Mitchell Johnson

[davey_magik]

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

Oh please.
McGrath and Clark have superb radars. Johnson doesn't.
McGrath and Clark can both seam the ball both ways. Johnson can't.

Johnson has pace, a left arm and very little else.

And let's not mention the fact Clark has swung the ball consistently since the Indian series.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Mr Longshanks my friend, you have been PWNED.

But I'm not calling for Johnson to be dropped.

I think that we need to have a look at some other guys at some stage, and I think there's a question about whether Johnson will be top notch long-term.

But I'm not calling for Johnson to be axed. Nowhere in this thread have I made the kind of knee-jerk demands that are so common on BigFooty.

You've pwned yourself by not reading my posts and by jumping on board with a troll who knows nothing about cricket.

Disappointing.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Can you spell I R O N Y?

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

What's ironic about this?

It's perfectly legitimate to discuss the third pace bowling spot - Johnson hasn't locked it down and there are some good other candidates. But I've made no knee-jerk calls for him to be axed. There's no contradiction whatsoever between the two threads.

You're so desperate to score points against me that you'll go with something as flimsy as this.

Try again.

How come you never actually discuss cricket?

 

[rumblah]

Oh please.
McGrath and Clark have superb radars. Johnson doesn't.
McGrath and Clark can both seam the ball both ways. Johnson can't.

Johnson has pace, a left arm and very little else.

And let's not mention the fact Clark has swung the ball consistently since the Indian series.

no that wasnt my point. In fact almost the complete opposite, i know you rate them, who doesnt.

Its just your post implies that you only rate swing bowlers.

 

[w00dy]

You gotta roll with it, you gotta take your time

how about...?

Johnson's "Time is running out"

 

[frankrizzo]

Johnson mostly got in the test team based on his ability in one day cricket to bring the ball back into right handers.

Without that weapon he hasn't looked that dangerous but even though i feel like he's about to lose his place i still think he's going to play a lot for Australia but right now it's hard to justify him taking the third seamers spot over noffke and bollinger.

If he can eventually develop the ability to bring the red ball back at the righties he could be one hell of weapon for us.

 

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

But I'm not calling for Johnson to be dropped.

I think that we need to have a look at some other guys at some stage, and I think there's a question about whether Johnson will be top notch long-term.

But I'm not calling for Johnson to be axed. Nowhere in this thread have I made the kind of knee-jerk demands that are so common on BigFooty.

You've pwned yourself by not reading my posts and by jumping on board with a troll who knows nothing about cricket.

Disappointing.

What do you mean have a look at other guys at some stage, i presume that phrase entails playing some bowlers and seeing how they go. Now correct me if im wrong Mr Longshanks, but that will probably involve dropping one of the 4 bowlers. That won't be Clark or Lee, it may be MacGill or Johnson. Now if Macgill is dropped he will be replaced by a spinner, you seem to have indicated that Johnson hasnt cemeted the 3rd seamers spot therefore it is likely any new player will take his spot. You seem to know a bit about cricket 'shanks, and you have a wonderful ability to write very fluent pieces, but at times these pieces can be quite sly with a bit each way.

I rate your posts and always read what you type in any forum, but you have to admit, there is a touch of irony in this thread.

 

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

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.

Here again, the first bit of the post suggests that you dont want him dropped.

Then the remainder of the post concentrates on putting across the point that his performances haven't been acceptable. You help emphasis this point by citing stats indicating Johnsons wickets have been made up primarily of tailenders. Basically, on one thread you bring to light the correct assumption that BF can call for players to be dropped after a short time of poor performance, now you are basically doing the same here, Johnson has only played 7 matchs, and now your citing stats which are surely irrevlant considering the brief time Johnson has been playing test cricket. Your a quality poster, i respect your thoughts on cricket and what not, but here you have missed the target.

Tubby Taylor.

 

[hujsh]

I think MacGill is a bigger problem than Johnson ATM.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

What do you mean have a look at other guys at some stage, i presume that phrase entails playing some bowlers and seeing how they go. Now correct me if im wrong Mr Longshanks, but that will probably involve dropping one of the 4 bowlers.

We are now more likely to play four quicks, so we can have a look at Noffke and Bollinger and whoever else.

I would like to see what they can do.

And I never said Johnson should be dropped immediately. I've been very measured about him from the get-go.

It's a tough call, because Johnson has shown some good signs. I'm just saying that having some decent options, who are untried, complicates Johnson's ongoing selection. To keep picking him indefinitely would be counter-productive. The quality outside the team means he doesn't have a blank cheque.

He's going to have more opportunities to cement his spot, and rightly so, but those opportunities are not limitless. That's what needs to be weighed up when assessing his development. If he just treads water for the next 12 months, will he be in our best XI for the Ashes?

at times these pieces can be quite sly with a bit each way.

I'm unashamedly having a bit each way, because I think it's a really tough call with Johnson.

If we only had three decent quicks, it would be an easy decision to keep picking him. But when you've some quality guys outside the team, you run the risk of never fully knowing whether they would improve the side or not.

That's why this is an interesting discussion - there's no obvious answer.

I rate your posts and always read what you type in any forum, but you have to admit, there is a touch of irony in this thread.

Not really.

In the other thread, I was lamenting people flying off the handle prematurely.

"Jaques hasn't scored a century for a few Tests - we should drop him."

"Our batsmen failed, there needs to be changes."

That sort of crap. Knee-jerk BS.

Regarding Johnson, I have no real conviction about whether he will be good long-term or not. I'm having a bit each way, as you said, which suggests my position is pretty different from those who call for players to be axed prematurely.

Those posters are certain a player should go, whereas I am not at all certain on Johnson, and haven't claimed to be.

He could play 100 Tests, or he could play 30. I think he could go either way.

The only point I've been trying to make in this thread is that his ongoing selection is complicated by having some handy bowlers outside the team. This thread was not about, "he's shit, he should be dropped".

Hence, no irony. Even if I had contradicted myself somehow, it still wouldn't be ironic. That word is over-used.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Then the remainder of the post concentrates on putting across the point that his performances haven't been acceptable. You help emphasis this point by citing stats indicating Johnsons wickets have been made up primarily of tailenders. Basically, on one thread you bring to light the correct assumption that BF can call for players to be dropped after a short time of poor performance, now you are basically doing the same here.

I was showing that Johnson hasn't done enough to cement his spot.

That's not the same as saying he should be dropped immediately.

You need to acknowledge this distinction, instead of just extrapolating one point into the other.

It's a similar situation to the one Symonds was in at the start of last summer. He was the incumbent #6, and was rightly going to be given the chance to make the spot his own, but had yet to do so.

That's where I think Johnson is at.

He's in the side, but his Test performances have not been so good that he's an automatic selection. Nor have they been so bad that he should be axed mid-series.

Let's say that by the next Ashes, Johnson has played 20 Tests and taken 70-80 wickets at 32. Or thereabouts. A year from now, he hasn't dropped off, but he hasn't really stepped up. In other words, he's yet to truly cement his spot.

I reckon that, by then, we'd want to have a pretty good idea of who else could do the job. It would be dumb to put ourselves in the position of having to choose between Johnson and two other guys who have played 1-2 Tests, or none at all.

 

[the_interloper]

I was showing that Johnson hasn't done enough to cement his spot.

I agree. I think in Test matches he doesn't make the batsman play enough, whereas in one dayers they can't afford to leave too many, hence he does better in that form of the game.

I've heard that Ricky Ponting is a massive rap for him, and that is helping him stay in the team. But there will be plenty of pressure on him to start performing with Noffke, Hilfenhaus, Bollinger, soon Tait and even Peter Siddle knocking on the door.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Geez, Johnson is struggling against the West Indies.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

In the first two Tests against the Windies, Johnson has taken 5 wickets at 46.

Hmmm...

Is it not fair to suggest that Noffke or Bollinger might have done better?

 

[frankrizzo]

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:



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.

We can't continue to pick Johnson based on what he might do forever.

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.

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.

To keep picking Johnson on faith alone isn't smart.

But I'm not calling for Johnson to be dropped.

Im starting to wonder if gunnar is actually a few different people, how else can you explain the constant contradictions?

 

[Cousin Jed]

Geez, Johnson is struggling against the West Indies.

And yet he still took more wickets than 2 of the 4 frontline bowlers this test.

Pitch was a road. Makes hard work for pace bowlers. So I would say it is unfair to suggest that others may have done better.

 

[SydneyDon]

Mitchell Johnson has the potential so I hope the selectors stick with him. He has the raw pace but needs to work on accuracy and variations. At the moment he is too predictable, slanting away from the right hander. I'd like to see him bowl closer to the stumps, then bring the seam into it more. Also need to get the red ball coming back into them.

I am a firm believer in variety in a pace attack and that the third seamer should be a lefty if possible. Obviously there have been notable exceptions in the past (Windies late 70's).

 

[PAFCsince1870]

In the first two Tests against the Windies, Johnson has taken 5 wickets at 46.

Hmmm...

Is it not fair to suggest that Noffke or Bollinger might have done better?

Johnson just doesn't look like he will cut it. Of course, many people have ended up with egg on their face after writing off a player's international career too soon, but I just don't think Johnson has the wicket-taking ability to make him elite at test level.

It's time for a Noffke or a Bollinger to show us what he can do.

Lee and Clark can't carry us forever. What would happen if one of them broke down? Our bowling attack would be;

Clark/Lee
Johnson
?????
?????

Perish the thought.

 

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

Some good signs last night, that ball to get rid of Sarwan was a great delivery. With the old ball at one stage he seemed to be getting some good reverse swing back into Chanderpaul the left hander. But then he'd lose the swing and ball gun barrell straight to the right handers. To me it suggests that his action has a few kinks, to the left hander he seemed to be getting his bowling arm higher which was allowing the ball to swing reverse, but then to the right hander he'd drop his arm and it would slant away from the right hander to slips.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Im starting to wonder if gunnar is actually a few different people, how else can you explain the constant contradictions?

What are the contradictions?

It's a measured assessment of a player who has shown a bit, but has yet to cement his spot.

He won't be dropped for the Third Test, but a call will need to be made ahead of the tour to India.

Try again.

But this time, try to actually make a point.

Point to something I've said that actually contradicts something else I've said. You're yet to do that.

Are you going to try to back up your claims, or just run away to avoid the embarrassment?

 

[likka]

I'm not a fan of MJ, too wayward and not enough tricks in his bag to consistently take wickets at test level.

He is one of Punter's mates though so no chance of him being dropped soon... protected species.

 

[DIG]

I'm not a fan of MJ, too wayward and not enough tricks in his bag to consistently take wickets at test level.

He is one of Punter's mates though so no chance of him being dropped soon... protected species.

Hey, who decides the selections nowadays when we tour? Is Merv there as a selector or just leading one of those drunken orgy tours?

 

[davey_magik]

Some good signs last night, that ball to get rid of Sarwan was a great delivery. With the old ball at one stage he seemed to be getting some good reverse swing back into Chanderpaul the left hander. But then he'd lose the swing and ball gun barrell straight to the right handers. To me it suggests that his action has a few kinks, to the left hander he seemed to be getting his bowling arm higher which was allowing the ball to swing reverse, but then to the right hander he'd drop his arm and it would slant away from the right hander to slips.

He does reverse swing it back into lefties, but he can't swing the new ball to save himself which is a big worry.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

I can't see Johnson getting dropped for the Third Test, but another poor showing might see him replaced for the First Test against India.

 

[rumblah]

I can't see Johnson getting dropped for the Third Test, but another poor showing might see him replaced for the First Test against India.

Who would replace him do you reckon?

Hilfy is my suggestion.