Steve Harmison when he was playing well or Ryan sidebottom now WHOES better?

Question

Extra info on Harmisons current form;;....Harmison, finished with 3-39, is aiming for a recall to the England squad for the third Test against New Zealand which starts on June 5th at Trent Bridge.

Answer 1

Steve Harmison is the better bowler, when he's in form. He's a tough little cricketer. He's gone through so much, and had to hold a lot of mental stress, he's had an up and down career, which i think has had a big impact on him. he is a great bowler but he could be better, the stress of cricket is weighing him down.

I've said it before, Ryan Sidebottom hasn't matured as a bowler in my opinion, he's on his way but not just yet. He's just established himself as a bowler, He needs a few more months as a 'just been established' bowler. Once he gets into the rhythm he'll be as good as harmison if not better. He's a very detirmined bowler and slowly making his way to the top.

Answer 2

Harmison is better.

Answer 3

I didn't know Harmison had ever been in form! I go for Sidebottom.

Answer 4

harmison

Answer 5

Harmison may be an out and out wicket taking bowler who is always going to be erratic (hey Kook, do you remember the first ball of the Ashes!! bet that memory still gives you nightmares!! LOL), the same may be said of Jimmy Anderson, however, bowlers like that need bowlers like Sidebottom at the other to keep the pressure on and bowl tight and give away nothing!

to me it depends on the side you have, if its Flintoff, Broad (bear in mind, i have never seen broad bowl so i dont know what to think of him) and Anderson then you want a bowler like Sidebottom who can just put the ball on the spot and give away no runs, but if you have a side thats say Flintoff, Broad and Hoggard, then you probably want someone like Harmi to come on and give 'em h**l! but to pick one i would choose Sidebottom, he might be a boring on the spot bowl, but australia had one recently, and he got over 500 test wickets

altho, given the choice, id pick Simon Jones over both of them, but i'm just a big fan of his!! Englands best bowler in 2005, flintoff was good but i think Jones was better

Answer 6

Fantastic Question!!!

The answer in my opinion is Steve Harmison.

Harmison is a geniune wicket taker, when he was in form (through 2004-2005), he was one of he fastest and defintely one of the most hostile bowlers in the world!!. Harmison even back in his glory days was inaccurate, but what he had about him was a wicket-taking attribute. Harmison could bowl bad spells but yet end up with 4 or 5 wickets in the innings.

Unfortunately...

The same cant be said of Sidebottom, Sidebottom for the last year has been in superb form, he has been the spearhead of England's attack!!, he is at the moment the best bowler that England have. BUT Sidebottom is still not a geniune wicket taker. Sidey can bowl fantastic spells and end up with 1 or 2 wickets, compared with lets say Jimmy Anderson who could have only bowled 10 decent deliveries in the innings but yet still took 3 or 4 wickets. Sidebottom is not yet a geniune wicket-taker!. This was proved in Englands tour of Sri Lanka when he bowled well day after day, but he got hardly any wickets throughout the whole tour.

So to sum up, when at his best Harmison has more chance of taking a wicket than Sidebottom, he is more dangerous to face than Sidebottom, and he is the better option for England to choose.

Answer 7

Harmison, when he is on form, is easily the best and most hostile pace bowler England have. Sidebottom on form is reliable and very useful, but scares no-one.  No-one would describe Sidebottom as fast, and the world's best batsman see nothing from him that they haven't already encountered and coped with.

The real problem is that Harmison has not been in form for at least three years.