• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

**Official** New Zealand in Australia 2015

sidecast

Cricket Spectator
Johnson v Lee - Mystery

There's something I can't understand. Pundits have been telling us for years how Mitchell Johnson has been 'erratic & inconsistent' throughout his career. So how come his career average, SR & RPO figures are all lower than his contemporary and Nein 'ATG' Brett Lee?
 

Spikey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
well having two ATG bowling series helped, as did Lee blowing out his average in his last couple of games
 

thierry henry

International Coach
There's something I can't understand. Pundits have been telling us for years how Mitchell Johnson has been 'erratic & inconsistent' throughout his career. So how come his career average, SR & RPO figures are all lower than his contemporary and Nein 'ATG' Brett Lee?
Because it's also widely accepted that Lee was (by Australian standards at least) nothing special as a test bowler and also tended to be a bit expensive? And most people would probably accept that Johnson at his best was more damaging than Lee which explains both how Johnson has the better record and why Johnson would be regarded as more inconsistent?

I dunno, maybe there are people out there who think Lee comfortably>Johnson as a test bowler but I think most would agree that the stats tell a reasonably fair story. Who cares if Lee's mates in the comm box act like he was an ATG, that's a total straw man.
 

Athlai

Not Terrible
Worthy of a thread, it's a pretty good question. I'd go Johnson but I think he goes missing more than Lee ever did.
 

mr_mister

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
as a kid I used to tell everyone who would listen that Binga was overrated(though I probably used a different word)

though it was soley based on the fact his best figures were only a 5 for. I put a lot of stock in best figures, McGrath and Warne top tier with 8, Dizzy, MacGill Kasper each had 7 fa's, naturally I considered Brett to be worse than them all with his crappy best of 5/30
 

adub

International Captain
I'd say Bing was generally more consistent than Johnson. Not as dire when off, but not as destructive when on. Lee was very good when he took over from McGrath as the No.1 quick but that also generally coincided with us playing weaker opposition. Despite taking 300 test wickets most Australians would rate Lee as no where near our best.

One interesting thing about Johnson I wonder is just how much influence Ryan Harris being in the side with him had on his performance?

Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

His numbers with Ryano are ATG. Now that might just be because of those 8 matches they played together v Eng and SA coincided with Johnson hitting god mode. But I don't think it's a coincidence that when Johnson was brought back for the WACA game after missing Adelaide on the previous Ashes tour and destroyed England in the first innings Rhino was up the other end. Nor a coincidence that when Rhino went down in the next test in Melbourne Johnson reverted to crap. Harris' control and constant threat I think complemented Johnson and allowed him to be his best in a not insignificant part. Harris isn't the whole explanation for that 13/14 summer of destruction from MJ, but I reckon it played a big part.
 

sidecast

Cricket Spectator
re "...blowing out his average in his [Lee] last couple of games." Lee's average hit 30 in his 28th Test. It stayed thereabouts till the end of his career 48 Tests later.
 

Compton

International Debutant
Just caught up with yesterday's play. Typical cricket that Starc bowls an outstanding spell with the new ball, then eventually takes a wicket with a wide full toss.
 

morgieb

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Yeah, weird things happen in the 2nd innings. It's possible that losing Khawaja will leave the Aussie lineup weak for a collapse but I don't think NZ have a spinner good enough to hold the opposition in a second innings chokehold. Every instance of a team making 550 and losing has a gun spinner performance behind it - Peel, Kumble, Warne.

Even if Southee/Boult do the damage to expose a Khawaja-less middle order then I expect Voges and Marsh to set up a stiff target with NZ just hanging on at the end.

This is assuming that Taylor and Craig don't have a good partnership that lets NZ bat for another half a day this innings. If that happens they're in business.

Anyway, all 3 results back on. Cabinet is probably right that I made an error abandoning this match after a session, but in my defence, I have actually slept this weekend for a change
On this, Kumble actually only took one second innings wicket in that game. Was Agarkar that did the damage, with Sachin taking a couple of key wickets too.
 

straw man

Hall of Fame Member
No rush this morning. Every run we score and minute we keep Australia in the field helps to pile the pressure on Australia. Bat until tea if they can. Score 700 if they can.

Aus bowlers will be threatening first thing but if NZ can survive that then some level of fatigue is going to set in for Australia. I can see Taylor/Craig surviving the first hour being the difference between the tail getting blown away for 550 all out, and a fun tail wag capped with a nice Henry/Southee/Boult slogathon.
 

Cabinet96

Hall of Fame Member
Have a problem. Been typically trying to wake up for the 2nd session so far this test (usually actually waking up an hour or so into said session) but I haven't gone to sleep yet and want to see the start of play. Urgh.
 

Top