Advertise on CBF

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 11

Author Topic: James Anderson vs Mitchell Johnson  (Read 23848 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

procricket

  • International Superstar
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 14521
  • Trade Count: (+33)
Logged
"Doubt whoever but never doubt yourself"

Ciaran

  • County 1st XI
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 910
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: James Anderson vs Mitchell Johnson
« Reply #16 on: January 03, 2013, 10:51:39 AM »

The Broad debate gives more interesting reading for me as its as close as a like for like comparison.
Both have days where they are near unplayable.
For me no matter what the stats say, gut instinct is that youd pick Johnson ahead of Broad. Although Broad may offer a little more with the bat, I feel he gives too little when he bowls!
Logged

joeylough

  • County 1st XI
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 830
  • Trade Count: (+6)
  • One hit wonder
Re: James Anderson vs Mitchell Johnson
« Reply #17 on: January 03, 2013, 10:56:43 AM »

I would have Johnson over Broad.

Not a fan of Broad and his arrogance. I think he is a poor choice as vice cap and cap of T20.
Proir test vice for me.
Logged
The edges of my bat take a beating, the middle is near enough new.
@joey_lough

Johng

  • County 2nd XI
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 399
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: James Anderson vs Mitchell Johnson
« Reply #18 on: January 03, 2013, 11:07:08 AM »

Stupid comparison.

Anderson was in a lot of ways in the early stages of his career similar to Johnson as his attitude was ordinary then he met David Saker.

Anderson is world class and for the wickets he does not take himself he builds pressure so that other bowlers can take wickets at the other end.
Johnson lacks mental strength to be a successful consistent international cricketer.

If Pat Cummins, Pattinson, Starc, Siddle and Bird are all fit Johnson will struggle to get a spot in England and lets hope Cummins is fit as the kid is an absolute freak!!
Logged

procricket

  • International Superstar
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 14521
  • Trade Count: (+33)
Re: James Anderson vs Mitchell Johnson
« Reply #19 on: January 03, 2013, 11:08:38 AM »

I watched cummins bowl a few overs in belfast he certainly is sharp
Logged
"Doubt whoever but never doubt yourself"

Johng

  • County 2nd XI
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 399
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: James Anderson vs Mitchell Johnson
« Reply #20 on: January 03, 2013, 11:12:40 AM »

I watched cummins bowl a few overs in belfast he certainly is sharp
Real real quick and very clever along with it.

Aus top six will be ordinary but if Cummins is fit he could even it up on his own.

Will be very different return series in Aus
Logged

tushar sehgal

  • World Cup Winner
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3874
  • Trade Count: (+8)
Re: James Anderson vs Mitchell Johnson
« Reply #21 on: January 03, 2013, 12:44:22 PM »

This might not be a fair comparison but think of MJ like Sehwag and Jimmy as Hayden (in prime)... both good and destructive but Jimmy is far more consistent...MJ on the other hand would have a series or a few matches where is absolutely dominant but then fades away for long periods...
Logged

Alvaro

  • Forum Legend
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6322
  • Trade Count: (+3)
Re: James Anderson vs Mitchell Johnson
« Reply #22 on: January 03, 2013, 12:58:01 PM »

Anderson is more of a Damien Martyn I'd wager.
India would take both in a shot.
However, both would be fat and shot this time next year.
Logged

Manormanic

  • Forum Legend
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6758
  • Trade Count: (+1)
Re: James Anderson vs Mitchell Johnson
« Reply #23 on: January 03, 2013, 01:09:12 PM »

This is a classic case of there being lies, damned lies and statistics; I think most everyone would agree that Anderson is one of the top three or four fast bowlers in teh world right now, and that he has been for at least three or four years, whereas Johnson had that one amazing year when he came in to Test cricket and occasionally shows the same form in Perth to remind us of what he could have been.

Yet their stats are surprisingly close - not just the average and wickets:matches ratio, but also their economies and strike rates.  The conventional wisdom of Johnson's career is not even that accurate, as the following demonstrates:
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/6033.html?class=1;template=results;type=allround;view=cumulative
His bowling average did briefly drop to the low 27's (8/61 in your arly career will cause that sort of blip), but has hovered around the 30 mark for most all of his Test career that apart, so he has always been roughly as effective...

The equivalent data for Jimmikins:
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/8608.html?class=1;template=results;type=allround;view=cumulative
Shows that he briefly threatened 40 around the time that Fletch et al messed around with his bowling action, but that he has gradually worked that down to a fraction over 30....where it has sat for a while now, which implies that the improvement has gone as far as it is going. 

Of course, these stats don't show how Anderson is a wicket taking threat in so many different conditions, nor how he has learnd to be the man to hold up an end whilst someone takes wickets at the other, neither of which apply to Johnson...
Logged
"to be the man, you've got to beat the man"

The_Bird

  • World Cup Winner
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2977
  • Trade Count: (+3)
Re: James Anderson vs Mitchell Johnson
« Reply #24 on: January 03, 2013, 01:18:04 PM »

Is there a way to show who Jimmy and MJ are getting out? For example is MJ bowling poorly against the top order and then knocking over the tail. Vice Versa for jimmy, I've seen him a few times get smashed around by lower order batsmen after the hard yards have been done.
Logged

Manormanic

  • Forum Legend
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6758
  • Trade Count: (+1)
Re: James Anderson vs Mitchell Johnson
« Reply #25 on: January 03, 2013, 01:19:50 PM »

There may be some of that about it, not sure how you'd check...
Logged
"to be the man, you've got to beat the man"

fros23

  • County 2nd XI
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 338
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: James Anderson vs Mitchell Johnson
« Reply #26 on: January 03, 2013, 01:57:45 PM »

The following shows wickets and average against batting position.  Seems to suggest that Anderson is better against the top 4 and number 9 with Johnson better against 5,6,7, and 10.

Anderson      
      
1st position   39   31.12
2nd position   37   18.81
3rd position   29   25.17
4th position   38   28.6
5th position   23   23.21
6th position   21   25.38
7th position   25   25.32
8th position   17   16.52
9th position   25   14.12
10th position   18   11.38
11th position   16   1.56
      
Johnson      
      
1st position   17   38.52
2nd position   25   28.28
3rd position   23   43.26
4th position   19   37.05
5th position   20   21
6th position   21   16.14
7th position   20   21.3
8th position   15   16.26
9th position   16   19.43
10th position   13   5.38
11th position   13   2.15
Logged
Twitter - @fros231

Tail Ender

  • County 2nd XI
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 420
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: James Anderson vs Mitchell Johnson
« Reply #27 on: January 03, 2013, 02:06:36 PM »

Johnson over Broad, but Anderson over Johnson (Dale Steyn over all of them, though).
Logged
"Cricket was my reason for living" - Harold Larwood

The_Bird

  • World Cup Winner
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2977
  • Trade Count: (+3)
Re: James Anderson vs Mitchell Johnson
« Reply #28 on: January 03, 2013, 02:06:50 PM »

Thanks fros23 that's a great stat and I think it is vital in the comparison as some statistic can be very misleading.
Logged

Buzz

  • Administrator
  • International Superstar
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12714
  • Trade Count: (+13)
  • Clear your mind, stay still and watch the ball
Re: James Anderson vs Mitchell Johnson
« Reply #29 on: April 04, 2013, 01:24:21 PM »

Anderson, greatness and England's lost generation
Jon Hotten (the old batsman)

Barring injury and other disasters, James Anderson will, at some point next month, become the 26th bowler in the history of Test match cricket to take 300 wickets. He will be only the fourth Englishman to pass the mark, which, considering that Fred Trueman was the first to do so in 1964, puts him in elite company as far as the three lions go.

Trueman's landmark will be fifty years old come next summer. When he walked off the field at the Oval having taken the defining wicket of Neil Hawke, Fred was asked if he thought anyone would beat his record. "I don't know," he replied, "but they'll be bloody knackered if they do." To Trueman in 1964, the thought of 400 Test wickets was a distant Everest. The notion of a man taking 800 might have been enough to leave even Fred temporarily wordless, and he didn't quite live to see it done.
RELATED LINKSFeatures:The Anderson reportFeatures:More records in sight for AndersonPlayers/Officials: James Anderson| Sir Ian Botham| Fred TruemanTeams: England
Ian Botham retired with the English record of 383 wickets in 1992 but 11 bowlers have gone on past 400: three from India, two from West Indies, two from Australia, and one each from Sri Lanka, New Zealand, South Africa and Pakistan. Or, put another way, at least one player from each of the other seven major Test nations has achieved something that no English bowler has.

With his almost undetectable variations of grip and wrist position, his rudder of a thumb, his angle on the crease, his endurance and his pace, Anderson can be irresistible, symphonic in his variations on a narrow theme. He knows about as much as any man can about the fragile mysteries of swing, because he can on occasion be defenceless without it. Perhaps more than any other bowler in the elite echelon that he is about to join, Anderson is hostage to forces beyond his control.

When he surmounts that 300 barrier (he currently has 298), it will be with an average of above 30 runs per wicket. It's odd but unavoidable that such a blunt stat will temper judgement of the feat and of Anderson's standing, but he will be one of just three of the 26 bowlers in the club with an average of above thirty. Of the others, Harbhajan Singh and Brett Lee enjoyed long periods with their cumulative average below 30, and only Daniel Vettori has never dipped under the mark. Anderson was last there in August 2003, after his sixth Test match.

Andy Zaltzman once dug out a gem of a stat: that Viv Richards needed to make at least 20 in his final Test innings to end his career with an average of more than fifty. Twenty runs, after the levels of Richards' accomplishments, were nothing, but in a way they were everything too. It wouldn't seem right that the avatar of modern batsmanship was forever denied the statistical company of, for example, Shivnarine Chanderpaul.

So it is with bowlers. Thirty seems to be the mark at which ambiguity begins, where good and great slowly begin to separate from one another, where a decision has to be made as to who belongs where.

Anderson's career has had a different sweep to many. His first 100 wickets cost him 35. By the time he reached 200, the figure was under 32. Now it is a hair above 30. It is a gentle curve, reflective of a craft being slowly but progressively refined.

At his current strike rate of a wicket every 59 deliveries, he will need to bowl another 800 overs to go past Botham, in another thousand he could become the first Englishman to 400. At his rate of around 36 overs per Test, that's another 30 games, or three years of full fitness and endeavour.

At around the same time, Alistair Cook or Kevin Pietersen might be the first English Test batsman to pass 10,000 runs, a total already exceeded by three men from India, three from Australia, two from West Indies, two from Sri Lanka and one from South Africa.

During the ragged decade of the 1990s and beyond, England stalled while these records piled up. It's only now, as the same achievements come into view for a generation of players to have benefited from central contracts, consistency of selection, rigour in coaching and financial investment that their scale is apparent.

The record books say that the world left England a long way behind. The story of a generation is told through its absence from them.
Logged
"Bradman didn't used to have any trigger movements or anything like that. He turned batting into a subconscious act" Tony Shillinglaw.
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 11
 

Advertise on CBF