Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

The Ashes 2009

Mike Selvey wrote an interesting article about Johnson. Basically, with his slingy action, the moment of release not only affects his length but also his line, so timing is even more important to him than it would be for, say, McGrath or Clark who have high arm actions. Selvey reckons the timing could all click together any time – in the middle of an over some time – that Johnson won't know what he's doing different, and that once it's back, he'll wonder how he ever lost it. I guess that's why Australia will feel they have to pick him – he's their only (potential) genuine strike bowler with Lee injured.

I can suggest a big fault with Johnson's action. My theory - which I don't think is in the coaching books - is that you take any great bowler, spin, speed, slingy, non-slingy - and at the moment of release, you can trace a vertical line running up from their front foot, diagonally across the body, up the delivery arm to the ball.

Mitchell Johnson is quite a way off I think, and that will make him inaccurate. He should lean his head over.

i'm trying to find a good pic of Jeff Thompson, here's one not at moment of release but you can the lining up of the delivery arm/planted leg

thomson2.jpg
 
I can suggest a big fault with Johnson's action. My theory - which I don't think is in the coaching books - is that you take any great bowler, spin, speed, slingy, non-slingy - and at the moment of release, you can trace a vertical line running up from their front foot, diagonally across the body, up the delivery arm to the ball.

Mitchell Johnson is quite a way off I think, and that will make him inaccurate. He should lean his head over.

i'm trying to find a good pic of Jeff Thompson, here's one not at moment of release but you can the lining up of the delivery arm/planted leg

thomson2.jpg
Mike Selvey specifically mentioned Thomson (he played county cricket with him) as an example of a bowler whose timing came and went but whose arm, although not high, was in fact vertical, so he didn't spray it when the timing went, just didn't bowl quite as quickly.

I wouldn't change Johnson now, just as I wouldn't change, say, Malinga. It's a recipe for disaster trying to change his natural technique. He has an action that can go wrong, but try to correct it and you may lose the lot for good.

ETA:
And he's not inaccurate if he releases the ball at just the right moment. It's just that his slingy action gives him a tiny margin of error. I remember a county cricket one-day final about six or seven years back when a bowler with an arm that was closer to horizontal than vertical (can't remember his name – he was only medium pace too) completely went to pieces under the pressure and bowled wide after wide. It was embarrassing to watch and I think marked pretty much the end of his career. The way to get Johnson right is to get him to handle the pressure - somehow to stop him worrying about it – easier said than done.
 
Weather looks a bit rubbish, which is a pity since I think England would have a fantastic chance of going 2-0 up otherwise.
 
I can suggest a big fault with Johnson's action. My theory - which I don't think is in the coaching books - is that you take any great bowler, spin, speed, slingy, non-slingy - and at the moment of release, you can trace a vertical line running up from their front foot, diagonally across the body, up the delivery arm to the ball.

Mitchell Johnson is quite a way off I think, and that will make him inaccurate. He should lean his head over.

i'm trying to find a good pic of Jeff Thompson, here's one not at moment of release but you can the lining up of the delivery arm/planted leg

thomson2.jpg

If you want an example of a perfect action, it's got to be Richard Hadlee..

Here he is taking out 9 aussies in an innings. Genius.

 
Yes. Hadlee was silky smooth. Which is why he lasted so long. That and the fact that he cut his run-up and decided there was more to bowling than speed.

Shame about the rest of the attack though.

Hadlee one end. Jeremy Coney at the other. :D

(Chatfield was ok, but only ok)
 
Yes. Hadlee was silky smooth. Which is why he lasted so long. That and the fact that he cut his run-up and decided there was more to bowling than speed.

Shame about the rest of the attack though.

Hadlee one end. Jeremy Coney at the other. :D

(Chatfield was ok, but only ok)

Yup. Those were my formative years in cricket. Good memories.
I got to meet the great man a coupla times, he was a true gentleman to go with the talent.

Chatfield was hilariously bad. Danny Morrison wasn't bad tho when he came thru.
 
Yup. Those were my formative years in cricket. Good memories.
I got to meet the great man a coupla times, he was a true gentleman to go with the talent.

Chatfield was hilariously bad. Danny Morrison wasn't bad tho when he came thru.

Nice to hear that about Hadlee, I thought he was overly intense, set loads of targets, plans etc and found it difficult to wind down?

Wasn't Chatfield almost killed by a bouncer from Peter Lever in NZ in about 74? Not surprised he was bad after that..
 
I haven't played cricket since I was a kid, but was mad about it for a bit and dreamed (totally unrealistically I might add) of growing up to be a fast bowler.

I'd try to copy the actions of Botham, Imran Khan and Holding (plus Bob Willis, Lance Cairns and Graham Dilley for the lols), but the one I really wanted to bowl like was Hadlee. Bowling looked as natural to him as walking.
 
Hughes dropped?

Fox and all that. Standard warnings apply.

edit: the orginal The Australisn story

Phil Hughes is understood to have been dropped from the Australian side and replaced by Shane Watson for tonight's third Test.

No official announcement has been made, but sources close to the team told The Australian the young batsman has lost his position after just five Tests and been replaced by the all-rounder.

The selectors have hit the panic button after the Hughes in the first three innings of the Test series with scores of 36, 4 and 17.

It is an incredible fall from grace for the 20 year old who starred in his first three Tests and arrived in England with an average of 69 after three stunning games on debut in South Africa, that included two centuries in his second Test.

Selectors were anxious that England’s bowlers, had found a weakness in Hughes ability to deal with the short body-line delivery after he fell to the same ball in tour and Test matches.
 
Well it's a novel approach to drop a batsman after two bad tests but keep a bowler.:D

I think Hughes is a very dangerous batsman. Watson, test average 19, yes please.
 
It will also be because they want five bowlers so that they can hide Johnson if they need to, in which case one of the six specialist batsmen had to go and he's been the least impressive.

*sober analysis mode on*
 
"Shane Watson, whose run tally in a previous stint as a first-class opener at Queensland could be counted on one hand. By someone with no arms."
 
But a bit of an air game at Lords? (I know he took over from Hauritz, but Clarke, Katich.. could have pitched up with spin options as well?)
 
They want five bowlers, so a batsman has to go. I'd have dropped Hussey, but they obviously have faith in him. Dunno why, he's been very poor for ages.
But given that they are keeping him, they have the choice between the two new boys, one of whom has had two bad tests, the other just one bad test. It's not such a terrible decision.
 
Ponting is convinced Johnson’s troubles lie not in his high-maintenance action but in his crowded mind and will make a concerted effort to relieve stress by using him in short, powerful bursts in the hope he can produce enough accurate balls to strike while others do the bulk of the grunt work.

Cheers ricky.
 
Nice to hear that about Hadlee, I thought he was overly intense, set loads of targets, plans etc and found it difficult to wind down?

Nah, was a really good chap to me. My old man knew him. I was only 10 or 11 tho :D He coulda been a right cunt to adults I guess. Anyway, I imagine to perform that well, you'd have to be pretty intense.

I think he cut his run-up to prolong his career due to back issues, but luckily it also turned out that by bowling slower he mastered swing in the moist kiwi conditions and therefore kicked serious ass. He was the Federer of his day. Didn't appear to sweat a drop while being the best in the world.
 
Back
Top Bottom