Print

[Buzz]

This is for Vic 

Right - according to the statistics, Anderson and Johnson are a similar quality of bowler and in fact with Johnson's batting, he is a significantly better bet as a pick than Anderson. Now we have all watched Anderson lead our attack all over the world and be awesome, whilst laughing at Johnson's perceived ineptitude. But the stats don't point to this being fair. In the past they were both "daisy" bowlers (some days he does, some days he doesn't). The questions I have are around how has Mitchell Johnson got the stats he has!!

If you are reading this with incredulous disbelief, check for yourself.
Mitchell Johnson - www.espncricinfo.com/ci/content/player/6033.html
Jimmy Anderson - www.espncricinfo.com/england/content/player/8608.html

Plus, even if you edit the stats to Anderson's second incarnation as a test bowler since he replaced Hoggy in New Zealand, the results are the same.

Personally I would never consider picking Johnson ahead of Anderson - but it is amazing what lies you can get from statistics - I mean they also suggest that Kallis is a better player than Tendulkar...

[PedalsMcgrew]

The difference between Johnson and Anderson is that, mentally, you can get at Johnson and take him out of the game. You can't do that with Jimmy. Personally, I am praying Johnson is in the starting line up for the first Ashes test. The crowd will tear him apart on the first morning and that will be it.... The likes of Starc, Cummins and Patterson worry me far more than this excuse of a bowler does...

[Chad]

I had actually never realised that... I think both bowlers also had spells where they would absolutely devastate opposition, Johnson against SA and Anderson against NZ springs to mind. I would never pick Johnson ahead of Anderson either. I don't see how those stats could be right... Cricinfo NEVER lies though...

Maybe it is because Johnson is so erratic even now, while Anderson is more consistent and dependable. Are there any ways to check where each player played their tests, and how their performances were at those specific areas? Maybe there are a few grounds which Johnson just seems to always excel in. 

[joeylough]

woow so Johnsons bowling average is miles better in ODI and T20s, but marginally worse in Tests.

The batting is again miles better than our jimmy. Even the economy of the bowling is similar. Has someone doctored this?

[Alvaro]

They're both different types of bowler used in different ways.
You would have both in the same team but not one or the other.

[Number4]

After watching the Aus v SL test today that stats suggest after 19 tests each Nathan Lyon was a better bowler than Richie Benaud.. Who in fact was the leading wicket taker for Australia when he retired until Dennis Lillee took that record off him

[ManHOOS]

J Anderson anyday

His ability to swing the ball in air with such pace.. both ways 

M Jhonson on other hand looks so injuryprone while bowling me thinks  and batsmen can easily pick him and score runs

[procricket]

When firing Johnson is world class there no doubt about that.

When he is on pomp he is better than Anderson I would say but he has 2 to 3 bad days for that one good day bit like his batting the enigma.

Anderson is steady away on his day he is devastating but in the main he is a steady bowler.

I suspect Mitchell will have his day again soon

[Ciaran]

Johnson seems to be too mentally fragile for test cricket. He gets worn down by the Barmy Army and struggles. Anderson is for sure the best bowler England have had for a while. Out of interest Buzz is there a comparison we can draw between Johnson and Broad?

[procricket]

To b honest the Kallis v Tendulkar debate that's a different ball game.
To me Kallis is the better cricketer by a long way

[The_Bird]

To b honest the Kallis v Tendulkar debate that's a different ball game.
To me Kallis is the better cricketer by a long way

Similar to this debate it's hard to compare people who do different roles. I think Broad is our version of MJ, at his best devastating but not mentally stable enough to shut off the demons when it's not going right for him.

[Buzz]

The Johnson vs Broad comparison is good as the both started in 2007 and want to be bowling alrounders.
Broads stats are here www.espncricinfo.com/england/content/player/10617.html

[procricket]

Be the strike rate very similar the fact Johnson is a couple,of yards quicker.

Broad seems to be the better batsman shame we have not seen that more recently.

[alba caerulea]

Johnson had a great first year or so, helped by his unusual slingy left arm action which was difficult to face for the first time, this gave his stats a kickstart but since he has declined and now only performs with the ball 1 in 5 matches at best. Batting is a sideshow for me, scoring 50 is no good if he's bowled 20 overs with figures of 0-110 and the opposition have racked up 500.

Anderson on the other hand had a woeful start to to Test career and ever since has been battling to bring his average down. He has led England's attack all over the world, consistently gets the best players in the opposition out and rarely breaks down with injury. Anderson DOESN'T perform with the ball 1 in 5 at worst.

I would say that if you looked at their careers they have very different growth curves and I expect the stats to back this up

'He bowls to the left, he bowls to the right' wasn't penned about Jimmy Anderson

[Kulli]

MJ has also never played against Zimbabwe or Bangladesh!