Is mitchell johnson once in generation fast bowler?

[tooextracool]

Exactly. But with pace alone, he would be a left-handed Tino Best. The fact is that the movement, bounce and accuracy are what will bring him success ADDED to the pace. The pace is not primary.

Besides, Johnson is so much better a bowler than Bradshaw on potential.

could it be that pace is just as important as accuracy which is just as important as being able to move the ball of the pitch and in the air? unless you are 6'6 like mcgrath or walsh, you are never going to be able to take wickets without pace, no matter how accurate you are.

 

[Laurrz]

Err, you cannot teach line-and-length. Or rather, you can teach it only to a certain degree.

Otherwise he who pracised the most would be the most accurate.

You can teach someone to swing a ball, but the ball still needs to be in the right condition.

yes, thats pretty much what i meant.. u CAN teach all those stuff... effectively or not is another matter.. but its possible.. u cant with pace..either have it or not

 

[Laurrz]

Brett Lee pretty conclusively disproves that.

Without a decent accuracy, no bowler is anything.

Bings getting better, a lot better then before, as he is getting accuracy... more..
Johnson has already shown he has consistency with that line to the right handers.. if he had not had the pace tho, he'd just be like a Bradshaw...with due respect to Bradshaw whos very handy,hes not a matchwinner..not in test matches anyway

 

[adharcric]

Honestly i dislike having 10 different categories, medium fast, fast medium, medium and what not. Its ridiculous. By and large the same people that call collingwood medium pace call pollock fast medium despite the fact that collingwood is probably quicker. For mine there are 3 categories, medium, fast and express.its simple to categorize bowlers within those categories IMO.

Where do you define the boundaries? For me, 75-80 is medium, 80-85 is medium-fast, 85-90 is fast-medium and 90+ is fast.
Perhaps you can group MF and FM into fast and call 90+ express.

 

[adharcric]

unless you are 6'6 like mcgrath or walsh, you are never going to be able to take wickets without pace, no matter how accurate you are.

Vaas? Are you suggesting that McGrath is special more because of his height (bounce) than his accuracy?

 

[honestbharani]

One funny thing about Johnson's emergence is, coupled with the emergence of Asif, it may just abt provide Pakistan with their version of Glenn McGrath and Australia with their version of Wasim Akram.


If these two match those two legends, it would be funny to see how many guys rate Akram and Asif above McGrath and Johnson and vice versa. Like, people who now believe Akram is a better bowler than McGrath, should, if their opinions dont change, rate Johnson above Asif.


Granted, it has a lot of provisos, but it will be funny if it did happen.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Johnson's so different a bowler to Akram. Of course, probably won't be nearly as good, but he's not of his ilk at all in terms of how they attempt to get their wickets. Johnson seems to be a back of a length bowler most of the time.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Classifying a bowler's "pace" isn't all about what they clock.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Johnson's so different a bowler to Akram. Of course, probably won't be nearly as good, but he's not of his ilk at all in terms of how they attempt to get their wickets. Johnson seems to be a back of a length bowler most of the time.

Yeah, and Asif isn't that much like McGrath either IMO. In reality, I think Asif has a lot more in common with Wasim than Johnson does. Aside from being left-armers who swing the ball, there really isn't much that's similar. It's like comparing Brett Lee and Matthew Hoggard or something. Asif is a really prodigeous mover of the ball both ways and bowls a similar length to Wasim.

 

[shortpitched713]

Classifying a bowler's "pace" isn't all about what they clock.

So "pace" would be classified by the length of one's hair, or the size of one's foot?

 

[Pup Clarke]

He might mean that some bowlers hit the bat harder than others.Someone like Lee could bowl a 95mph delivery but the batsmen might not feel it as that as the ball's speed has signifacantly decreased when the bowler let's the ball out of his hand.

 

[Richard]

Can't exactly remember the exact number off of the top of my head, but the fact that he was dropped several times doesn't mean he didn't get the runs. When he was dropped he made the opposition pay big time, and later on in the year he tended to give less chances. Theres no way you're going to bat chancelessly for an entire year.

It's not difficult to make people pay big-time when you're being dropped every 70 runs or so.

Of course no-one is going to bat chancelessly for an entire year, otherwise people would go whole years without being dismissed. Very, very few, however, have as much luck as Mohammad Yousuf did between Karachi against England in the last game in 2005 and the end of that West Indies series - where he was dropped more times than ever.

 

[Richard]

Honestly i dislike having 10 different categories, medium fast, fast medium, medium and what not. Its ridiculous. By and large the same people that call collingwood medium pace call pollock fast medium despite the fact that collingwood is probably quicker. For mine there are 3 categories, medium, fast and express.its simple to categorize bowlers within those categories IMO.

It's equally simple to categorise bowlers as medium, medium-fast, fast-medium and fast.

Those definitions are those I prefer.

Low 70s - medium; high 70s, medium-fast; low 80s, fast-medium; high 80s, fast. And you might add very fast for 90s, but such bowlers are exceptionally unusual.

And I don't really call many people "medium" because as I said, such a pace is virtually useless at any decent level of cricket.

 

[Richard]

yes, thats pretty much what i meant.. u CAN teach all those stuff... effectively or not is another matter.. but its possible.. u cant with pace..either have it or not

There are many things a bowler can do to increase his speed. About as many, in fact, as he can to increase his accuracy.

The simple fact of the matter, however, is that there is a ceiling for both and without the natural talent there's not a lot that can be done about either.

 

[Richard]

Vaas? Are you suggesting that McGrath is special more because of his height (bounce) than his accuracy?

Vaas used until fairly recently to be 78-80mph-ish.

It's only recently that he's been 74-75, and it's no coincidence that he's struggled to be effective since being worn down to such a pace.

 

[Richard]

Classifying a bowler's "pace" isn't all about what they clock.

Indeed, it isn't.

What a bowler clocks is simply the pace of the ball as it leaves his hand. Even in the time between leaving the hand and hitting the pitch the ball loses one hell of a lot of speed.

And when it hits, it loses about the same again in that instant.

I've long maintained that it'd be infinately more revealing to have two speeds displayed on the auto-display that you get after (almost) every delivery, because some bowlers lose less off the pitch than others.

An effect often referred to as the "heavy ball" effect. Those who lose least off the pitch "bowl a heavy ball".

And that is almost as important as the speed out of the hand.

 

[Pup Clarke]

It's equally simple to categorise bowlers as medium, medium-fast, fast-medium and fast.




And I don't really call many people "medium" because as I said, such a pace is virtually useless at any decent level of cricket.

How come Craig McMillan was bowling 70mph and causing trouble for the England batsmen.Feel someone who bowls at 60-70mph is much more effective than 90mph+ as they take the pace off the ball and bowlers like Collingwood and McMillan can be effective in the middle overs when the ball goes soft

McMillan's figures 7-1-38-2
Hardly Useless?

 

[Richard]

It's like comparing Brett Lee and Matthew Hoggard or something.

They're not so dissimilar as you'd think.

Both were for a long time bowlers who could cause big problems with a swinging ball but were utterly innocuous when they couldn't attain any swing.

And both have learnt one or two more tricks from a certain stage. Hoggard IMO a little better than Lee.

 

[Richard]

How come Craig McMillan was bowling 70mph and causing trouble for the England batsmen.Feel someone who bowls at 60-70mph is much more effective than 90mph+ as they take the pace off the ball and bowlers like Collingwood and McMillan can be effective in the middle overs when the ball goes soft

McMillan's figures 7-1-38-2
Hardly Useless?

You or me could "cause trouble" if we were bowling at a team chasing 11-an-over.

McMillan hardly bowled well, he just bowled at a good time for someone to bowl if they're looking for wickets. Collingwood as has been said is far more than a mere medium-pacer, he's usually in the late-70s mph.

I'd also add there's only one person who's ever bowled 60-70mph since we've been able to know accurately what speed a bowler is, and that's Chris Harris.

 

[Pup Clarke]

Yeah but he still wasn't bowling floaty half volley's that were going to spanked out the ground.He mixed his pace up well and some of his off breaks turned a mile to Nixon.