Some Achieve Greatness, and Others Have Greatness Thrust Upon Them. 

There can be no doubt that when it comes to sport today the words ‘legend’ and ‘great’ are overused.

In the past week a former Socceroo was referred to as a “Legend.” A player who played 29 internationals, and without being harsh, was never outstanding or overly influential, a player who did a job. Even if one looked at their club career it was far from outstanding, 11 clubs in 15 years and at no club did they make over 100 appearances, and few if any of these clubs would afford the player in question legendary status.

In an article at the weekend acknowledging England bowler Jimmy Anderson becoming the first fast bowler to take 700 test match wickets, and the third highest wicket-taker of all time, not only was the player themselves referred to as ‘great’ but in the first three paragraphs two other England players were also referred as ‘greats’ of the game; one of these possibly justified.

So what is greatness?

Greatness has been described as being “a concept of a state of superiority affecting a person or object in a particular place or area. Greatness can also be attributed to individuals who possess a natural ability to be better than all others.”

Clearly by taking more wickets than all others who have gone before based on this description Jimmy Anderson can be classed as great. However, surely to be great there has to be more to it than that?

Anderson remarkably has kept going at the highest level at the age of 41; he will be 42 in July during the upcoming England summer. This is no mean feat, and should be respected. Not only keeping himself fit and healthy, but also maintaining the desire to keep playing at the highest level.

Some will argue that despite his availability for selection England would have been better served to have brought through another player. That is a debate for another day.

Apart from being the age he is, he has played more Test matches than any other fast bowler. At the time of writing he has also played more test matches than every player who has gone before, apart from India’s Sachin Tendulkar, who retired after 200 test matches. Anderson is not however the oldest player to play test cricket. That honour goes to Wilfred Rhodes of England who was 52 years and 165 days old in his last test match.

Surely the more you play the more the likelihood that you will take more wickets than those who have not played as many games? So based on longevity does that guarantee greatness?

Cricket is a game of statistics. It is the way that followers of the game have been able to make comparisons for over 100 years. However, statistics can never take into consideration the conditions of a wicket, the weather, the situation within the game, umpiring and the influence of the crowd. It doe give us a benchmark on which to compare careers.

Based on fast bowlers who have taken over 400 wickets in test cricket how does Jimmy Anderson’s record compare?

Based on averages it is interesting to note that Anderson and Stuart Broad, with whom he shared the England attack for so long have two of the highest averages of this group of players. Only India’s Kapil Dev finished with a higher average. Some will argue that Dev was an all rounder, but the truth of the matter was he dragged his career out probably longer than he should have as he was intent on beating Sir Richard Hadlee’s record at the time for the most test wickets.

If you look at strike rate Kapil Dev bowled the most balls in order to take a wicket. Surprising to some the West Indian Courtney Walsh and another all rounder South African Shaun Pollock took the next highest amount of balls to take a wicket. Then come Anderson and Broad. The strike rate amongst these top fast bowlers is in fact very similar, with the exception of Dale Steyn, whose strike rate of a wicket every 42.38 balls shows what a world class bowler he was. Malcolm Marshall had a strike rate of 46.76 and Waqar Younis 43.49, which reveals the company that Steyn is in.

What is impressive is that Pollock and Dev are in this list as both were classified as all rounders. Sir Richard Hadlee was another who was often referred to as an all rounder during his career. Although if scoring a test century is a prerequisite to calling yourself an all rounder then Stuart Broad (1) and Wasim Akram (3) must also be classed as all rounders. Dev scored eight test hundreds, Pollock and Hadlee both scored two.

There are a number of fast bowlers over time that have held the world record for the most test wickets. Anderson is only eight wickets behind Shane Warne but still has a long way to go to surpass Sri Lanka’s Muriah Muralitharan who took 800 test wickets.

It is worth comparing the records of those who at some time held this record to that of Anderson’s, which will see the likes of the late Fred Trueman and Dennis Lillee included.

This table highlights the achievements of Trueman, Lillee and Hadlee, and tends to confirm that these were truly great players. Players who warrant this adjective. As Sir Richard Hadlee once said we should never forget that Dennis Lillee took 67 wickets in World Series Cricket against the cream of World Cricket at that time. Lillee took those 67 wickets in 14 matches at an average of 26.87 and a strike rate of 53.35.

The key element to being a fast bowler is taking wickets consistently. It is their job to remove the top order. In the recent series with India in which Anderson took his 700th Test wicket, he took 10 wickets in the series; in seven innings. Anderson dismissed top order batsmen on six occasions. He was wicketless in two innings. This series was in India, which can be a tough place for fast bowlers.

So let us look at the series against Australia in England where Anderson’s record has been phenomenal. In his career he has taken five wickets in an innings 32 times and 10 wickets in a match three times. Playing in England he has taken five wickets in an innings on 24 occasions and all of his ten wicket hauls have been when playing at home. So in English conditions he has thrived. In this series against Australia he only took five wickets in four test matches, in eight innings. Only once did he dismiss a top order batsman, and was wicketless in three innings.

While his career would appear to be slowing down, with only 15 wickets in six test matches in 2023 how does his wicket taking per innings compare with those in the tables above?

Once again as you would expect the statistics are very similar. However, they show again the consistency and effectiveness of Dennis Lillee and also Sir Richard Hadlee. A consistency that is to be admired and respected. Dale Steyn again shows that he should be mentioned in such company. It is worth noting that Malcolm Marshall averaged 2.49 wickets per innings; the only reason he was not in the comparison list was he took 376 test wickets and there had to be a cut off point.

Some have said the most important measure of a bowler is how many wickets they average per match. Although it is vital to take into account that in some matches they may only bowl in one innings.

Once again there are probably no surprises that Lillee, Hadlee and Steyn are the highest in this comparison, with McGrath and Trueman not far behind. Of these 12 bowlers only Stuart Broad comes in below Jimmy Anderson.

It is worth noting that in the history of Test Cricket Lillee comes in 19th and Hadlee 21st, with Shane Warne 22nd when comparing wickets per match. England’s SF (Sydney) Barnes tops the list averaging an incredible seven wickets per Test with 189 wickets in 27 matches. Of the modern day players Prabath Jayasuriya of Sri Lanka is averaging 6.70 with 67 wickets in ten matches, and India’s Ravichandran Ashwin 5.16 per match having taken 516 wickets in 100 Tests, both of these are slow bowlers.

Of course there is no perfect measure. For example the great Malcolm Marshall does not appear on this list, although he averaged 4.64 per match. Marshall’s record some will say was hurt by the fact that he was part of a great bowling attack in which wickets were regularly shared around. Sir Richard Hadlee it is fair to say for much of his career carried the New Zealand bowling attack. (If You Know Your History…)

The key is you need your opening bowlers to be taking wickets consistently. You need them to be removing the top order and not juts cleaning up the tail. Once a fast bowler stops taking wickets at the top of the order you know that their time is up.

Looking at these statistics is Anderson really among the greats? Does longevity guarantee greatness? Remembering the definition that greatness is “attributed to individuals who possess a natural ability to be better than all others.” Surely context needs to be given to his 700 wickets, and the fact that he has kept playing, and has played the most test matches of any fast bowler. Does that alone guarantee greatness?

When Virgin Atlantic was having problems with British Airways in the 1990’s Sir Richard Branson came out with a wonderful quote, that seems similarly applicable in this situation. Branson was quoted as saying “calling yourself the World”s Favourite Airline, just because you carry the most passengers is like saying the M25 is the World’s favourite motorway!”

Taking the most wickets and having played the most test matches of any fast bowler does not reflect greatness. It does confirm what Fred Trueman said when asked if his record would be beaten, “Aye, but whoever does will be bloody tired.”

If picking two teams of the world’s best players would Anderson gain selection in either side? Of course this is subjective, but to many who know the game he wouldn’t.

There have been some wonderful players over the length of time that Test cricket has been played, only the very few are guaranteed legendary status. Then come those who were truly great. Despite the claims of the media managers and many of the sycophants in the press today looking to gain attention, many of today’s players will not in time be afforded the honour of being labelled ‘great.’ Time will in the end decide who is afforded that privilege, and time will decide whether ultimately Anderson outside of England is viewed as one of the great fast bowlers. Based on his statistical record one has to say that in time that is unlikely.