Mitchell Johnson bowling over the wicket to right handed batsmen

[Sir Alex]

yet he was still was the leading wicket taker in both series. Considering the lack of experienced support, reckon he did fairly well.

No, he was not. In Australia he was 3rd overall best wickettaker with the worst SR among the top 7 bowlers.

Cricket Records | Records | Border-Gavaskar Trophy, 2007/08 | Most wickets | Cricinfo.com

In India he averaged over 40 per wicket and was overall 4th best in wickettakers list.

Cricket Records | Records | Border-Gavaskar Trophy, 2008/09 | Most wickets | Cricinfo.com

as regards to support, in Australia, Brett Lee was the attack leader and he topped the list at 22 a piece. In India, he lacked that kind of support from Lee for sure. But he got admirable help from Watson. He was actually fortunate to end up with figures that he did eventually.

 

[Sir Alex]

Worth noting that he's comfortably a better bowler now, than when India last toured in what was only Johnsons second test series.

Is he? Well he has not put on much variety nor pace in the last 12 months. And after Ashes 2009, I am not sure he has achieved much more control also. To be fair, I did not watch him in the recent series so I cannot really comment on that. He is still the blow hot blow cold kind of bowler for me; somebody like Zaheer Khan or James Anderson who can blow away batting lineups when in form but is completely listless when not in control.

 

[pasag]

Is he? Well he has not put on much variety nor pace in the last 12 months. And after Ashes 2009, I am not sure he has achieved much more control also. To be fair, I did not watch him in the recent series so I cannot really comment on that. He is still the blow hot blow cold kind of bowler for me; somebody like Zaheer Khan or James Anderson who can blow away batting lineups when in form but is completely listless when not in control.

And yet he still takes wickets when not in form, 63 last year to be precise.

 

[Sir Alex]

And yet he still takes wickets when not in form, 63 last year to be precise.

Of course he has had a good year except for the Ashes. He was unplayable in South Africa, unplayably dire in England, and good so far in the summer though the batting lineups he had to bowl to were not strictly world class. As tooextracool said, he is a one-trick pony and good batsmen will learn to counter him quickly if he continues to rely on this outside off stump line.

 

[NUFAN]

How the hell is he a one trick pony? How about the wickets he's gotten from the slower balls and also when he gets top order batsman out LBW?

 

[pasag]

Of course he has had a good year except for the Ashes. He was unplayable in South Africa, unplayably dire in England, and good so far in the summer though the batting lineups he had to bowl to were not strictly world class. As tooextracool said, he is a one-trick pony and good batsmen will learn to counter him quickly if he continues to rely on this outside off stump line.

Didn't they say the same about McGrath?

 

[Son Of Coco]

b) he will struggle to take wickets on slower wickets away from home, because he really wont be beating very many batsmen by bowling wide of the off stump (this is also why he struggled in England).

Well, he struggled in England because he rarely hit the same spot on the wicket twice for the most part. He's been more accurate against Pakistan and was so against SA too. Whether it continues or not is anyone's guess.

 

[stephen]

How the hell is he a one trick pony? How about the wickets he's gotten from the slower balls and also when he gets top order batsman out LBW?

This. Johnson has the best slower ball in world cricket at the moment, but rarely bowls it. It is extremely difficult to pick up and is only 10 kms slower, which makes it quite deadly. He usually throws it wide as a sucker ball too.

 

[social]

Of course he has had a good year except for the Ashes. He was unplayable in South Africa, unplayably dire in England, and good so far in the summer though the batting lineups he had to bowl to were not strictly world class. As tooextracool said, he is a one-trick pony and good batsmen will learn to counter him quickly if he continues to rely on this outside off stump line.

Utter nonsense

Johnson bowls away swingers at up to 90 mph to the right hander - he DOES NOT simply chuck it wide of off stump and hope someone is stupid enough to chase a wide, straight ball

And, btw, Ntini took 380 odd test wickets and has never bowled an away swinger in his life so I really dont get what the preoccupation is with Johnson swinging the ball both ways is anyway

As it is, the way he is going, Johnson will beat that and add a lot of runs to boot

That's a career t be more than proud of

 

[Sir Alex]

Whoa! I think you Australians are feeling the same way about Johnson the way us Indians feel about Tendulkar.

How the hell is he a one trick pony? How about the wickets he's gotten from the slower balls and also when he gets top order batsman out LBW?

I should have been a bit more explanatory on the term one trick. I meant "one-strategy" basically. He keeps on bowling outside off stump and sometimes catches the batsman by surprise by bringing one inside. It might look effective but good batsmen will always find a a way out to deal with him as I have seen Indian batsmen have done.

Didn't they say the same about McGrath?

McGrath is a master bowler and you are painfully reducing him to the level of the Johnsons and the Zaheers. McGrath used to operate in the cliched "corridor of uncertainty" which even the most established batsmen used to get foxed by his line. Apart from that he had the ability to swing it both ways (albeit not banana swing but just the subtle "enough to take edges" variety) and ability to seam it into the right hander from a good length which fetched him lbws and bowleds. In fact he had almost all weapons that a fast bowler could dream of except rocket pace.

This. Johnson has the best slower ball in world cricket at the moment, but rarely bowls it. It is extremely difficult to pick up and is only 10 kms slower, which makes it quite deadly. He usually throws it wide as a sucker ball too.

What good is a "world class slower delivery" when it is seldom used? I must confess I have not watched him of late so I don't know how many wickets he has taken with this delivery. But I hardly saw him use that against us and that was easily dealt with.

Utter nonsense

Johnson bowls away swingers at up to 90 mph to the right hander - he DOES NOT simply chuck it wide of off stump and hope someone is stupid enough to chase a wide, straight ball

And, btw, Ntini took 380 odd test wickets and has never bowled an away swinger in his life so I really dont get what the preoccupation is with Johnson swinging the ball both ways is anyway

As it is, the way he is going, Johnson will beat that and add a lot of runs to boot

That's a career t be more than proud of

His line is far too outside the off stump and regardless of the swing he is able to get, it is basically useless if he pitches it that far outside. Of course he will get the aggressive mediocre batsmen as he is getting now. I agree with your comparison with Ntini. Johnson like him puts in so much hardwork into his bowling, is virtually untiring, and hits the deck hard. I predict a final bowling average of around 30 for Johnson which is pretty good in this era and a batting average in the middle to higher 20s which will be enough proof of him as a world class bowling allrounder.

 

[social]

No-one is comparing Johnson to McGrath, Tendulkar or Garry Sobers

However, many of us find it laughable that some people think his wickets come exclusively via luck or poor batting

Do you really think that the batsmen dont know what he is trying to do?

Anyway, all you have to ask yourself is how many 90 mph left-handed bowlers have there been in history

The answer is not very many and that should go a long way to telling you why batsmen are made to look so clueless on occasion

 

[Sir Alex]

No-one is comparing Johnson to McGrath, Tendulkar or Garry Sobers

However, many of us find it laughable that some people think his wickets come exclusively via luck or poor batting

Do you really think that the batsmen dont know what he is trying to do?

Anyway, all you have to ask yourself is how many 90 mph left-handed bowlers have there been in history

The answer is not very many and that should go a long way to telling you why batsmen are made to look so clueless on occasion

You sound more like a PR than an arguer social I agreed above he is a "different" bowler and not many lefties are there bowling at 90 kmph. When Paul Adams came there weren't many chinamen bowlers around, alteast not one who looks at the sightscreen behind through his legs when bowling! I am an Indian supporter and the only time I found him absolutely threatening was in one or two ODIs and seldom in test matches. I will repeat he will end up in the Ntini / Hughes / Lee category - a honest trier but I cannot see him moving up to that elite which is currently occupied by only Steyn in world cricket.

 

[social]

You sound more like a PR than an arguer social I agreed above he is a "different" bowler and not many lefties are there bowling at 90 kmph. When Paul Adams came there weren't many chinamen bowlers around, alteast not one who looks at the sightscreen behind through his legs when bowling! I am an Indian supporter and the only time I found him absolutely threatening was in one or two ODIs and seldom in test matches. I will repeat he will end up in the Ntini / Hughes / Lee category - a honest trier but I cannot see him moving up to that elite which is currently occupied by only Steyn in world cricket.

Mate, I dont know one Oz supporter that expects him to be an all-timer but if he ends up being a Lee etc then he'll be in the top 5 in the world for the rest of his career (given the paucity of talent around at present). That's a very good result

Anyway, IMO, Bollinger is already a better bowler but if we can find one more to support those 2, then we're talking a serious pace attack

BTW, comparisons with Paul Adams are grossly unfair to Johnson - he never had a record that remotely compared and was worked out in a heartbeat

 

[pasag]

McGrath is a master bowler and you are painfully reducing him to the level of the Johnsons and the Zaheers. McGrath used to operate in the cliched "corridor of uncertainty" which even the most established batsmen used to get foxed by his line. Apart from that he had the ability to swing it both ways (albeit not banana swing but just the subtle "enough to take edges" variety) and ability to seam it into the right hander from a good length which fetched him lbws and bowleds. In fact he had almost all weapons that a fast bowler could dream of except rocket pace.

Noone is "reducing him to their levels", however you had idiots when McGrath was playing saying why dont batsman just do this, he'll be figured out eventually etc etc as he was taking bags of wickets. Who has taken more wickets than Mitch in the past two years? It's really not a matter of batsman figuring him out either as when he's accurate and in form he can really cramp the batsman up and give him no room at all which can be deadly at a great speed. It can all fall apart when he loses that accuracy as we saw in the West Indies and England. How good Johnson is has nothing to do with how batsman play him, more about which Mitch turns up on the day. And that in itself is a concern.

 

[tooextracool]

Well, he struggled in England because he rarely hit the same spot on the wicket twice for the most part. He's been more accurate against Pakistan and was so against SA too. Whether it continues or not is anyone's guess.

This is true although its mostly the case for the first 2 tests rather than for the entire series. I dont think he is more accurate now, it is just that he has been getting players to nick the same deliveries that were being easily dispatched for 4 in England. His line and length, wide outside the off stump at 90mph is more likely to be dispatched for 4 in England than in Australia.

If batsmen opted for a more conservative approach against Johnson and left anything that he bowled that pitched on or outside off, he wouldnt get a batsman out.

 

[tooextracool]

He usually throws it wide as a sucker ball too.

Just like every other delivery that he bowls.

 

[Jarquis]

Noone is "reducing him to their levels", however you had idiots when McGrath was playing saying why dont batsman just do this, he'll be figured out eventually etc etc as he was taking bags of wickets. Who has taken more wickets than Mitch in the past two years? It's really not a matter of batsman figuring him out either as when he's accurate and in form he can really cramp the batsman up and give him no room at all which can be deadly at a great speed. It can all fall apart when he loses that accuracy as we saw in the West Indies and England. How good Johnson is has nothing to do with how batsman play him, more about which Mitch turns up on the day. And that in itself is a concern.

Nobody but nor has anybody bowled in more innings or more overs.

 

[tooextracool]

Mitch has played a lot of tests this year, but hes also bowled a lot at home and a few in South Africa. I would really like to see how he goes outside because thus far hes been a miserable failure in all bar the series to SA, which really was a freak exception given that for the only time in his career he got the ball to swing.

 

[Sir Alex]

Mate, I dont know one Oz supporter that expects him to be an all-timer but if he ends up being a Lee etc then he'll be in the top 5 in the world for the rest of his career (given the paucity of talent around at present). That's a very good result

Anyway, IMO, Bollinger is already a better bowler but if we can find one more to support those 2, then we're talking a serious pace attack

BTW, comparisons with Paul Adams are grossly unfair to Johnson - he never had a record that remotely compared and was worked out in a heartbeat

Bollinger has not really been tested so far other than against mediocre batting lineups like those of West Indies and Pakistan, even that too at home. Let him have a complete season so at the moment Johnson is definitely better than him. Johnson too was worked out as soon as he made debut by India. But yes, the comparison with Paul Adams was more of tongue in cheek to say that novelty factors don't always ensure glowing test careers. Mendis am afraid is going the same way too.

Noone is "reducing him to their levels", however you had idiots when McGrath was playing saying why dont batsman just do this, he'll be figured out eventually etc etc as he was taking bags of wickets. Who has taken more wickets than Mitch in the past two years? It's really not a matter of batsman figuring him out either as when he's accurate and in form he can really cramp the batsman up and give him no room at all which can be deadly at a great speed. It can all fall apart when he loses that accuracy as we saw in the West Indies and England. How good Johnson is has nothing to do with how batsman play him, more about which Mitch turns up on the day. And that in itself is a concern.

McGrath was never branded as a one trick pony by anyone sensible enough. Of course his ability to perform in non-assisting conditions like those of the subcontinent were questioned and credit to him for quashing all those with intelligent bowling. As regards to Johnson being the highest wickettaker it is obvious if he bowls more he will indeed get more wickets as mentioned above by others. Also I don't really rate his efforts against West Indies and Pakistan as both sides had not great batting lineups anyways. So that leaves one freakish performance against the South Africans.

 

[tooextracool]

Anyway, all you have to ask yourself is how many 90 mph left-handed bowlers have there been in history

The answer is not very many and that should go a long way to telling you why batsmen are made to look so clueless on occasion

I think thats exactly the point though. There are few left handers who bowl at 150k and they are fewer still who operate the kind of style that Mitch does. Most players are simply not used to the lines and lengths that he bowls and it really has nothing to do with how well he is bowling but more to do with the novelty factor.

This is my point in that as time goes on, batsmen will get better at facing him and he will start taking fewer wickets. On slower wickets, his style of bowling will be rendered useless, because he doesnt bowl on the stumps and effectively takes lbw and bowled dismissals out of the equation. He really is the fast bowling equivalent of Mendis and Saqlain and as soon as batsmen start figuring him out, he better have added something new to his armoury because otherwise he will not take very many wickets. Saqlain and Mendis didnt do that which is why they are both currently on the sidelines.