Has there ever been anything like Mitchell Johnson?

[hawkeye]

I know there have been great pacers in the past: Larwood, Tyson, Lillee, Thomson, Holding, Roberts, Marshall, Clarke. But was any of them so dangerous over so many consecutive games?

If anything, Johnson was even more terrifying at Supersport Park than he was at any time during the Ashes series: bodies were battered, helmets were clanged, bats were broken, and blood was drawn. Batsmen who walked out to face the missiles that he consistently delivered at over 90 mph could be forgiven for thinking they had more to lose than just their wickets. They should probably have heeded the line that was added to a song in the musical ?Old Miss Gibbs? that ran during the bodyline series of 1932-1933 as Harold Larwood threatened life and limb, and placed themselves in the firing line only ?After kissing their wives, and insuring their lives.?

Australia would be a good team without Johnson, but with him bowling as he has done for the last six tests, they are simply unbeatable. The South African team has now been shaken and its confidence dented. Hopefully, they will not make the mistakes England did and seek to assign blame where none is warranted. If they are to come out of this series with any positive results a way has to be found to neutralize Johnson; and short of him falling over in a heap, or returning to his old wayward ways, there is hardly anything they can do.

Johnson Looked Even More Terrifying Against South Africa

 

[Samuels]

Yes there has been a few occasions where a bowler has been dominating the matches single handed. One such fast bowler was Alan Donald in 1998 when he took over a 107 wickets in mere 27 test matches at an average of 18.57 runs per wicket and if that is not a good record, Muralitharan averaged under 20 for 2 years on the trot in the year 2000 and 2001 but that was mainly due to his miserly bowling. If you ask me the most dominating of the two, it has to be Alan Donald for sure. Murali averaged 16.80 in the year 2003 which was probably his best year. Talking about averages, Waqar took 96 wickets at 14.88 a piece a year after he made debut in 1989 while Ajantha Mendis had 81 scalps to his name at a shade under 12 per wicket back in 2008 when his mystery was still unsolved.

 

[blockerdave]

S F Barnes career test record was 189 at 16.43 with a 41.6 strike rate

i think Johnson's particular menace at the moment is a)left arm and getting swing back in is a very rare threat at that pace, few comparable bowlers b)he has an excellent support attack - harris is a fantastic bowler and siddle / watson / lyon are all very good 3rd/4th/5th bowlers to have, so the batsman can't just see off johnson and score off the others c)he has a fantastic captain who is managing him superbly

 

[nightprowler10]

I would say the Windies teams of the past that had bowlers like Holding, Marshall, Gilchrist, Garner and no bouncer restrictions were as dangerous if not more.

 

[blockerdave]

I would say the Windies teams of the past that had bowlers like Holding, Marshall, Gilchrist, Garner and no bouncer restrictions were as dangerous if not more.

absolutely - 4 top top quality properly fast bowlers, no respite at all.

----------

also, wasim would be close to Johnson as he had the left-arm. maybe not out and out quick but certainly rapid. maybe swung the ball more so less of a bouncer threat.

 

[nightprowler10]

absolutely - 4 top top quality properly fast bowlers, no respite at all.

----------

also, wasim would be close to Johnson as he had the left-arm. maybe not out and out quick but certainly rapid. maybe swung the ball more so less of a bouncer threat.

I don't think Wasim fits. He was aggressive but never an intimidator. Not sure about his early days in the 80s though when he was bowling out and out pace, but then he had to reign it in according to his biography because he wasn't getting results.

 

[War]

Frank Tyson in the 1954/55 Ashes..

 

[NathanScott45]

Perish the thought of a batting unit now facing this.

 

[Samuels]

The most unplayable spell ever would have to be the famous 7/1 by Curtly Ambrose against Australia at WACA in 1992-'93 season and Allan Donald and Waqar Younis bowled the most lethal spells in the year 1998 and 1990 respectively. If you ask about someone who has was the toughest to hit, Joel Garner comes to the mind in a split second and this is why but if we talk about one player who has always dominated the batsmen, it has to be the great Malcolm Marshall. He got to the batsmen like no other. My father still has a glare in the eye when talking about the big Barbadian.

 

[sifter132]

I know there have been great pacers in the past: Larwood, Tyson, Lillee, Thomson, Holding, Roberts, Marshall, Clarke. But was any of them so dangerous over so many consecutive games?

One way to measure that question would be in man of the match awards, and the answer is perhaps not, no. Numbers are mentioned in this article:
Rob Steen: The worth of the Man-of-the-Series award in measuring greatness | Cricinfo Magazine | ESPN Cricinfo

Talking about Man of the Match Awards...Mitch had 4 in 6 Tests. Others compare thusly:

Wasim and Ian Botham both pulled off a hat-trick - awards in three consecutive Tests - and Malcolm Marshall and Jacques Kallis reeled off three in four. Three in a series, so far as I can ascertain, has been accomplished only by Botham (in the 1981 Ashes) and Johnson, although many of us would argue that the second member of Botham's trio could and probably should have gone to John Emburey. Kallis once went on a roll of five in 13, but four in six? Call it greedy if you like, but I'm thinking phenomenal. Which it is, even if Muttiah Muralitharan did once grab four in five.

Of course Man of the Match awards didn't exist before the 70s...so that analysis is a little flawed

Depending on his final stats in this series it would be interested to see the list of bowlers who have taken 20+ wickets in back to back series (and with a very good average). I imagine the list wouldn't be very long.

 

[blockerdave]

One way to measure that question would be in man of the match awards, and the answer is perhaps not, no. Numbers are mentioned in this article:
Rob Steen: The worth of the Man-of-the-Series award in measuring greatness | Cricinfo Magazine | ESPN Cricinfo

Talking about Man of the Match Awards...Mitch had 4 in 6 Tests. Others compare thusly:


Of course Man of the Match awards didn't exist before the 70s...so that analysis is a little flawed

Depending on his final stats in this series it would be interested to see the list of bowlers who have taken 20+ wickets in back to back series (and with a very good average). I imagine the list wouldn't be very long.

Be highly surprised if Barnes didn't do that. 189 wickets at 16.43 to me makes him the Bradman of Bowlers.

 

[ethybubs]

SF Barnes took 107 wickets in three series. With a strike rate of 34.49 and an average of 13.68

 

[sifter132]

Just on SF Barnes guys...some more details...

I did a quick search the other night looking for bowlers who strung together dominating series's. I searched for series by bowlers with 20+ wickets at an average of less than 15 (yes, my definition of dominating a series is pulled out of the air ) Not many bowlers have had a series that good, let alone done it multiple times. Here are the bowlers who have had at least 2 series that I defined as dominating:
3 - M Muralitharan (SL) (vs Zim 01/02, vs Eng 03/04, vs Ban 07)
3 - SF Barnes (Eng) (vs SA 1912, Triangular Tourny 1912, in SA 13/14)
2 - AV Bedser (Eng) (vs Ind 1946, vs Ind 1952)
2 - DW Steyn (SA) (vs NZ 07/08, vs Pak 12/13)
2 - H Ironmonger (Aus) (vs WI 30/31, vs SA 31/32)
2 - JH Wardle (Eng) (vs Pak 1954, in SA 56/57)
2 - MA Holding (WI) (in Eng 1976, in Aus 81/82)
2 - Sir RJ Hadlee (NZ) (in SL 83/84, in Aus 85/86)
2 - Waqar Younis (Pak) (vs NZ 90/91, vs Zim 93/94)

Immediately we run into problems. Of Murali's 3 awesome series, 1 was vs Bangladesh, another vs Zimbabwe. Both of Alec Bedser's were against India, India actually beat England in 1952, but back in 1946 had never won a Test. One of Richard Hadlee's series was against early 80s Sri Lanka, not very strong. One of Waqar's is against Zimbabwe.

Then it's apparent that none of these bowlers really strung together dominating series. The only guys to string together back-to-back series were SF Barnes and Bert Ironmonger: Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo Then competition becomes a question mark. Most of SF Barnes' games in those 3 series were against South Africa, not the stronger Australia, ditto with Bert Ironmonger facing West Indies and South Africa, rather than England.

With that in mind, if Mitchell Johnson can blow South Africa out of the water in this series, I feel it would be extremely significant. Merely having 2 dominating series is an achievement in itself, but to do it back-to-back AND to do it against 2 of the strongest sides in world cricket would be arguably unprecedented.

----------

EDIT: If I extend the qualification of dominating series just a tad you get 2 more nominations for back-to-back dominations:
Alan Davidson in India 59/60, then WI 60/61 Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo
and Alec Bedser again with 3 excellent winter series in a row: vs SA 1951, vs Ind 1952 and vs Aus 1953. Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo