Mitchell Johnson

[Gunnar Longshanks]

I reckon Johnson could go either way.

He could develop into a world-class quick, but I just wonder how long he has to deliver.

He'll turn 27 in November. Still young enough, but he's not a kid. By now, he should be able to bowl line and length and put the ball in the right areas.

I hear all the arguments for his retention. He's a talent. He adds variety. We have to persist with younger cricketers. He's only played a handful of Tests. That's all well and good, but surely those considerations shouldn't keep him in the side indefinitely. At some point he actually has to justify his selection with performances.

I'm not a Johnson-hater. It might all click for him once he's played 15-odd Tests. I think he's shown a bit, but it's been patchy, and a lot of his Test wickets have been cheap ones or tailenders.

And it's not as though the fast bowling cupboard is bare. There are quite a few guys behind Johnson who seem pretty capable, many of whom have superior FC records:

Mitchell Johnson
Ashley Noffke
Shaun Tait
Nathan Bracken

And there are others who aren't far behind:

Doug Bollinger
Ben Hilfenhaus

If Johnson continues to blow hot and cold, nursing an average in the low 30s, surely one of these other guys deserves a crack at some stage.

Johnson may yet come good - I'm not drawing a line through him. But these other guys might well offer more. We can't continue to pick Johnson based on what he might do forever.

It will be interesting to see if Johnson's curve heads upwards over the next 12 months. Is he likely to be part of our best attack come the Ashes in 2009?

If I had to make a prediction, I would probably lean towards Johnson continuing to frustrate. That said, I am prepared for him to embarrass me.

 

[Ice goddess]

I think we can afford to carry him at the moment with Clark and Lee bowling so well. Our attack is comfortably the best in world cricket so just let him continue to develop. Someone should help him with his accuracy though.

 

[trev106]

Do ya reckon his trying to bowl to fast? I think his got the talent to become a great bowler but if McGill goes down or keeps bowling the crap he did in the 1st test can we afford to carry them both?

 

[Bradesmaen]

I reckon Johnson could go either way.

He could develop into a world-class quick, but I just wonder how long he has to deliver.

He'll turn 27 in November. Still young enough, but he's not a kid. By now, he should be able to bowl line and length and put the ball in the right areas.

I hear all the arguments for his retention. He's a talent. He adds variety. We have to persist with younger cricketers. He's only played a handful of Tests. That's all well and good, but surely those considerations shouldn't keep him in the side indefinitely. At some point he actually has to justify his selection with performances.

I'm not a Johnson-hater. It might all click for him once he's played 15-odd Tests. I think he's shown a bit, but it's been patchy, and a lot of his Test wickets have been cheap ones or tailenders.

And it's not as though the fast bowling cupboard is bare. There are quite a few guys behind Johnson who seem pretty capable, many of whom have superior FC records:

Mitchell Johnson
Ashley Noffke
Shaun Tait
Nathan Bracken

And there are others who aren't far behind:

Doug Bollinger
Ben Hilfenhaus

If Johnson continues to blow hot and cold, nursing an average in the low 30s, surely one of these other guys deserves a crack at some stage.

Johnson may yet come good - I'm not drawing a line through him. But these other guys might well offer more. We can't continue to pick Johnson based on what he might do forever.

It will be interesting to see if Johnson's curve heads upwards over the next 12 months. Is he likely to be part of our best attack come the Ashes in 2009?

If I had to make a prediction, I would probably lean towards Johnson continuing to frustrate. That said, I am prepared for him to embarrass me.

I didn't know Mitchell Hackson had a clone! Dear god, save us all.

 

[frankrizzo]

I like jonhson and i think he can develop into a quality bowler but right at this moment we have a 2 man bowling attack.

Noffke deserves his shot as the third seamer(and he can bat at 8 as lee has badly regressed as far as batting goes) and as a bonus we force ponting to give clark the new ball.

Earth to ponting, johnson isn't swinging the new ball and he bowls well with the old one.

Earth to ponting, clark is the man the opposition least want to face with the new rock.

 

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

Gunnar, you have to realise that Johnson has just played his 7th test, not every new player can start of like Stuart Clark. Johnson has to be persisted with in the remaining test matchs. He bowled quite economically despite popular opinion with an economy rate under 3. He will come good.

 

[Johnson#26]

Would love to see Noffke get a run ahead of him.

 

[pluga_4]

the upcoming tour of india may well be his make or break tour.

 

[davey_magik]

When he swings the new ball I'll rate him.

 

[walkers a legend]

I think it will except Hilfenhaus >>>>>>> any other young bowler.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

I think we can afford to carry him at the moment with Clark and Lee bowling so well.

Maybe we can afford to carry him, but that's not really the objective is it? Just playing him repeatedly because Clark and Lee are good enough?

At some point, we actually have to assess whether he is part of our best attack.

 

[rusdid24]

Maybe we can afford to carry hi, but that's not really the objective is it? Just playing him repeatedly because Clark and Lee are good enough?

At some point, we actually have to assess whether he is part of our best attack.

And this is the key. We've had Lee and Clark carrying bowlers since the SL series, all the way through til now.
If these guys aren't pulling their weight, it's time to throw in Noffke or Bollinger and see if they can do the job instead.

 

[frankrizzo]

We certainly can't carry a bowler in India.

To even stand a chance of winning there you need all 3 quicks firing.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

My concern with Johnson is also about what we might be missing out on by not giving others a shot.

Bollinger and Noffke have done enough to deserve a crack. Are we going to leave Hilfenhaus on the shelf indefinitely?

If we get to the 2009 Ashes and these guys are still untried at Test level, we will have backed ourselves into a position of weakness. We will have limited our options.

If by then Johnson has come good and is an automatic selection, then great. But if he's still 50-50, bowling well in patches and generally hit-and-miss, we need to know what the other guys are capable of at Test level. Otherwise, we will be choosing between the unproven Johnson and other guys who are unknowns.

Remember what happened in 2005? McGrath got injured and Gillespie lost form. Suddenly Tait had to debut in support of Lee and Kasper. Not ideal.

By 2009, we need to have had a good look at the guys competing for that third fast bowling spot. To keep picking Johnson on faith alone isn't smart. Even if he becomes a good bowler, the higher priority should be to see what the others can do and then select our best team from there. That side may still include Johnson, but we shouldn't go to the Ashes without knowing our options.

Ideally, we'll have six quicks to choose from. But if we don't give Bollinger, Noffke and Hilfenhaus a chance to impress at Test level, we'll be narrowing the field unnecessarily.

 

[Theseventhhamster]

If he looks good in ads he'll be fine. A certain other paceman threw pies for half a decade and only got dropped once.

 

[roostersgal4eva]

Well its harsh to judge someone on their 7th test so Im prepared to give him a go

Im looking foward to Ben Hilfenhaus getting a game actually

 

[DaRick]

Writing him off now seems a touch premature, disappointing though he was this Test match. His performances during the 2007/08 season were often respectable, at the very least. Certainly, I felt that he bowled a lot better than his Indian counterpart, RP Singh (Pathan didn't play enough matches, for mine).

I have supported him, so I hope that he comes good eventually. He already has in the ODI's, despite some inconsistency.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Writing him off now seems a touch premature, disappointing though he was this Test match. His performances during the 2007/08 season were often respectable, at the very least. Certainly, I felt that he bowled a lot better than his Indian counterpart, RP Singh (Pathan didn't play enough matches, for mine).

No-one's writing him off. But it's entirely legitimate to ask whether he is our best option as the third quick. Something's wrong if that question doesn't get asked.

You say his performances were respectable. I'd say they were patchy:

http://www.howstat.com/cricket/Statistics/Players/PlayerProgressBowl.asp?PlayerID=3334

Flattered by knocking over quite a few tailenders.

 

[DaRick]

No-one's writing him off. But it's entirely legitimate to ask whether he is our best option as the third quick. Something's wrong if that question doesn't get asked.

Yeah, you're right, that is a legit question. However, some here have been writing him off ("Mitchell Hackson" is a jibe I've encountered here).

You say his performances were respectable. I'd say they were patchy:

http://www.howstat.com/cricket/Statistics/Players/PlayerProgressBowl.asp?PlayerID=3334

Flattered by knocking over quite a few tailenders.

Let's see: No tailenders out of 8 during the SL series (I don't consider Prasanna Jayawardene to be quite in that category) and 5/16 tailenders during the IND series (I don't consider Pathan or Dhoni to be tailend batsmen). That comes to 5/24. I wouldn't consider that to be 'quite a few'.

His performances weren't entirely consistent, yes, but read what I said:

"His performances during the 2007/08 season were often respectable, at the very least."

He was fine against Sri Lanka (he lost it towards the end of the 2nd inns in Hobart, though). In Melbourne, he didn't bowl badly. In Sydney and in the 2nd innings in Perth, he sucked. In Adelaide, he was pleasing.

That's 8 or 9 out of 12 possible innings. For the most part, then, I consider him to be respectable.

You have a different opinion, then fine. We'll agree to disagree. I just think that he's received too many brickbats for his Test performances over the summer, that's all.

 

[m.diddy]

We get a little exposed at the moment once the Lee/Clark spell first spell is finished and the windies batsmen will take advantage of the Macgill/Johnson spell and was evident on the last day where the windies tail wagged a bit.

 

[pup23]

judge him at the end of the current test series but things wont be looking good if he doesnt perform soon as there is to much being relied on lee and clark with also stuart macgill being a passenger and only get wickets with bull bangers or gettin the number 11 out who cant hold a bat

 

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

You gotta roll with it, you gotta take your time

 

[swanniez1983]

No-one's writing him off. But it's entirely legitimate to ask whether he is our best option as the third quick. Something's wrong if that question doesn't get asked.

You say his performances were respectable. I'd say they were patchy:

http://www.howstat.com/cricket/Statistics/Players/PlayerProgressBowl.asp?PlayerID=3334

Flattered by knocking over quite a few tailenders.

Can you spell I R O N Y?

Why are cricket fans compelled to prematurely call for players to be dropped?

 

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

Can you spell I R O N Y?

Why are cricket fans compelled to prematurely call for players to be dropped?

Mr Longshanks my friend, you have been PWNED.

 

[rumblah]

When he swings the new ball I'll rate him.

so you didnt rate Mcgrath or Clark for that matter??