Matt79
Hall of Fame Member
Well Mitch has taken 8 wickets in two matches AND scored a half century. Hughes has scored a streaky 37 and looked completely at sea against a plan that an opening batsmanNot sure I agree with that. Hughes has simply succumbed to plans that were set for him, to which our opening bowlers should get a lot of credit. Johnson on the other hand has just looked all over the place, rather than batsmen working out a way to counter his bowling he has simply bowled poorly. My kid brother barely knows a thing about cricket and said after the second Test, "that Johnson's rubbish isn't he?"
That being said, I think part of the logic is that in cricket people generally seem to be prepared to give batsmen more of a chance than bowlers.
Also, I think if there was someone like Jaques in the squad, Hughes being dropped for him wouldn't be greeted with such outcry. The impression I'm getting is that people are happy to see Watto in the side but not at the top of the order.
should be able to deal with (shock, horror, they're bowling bouncers at me!! ).
I'm not really saying that Mitch has bowled that well - he was average in Wales and bad in Lords, but pointing out that people want to give Hughes time to get right because
of what he did in SA, whereas they aren't willing to do that for Johnson.