he’s considered finished. I think he’s still a fine bowler who may not have the appetite to continue after this series.
Click to expand...

Could you clarify Robinson is out of form? He has 10 wickets in this series at 28.4 which is a better average than Stuart Broad

A side needs to continue to evolve to progress and achieve their goals. England's approach to me puts more emphasis on a longer tail, wickets are generally flatter now so more pace is required and his competition ie, Broad and Woakes have shown a lot more in this series

I don't believe he is finished. He has a poor record against Australia and is out of form on top
Sea to Shining Sea said:
The team have taken 15 wickets on a flatty in less than four days play. Anderson has bowled tight lines.
Click to expand...

We need to take 20 wickets to win a test. Spinners are there to dry and an end up if required

England need to change their philosophy when selecting bowling attacks and place more emphasis on picking bowlers who can get players out without any help or assistance from the pitch or conditions. If there is no assistance we are in effect a bowler light
 
Last edited:
essex boy said:
Could you clarify Robinson is out of form? He has 10 wickets in this series at 28.4 which is a better average than Stuart Broad

A side needs to continue to evolve to progress and achieve their goals. England's approach to me puts more emphasis on a longer tail, wickets are generally flatter now so more pace is required and his competition ie, Broad and Woakes have shown a lot more in this series

I don't believe he is finished. He has a poor record against Australia and is out of form on top


We need to take 20 wickets to win a test. Spinners are there to dry and an end up if required

England need to change their philosophy when selecting bowling attacks and place more emphasis on picking bowlers who can get players out without any help or assistance from the pitch or conditions. If there is no assistance we are in effect a bowler light
Click to expand...

That’s not at all how England use spinners though. And we’ve also not got a spinner who can bowl that way.
 
Sea to Shining Sea said:
That’s not at all how England use spinners though. And we’ve also not got a spinner who can bowl that way.
Click to expand...
He makes no sense ever. Anderson had been outstanding on the flattest pitches in the world in recent years. A four man attack needs balance, it needs the ability to take wickets and the ability to have control and Anderson has always given both. He’s 41 and had a couple of poor tests and at his age questions are always going to be raised when that happens.
 
Anderson's record against Australia and South Africa away from home are worse than any other nation. Why you ask? They are the flattest wickets around (he can reverse swing it in the sub continent). Stokes has asked for flat pitches this series and England have continued to pick 3 medium/quicks all series which fundamentally cost us the Ashes by losing the first two tests. Jimmy has been the odd man out because Woakes, Broad and Robinson in this series have been more on form. A balanced attack is required but like in this test picking two bowlers doing the same roles ie, Woakes and Jimmy has left us a bowler short ie, Tongue. Picking 3 x 80-85pm bowlers on flat wickets will never get you anywhere against the best around which is why Engand's only victory has come at Headingley which was not flat and offered assistance to all bowlers throughout

If people are now of the view that Jimmy should be playing because he offers control, but is not taking wickets with the new ball nor offering anything with the bat that is complete rubbish. He was bowling 79mph lollipops to Labuschange yesterday which resembled a glorified net session
 
essex boy said:
Anderson's record against Australia and South Africa away from home are worse than any other nation. Why you ask? They are the flattest wickets around (he can reverse swing it in the sub continent). Stokes has asked for flat pitches this series and England have continued to pick 3 medium/quicks all series which fundamentally cost us the Ashes by losing the first two tests. Jimmy has been the odd man out because Woakes, Broad and Robinson in this series have been more on form. A balanced attack is required but like in this test picking two bowlers doing the same roles ie, Woakes and Jimmy has left us a bowler short ie, Tongue. Picking 3 x 80-85pm bowlers on flat wickets will never get you anywhere against the best around which is why Engand's only victory has come at Headingley which was not flat and offered assistance to all bowlers throughout

If people are now of the view that Jimmy should be playing because he offers control, but is not taking wickets with the new ball nor offering anything with the bat that is complete rubbish. He was bowling 79mph lollipops to Labuschange yesterday which resembled a glorified net session
Click to expand...
I don’t think anyone is justifying his position in the team based on control alone. He hasn’t taken many wickets in this series but it’s the first in a while. He also provides control when few others do.

By the way, the rest of the seamers offered next to no threat yesterday as well. I also don’t think Anderson bowled many at 79mph.

I think there are some good arguments to not play Anderson but, to me, you seem to be being overly critical of him.
 
chopsfc007 said:
It's worth it so @essex boy combusts
Click to expand...

Why would I combust? Unlike the majority of the board I have not written him off and called for him to retire. My issue is he should not have been picked again this series after the second test. We were two down and he had been awful. Woakes and Tongue had overtaken him
 
Last edited:
essex boy said:
Why would I combust? Unlike the majority of the board I have not written him off and called for him to retire. My issue is he should not have been picked again this series after the second test. We were two down and he had been awful. Woakes and Tongue had overtaken him
Click to expand...
Couldn’t agree more. Makes you wonder who actually picks the team.
 
THELORDRODWELL said:
We not won any tests against them in 8 years?

We’re better without him

Bring back Flintoff anarl
Click to expand...

This series is the only one where your point is relevant (he’s been poor). Other than that you’ve basically said that he hasn’t won any tests away in Australia.

Given that we’ve won two out of the last twenty five out there it’s not that surprising really.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top