Yes, but taking wickets doesn't make him a better bowler. He's woeful. Completely lacks accuracy, he may have good pace but he can't control it, tends to bowl too short, doesn't swing the ball enough because of his length, doesn't bowl to the captains plans, and just ends up getting flukey wickets. He's going at 3.56 an over, has a far worse average than both Sharma and Khan, and has bowled far more overs. If Sharma had bowled 117 overs he'd have taken far more than 11 wickets. I just don't rate Johnson what so ever, hence why the claims yesterday about him being better than Harmison I just found ludicrous.