I really don't think Broad is as good at scoring quick runs. Broad is a better batsman but when you need someone to just smash a few boundaries I think Johnson is your man.Broad?
Fair enough.I really don't think Broad is as good at scoring quick runs. Broad is a better batsman but when you need someone to just smash a few boundaries I think Johnson is your man.
Aesthetically speaking, he's always been that way.haha.....johnson looking better with the bat than he does with the ball
Cummins/Siddle/MJ for the NZ tests thenJohnson will take wickets second dig here.
I meant tehcnicallyAesthetically speaking, he's always been that way.
Girlfriend concurs he's very aesthetically pleasing.Aesthetically speaking, he's always been that way.
He sort of reminds me of Cairns in how he hits the ball, uses a lot of muscle combined with some classical cricketing strokes to hit his boundaries. Oddly for a lower order slogger he doesn't get many of his runs by freeing up his arms and hoicking it away.Aesthetically speaking, he's always been that way.
Yeah that's what I'm thinking. God he is a ****ing enigma. It's like he suddenly just decides to play well sometimes. He doesn't seem to have normal ups and downs like everyone else, sometimes, and seemingly randomly, things just click with him. I just don't get it.Johnson will take wickets second dig here.
James Franklin mk III really wonder how good Johnson could have been if he was a batsman and didn't bowl at all.
in b4 'he is a batsman'.
I'm not sure the selectors have signed a pledge in blood with regards to Cummins but certainly MJ and Siddle only play well when selected in the same side.Cummins/Siddle/MJ for the NZ tests then