Yeah I think this is spot on. They bowled much better in the second innings after (finally) realising this wasn't going to work.Think they wanted to open old scars and didn't adapt quickly enough. Guess they thought if they could rough us up early then they may win the series on the opening day as we may not be mentally strong enough to come back.
He definitely did bowl a few cutters, especially in the second innings. I was half-expecting him to come on and bowl a spell of primarily cutters though, especially given the new balance of the attack, and that never happened.Johnson not attempting his cutter at all (or dide he?) baffled me. Surely on a slowish pitch it's a good idea.
Think they can go with the same plan but just Johnson to do it in the remaining tests. Hazlewood is good enough to just bowl his stuff and to be honest we have no idea how fit Starc will be. Guess the scan he has probably gone for will be telling.Yeah I think this is spot on. They bowled much better in the second innings after (finally) realising this wasn't going to work.
Chappelli logic says to bat your best guy at 3. Since he batted at 3, that means he was the best bat in his team. By implication, he therefore was a better bat than his brothers. This is the mentality we're dealing with. Must have been an awfully tense Christmas when he once criticised GChapp for being too technically perfect.
I guess it depends on the injury. If it's anything that could break down after 2 days. Surely they won't risk him. If he went down in test they could be left with Johnson having to bowl a lot of overs.I'd be surprised if it kept him out of the second test, given how well he bowled through it.
Thing is if you watch his masterclass, Warne was a big advocate of attacking bowling with defensive fields.McGrath said in his masterclass he wasn't thinking about taking a wicket every over let alone every ball. Just keep it in the right areas, Warne is just a hyperactive child.
Yet he had a habbit of taking a wicket in hsi first over. Possibly more myth than statistical truth?Graeme Swann said that as well. His first 4-6 overs he wanted to go for less than 10.
That inevitably happens when you answer direct questions from the media, they then go away and edit it to make it sound like he was complaining about the pitch when he was just briefly responding to a pointed question.Read some comments from Lehman after the game which included (another) dig at the pitch. Along with the fact he felt that they did nothing wrong in the way they played Moeen.
Swann was never an 'attacking' field setter though.Yet he had a habbit of taking a wicket in hsi first over. Possibly more myth than statistical truth?
Otherwise I agree with the idea. Makes sense
HawkeyeWhat was Johnson's highest speed
The highest speed I saw was 142
And a few in the 139/140 mark
Did he get higher than that ?