Tim Bresnan

[indiaregulator]

We can go through this as much as we want but the fact remains and will always remain that for Indian fans aside, every unanimously believes that Jimmy > Zaheer. Anderson obliterated Zaheer in the recent series. Anderson was one of our bowlers...Zaheer got dropped for being useless. The away records also bullshit: Jimmy's "away" is dead tracks of Indian and the subcontinent. Zaheer's away consists of England.

[FischerTal]

We can go through this as much as we want but the fact remains and will always remain that for Indian fans aside, every unanimously believes that Jimmy > Zaheer. Anderson obliterated Zaheer in the recent series. Anderson was one of our bowlers...Zaheer got dropped for being useless. The away records also bullshit: Jimmy's "away" is dead tracks of Indian and the subcontinent. Zaheer's away consists of England.

zaheer's home is those same dead tracks :two_thumbs_up:

[Crookbond]

We can go through this as much as we want but the fact remains and will always remain that for Indian fans aside, every unanimously believes that Jimmy > Zaheer. Anderson obliterated Zaheer in the recent series. Anderson was one of our bowlers...Zaheer got dropped for being useless. The away records also bullshit: Jimmy's "away" is dead tracks of Indian and the subcontinent. Zaheer's away consists of England.

This comes much like the Neo Supremacists theory. Your method of proving X over Y is highly convenient to what you want to prove. Anderson > Zaheer is close to a retarded argument. For starters, Anderson is 30 and Zaheer is 34 - so effectively you are comparing them when Anderson is at his peak. For your recent series argument, here is what the great James "Marshall" Anderson did when he toured in India last time around in 2008. Tests No code has to be inserted here. ODIs No code has to be inserted here. Now, take into account where Anderson's away is 30% SC wickets while Zaheer's home 70% SC wickets and you've got no match. Not to mention, Anderson is as sh!t a limited overs bowler as you can get which makes Zaheer as no match. Oh btw, did you miss the England series in 2007 where Zaheer got more wickets than Anderson in "home" conditions. :giggle: Try the Neo Supremacist theory next time mate. :bye:

[FischerTal]

This comes much like the Neo Supremacists theory. Your method of proving X over Y is highly convenient to what you want to prove. Anderson > Zaheer is close to a retarded argument. For starters, Anderson is 30 and Zaheer is 34 - so effectively you are comparing them when Anderson is at his peak. For your recent series argument, here is what the great James "Marshall" Anderson did when he toured in India last time around in 2008. Tests No code has to be inserted here. ODIs No code has to be inserted here. Now, take into account where Anderson's away is 30% SC wickets while Zaheer's home 70% SC wickets and you've got no match. Not to mention, Anderson is as sh!t a limited overs bowler as you can get which makes Zaheer as no match. Oh btw, did you miss the England series in 2007 where Zaheer got more wickets than Anderson in "home" conditions. :giggle: Try the Neo Supremacist theory next time mate. :bye:

patriot :isalute:

[indiaregulator]

I think its utterly pointless trying to argue against Zaheer on an Indian board so I'll leave it at that.

[FischerTal]

I think its utterly pointless trying to argue against Zaheer on an Indian board so I'll leave it at that.

yes go on PP where even Mohammad Sami is ATG :two_thumbs_up::two_thumbs_up:

[Crookbond]

I think its utterly pointless trying to argue against Zaheer on an Indian board so I'll leave it at that.

It's not about England vs India. You will not see me arguing for Prior over Nayan Mongia. Both Zaheer and Anderson are of similar stature, you are just being to convenient to your personal prejudices.

[rkt.india]

but but pace is not important at all!

Pace is very important if it is directed well. Remember India-England test series in 2011, Broad and Bresnan were hostile and were still moving the ball. Anderson was also hitting decent pace and swinging the ball. Movement and accuracy at higher pace is always more dangerous than movement and accuracy at lower pace. Rarely any Indian pace bowler shows that trait to be quick and accurate and still move the ball. Yadav have pace and can move the ball in conditions but lack control. BK is one who looks to have all these three traits has decent pace like Anderson if not really quick and can swing both ways with decent control but he still has a long way to go because he can be hot and cold too as seen in India-Aus test series. Even our slower pace bowlers are not consistently accurate enough to keep the batsmen in check.

[Old guy]

Pace is very important if it is directed well. Remember India-England test series in 2011, Broad and Bresnan were hostile and were still moving the ball. Anderson was also hitting decent pace and swinging the ball. Movement and accuracy at higher pace is always more dangerous than movement and accuracy at lower pace. Rarely any Indian pace bowler shows that trait to be quick and accurate and still move the ball. Yadav have pace and can move the ball in conditions but lack control. BK is one who looks to have all these three traits has decent pace like Anderson if not really quick and can swing both ways with decent control but he still has a long way to go because he can be hot and cold too as seen in India-Aus test series. Even our slower pace bowlers are not consistently accurate enough to keep the batsmen in check.

what do u think about mohit? his pace is better is all right and has good control and got movement too.. and i agree with this whole post.. my comment was for people who think pace does not matters at all and here we have test cricketer talking about increasing pace:winky:

[rkt.india]

what do u think about mohit? his pace is better is all right and has good control and got movement too.. and i agree with this whole post.. my comment was for people who think pace does not matters at all and here we have test cricketer talking about increasing pace:winky:

He is very similar to BK, has better control, but does not have swing of BK, but he has kind of seam movement most bowlers dont have. He gets deceptive seam movement off the pitch like Asif used to get though in opposite direction.

[FischerTal]

He is very similar to BK' date=' has better control, but does not have swing of BK, but he has kind of seam movement most bowlers dont have. He gets deceptive seam movement off the pitch like Asif used to get though in opposite direction.[/quote'] do you think mohit can develop into a good death overs specialist?

[Old guy]

He is very similar to BK' date=' has better control, but does not have swing of BK, but he has kind of seam movement most bowlers dont have. He gets deceptive seam movement off the pitch like Asif used to get though in opposite direction.[/quote'] arent seam bowlers better option ? even philander is more of a seam bowler then swing

[rkt.india]

do you think mohit can develop into a good death overs specialist?

Anyone can do that if practices well in the nets, especially if someone has a round armish action like Yadav, Mohit, Nechim, etc. Their actions are more suited to bowl yorkers, but they wont do it well until they practice it.

[rkt.india]

arent seam bowlers better option ? even philander is more of a seam bowler then swing

I would say a swing bowler should not depend only on swing.

[Old guy]

I would say a swing bowler should not depend only on swing.

yeah swing normally doesn ot comes into play afterb all gets old and if conditions aren ot overcast also i have seen batsmen ,good ones find it much easier to play swing bowling then seam bowling unless ur swinging it very late