Mitchell Johnson vs. Dale Steyn

[Number]

ambrose is not fast?

I think he was slower than all 4 of quartet, Bishop, Patterson and even Walsh. Still easily over 85 mph.

[rkt.india]

I think he was slower than all 4 of quartet' date=' Bishop, Patterson and even Walsh. Still easily over 85 mph.[/quote'] no, walsh was the slowest, far slower than Bishop. Ambrose was fast medium range, not slow by any means.

[rkt.india]

Point to be noted .... Every cricket expert was calling Ishant's spell fast and hostile. Batsmen were intimidated, hurried and bullied into submission. Yet, Ishant's release speeds were between 130 to 140 k. If speedguns were not present .... folklore would ultimately make Ishant into a 150 k + bowler yesterday. Fact is fast bowling is not just about high release speeds but Also depends upon steep bounce, accuracy, pace off the deck, type of pitch, number of body directed bouncers bowled etc. etc. It is possible for a tall , bouncy and accurate pacer to be known as a fast bowler even if he bowls 130 to 140 k provided he is bowling hostile bouncers. Infact, effective hostile bouncers and intimidation is true fast bowling from the point of view of the batsman. They are not bothered about release speeds.

Right.

[Old guy]

Point to be noted .... Every cricket expert was calling Ishant's spell fast and hostile. Batsmen were intimidated, hurried and bullied into submission. Yet, Ishant's release speeds were between 130 to 140 k. If speedguns were not present .... folklore would ultimately make Ishant into a 150 k + bowler yesterday. Fact is fast bowling is not just about high release speeds but Also depends upon steep bounce, accuracy, pace off the deck, type of pitch, number of body directed bouncers bowled etc. etc. It is possible for a tall , bouncy and accurate pacer to be known as a fast bowler even if he bowls 130 to 140 k provided he is bowling hostile bouncers. Infact, effective hostile bouncers and intimidation is true fast bowling from the point of view of the batsman. They are not bothered about release speeds.

:haha::hatsoff:

[rkt.india]

Release speed alone bothers batsmen when it is bowled 145k plus leading 150-155. Other than that, you need to combined it with movement to be really successful.

[vvvslaxman]

Release speed alone bothers batsmen when it is bowled 145k plus leading 150-155. Other than that' date=' you need to combined it with movement to be really successful.[/quote'] Accuracy too. Tait often is awful in that department. MJ also used to be erratic.

[rkt.india]

Accuracy too. Tait often is awful in that department. MJ also used to be erratic.

Such bowlers wont be greatly accurate but they will take wickets. Regarding, no matter how wayward, he can be, he was still a wicket taker un ODIs, has a pretty good record there. Still remember how he destroyed England top order with pace in one of ODIs on 2009 if I remember. His come back made the difference for Aus. Johnson also has a pretty good record even with all his inconsistency. Half decent accuracy will work for them.

[maniac]

Accuracy too. Tait often is awful in that department. MJ also used to be erratic.

Have seenTait be awfully erratic and then have 1 or 2 overs where he just eats into the middle order...The difference between him and Johnson is fitness.otherwise Tait was a special talent

[maniac]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRQ-S4LFGzg]Shaun "The Wild Thing" Tait - Very Fast Over vs Pakistan MCG T20 2009/10 HD - YouTube[/ame]

[rkt.india]

Have seenTait be awfully erratic and then have 1 or 2 overs where he just eats into the middle order...The difference between him and Johnson is fitness.otherwise Tait was a special talent

Yes. H is bowling action took toll on his body. It was hard on him. KxKE9c_u3DY sXVWaMXIMs0

[maniac]

Yes. H is bowling action took toll on his body. It was hard on him. KxKE9c_u3DY

Also I beleive he had depression issues but you don't get someone who can hit 160. With a clean action every day....he could have been a very uselfl loi bowler had he sorted out his mental issues.

[Number]

no' date=' walsh was the slowest, far slower than Bishop. Ambrose was fast medium range, not slow by any means.[/quote'] Bishop was surely quicker than Ambrose and Walsh. Walsh - Ambrose were around the same mark I think. There were times when Walsh was quicker. No doubt, Ambrose as a bowler is in a different league to Walsh, far better.

[rkt.india]

Bishop was surely quicker than Ambrose and Walsh. Walsh - Ambrose were around the same mark I think. There were times when Walsh was quicker. No doubt, Ambrose as a bowler is in a different league to Walsh, far better.

I still think Ambrose was quicker than Walsh.

[maniac]

Bishop was surely quicker than Ambrose and Walsh. Walsh - Ambrose were around the same mark I think. There were times when Walsh was quicker. No doubt, Ambrose as a bowler is in a different league to Walsh, far better.

Walsh was like McGrath could keep bowling probing length all day long....also had a killer short ball....Ambrose was a135-140 bowler at best but the bounce he got was what made him look lethal.....he had a killer Yorker ,infact a better Yorker than waqar because don't think his Yorkers did crazy things in the air due to ball tampering...just fast,straight accurate

[maniac]

As far as the thread goes.....steyn is vastly superior to m.j.....you need to include mj's batting abilities to make a case for him.

[Mippa]

I honestly think Steyn is overall a better bowler. Johnson is one who needs the help from pitch. On his day he might win you matches in any pitch but I would only think Johnson is better if he carries on his current form for a couple of years. Johnson on his day in a pitch helping him looks better than any bowler. As how he outbowled Steyn in 1st test against SA.

[Precambrian]

Its a joke comparing Steyn to Johnson. Johnson just had a couple of good series, against average batsmen largely in home or home like conditions. Steyn on the other hand has been pawning even the best, away, home or wherever. His record in subcontinent solely pins his status as the greatest fast bowler of last many decades.

[rkt.india]

Its a joke comparing Steyn to Johnson. Johnson just had a couple of good series, against average batsmen largely in home or home like conditions. Steyn on the other hand has been pawning even the best, away, home or wherever. His record in subcontinent solely pins his status as the greatest fast bowler of last many decades.

SA batsmen were not average. Johnson made the difference there. and even England were average. He made them look like that. Johnson less Aus were just beaten by England 3-0 3 months back. Johnson is mercurial. If he is good, there is no one who can stand in front of him. In the past, he did not have a middle ground, but now I see better in that aspect. Though Steyn is still the best overall.

[express bowling]

I have seen the attack of Ambrose, Walsh , Patterson and Bishop bowl. Post good helmets ... this was the most fearsome attack I have seen. Batsmen were afraid of them. Sidhu had " broken fingers " before a Windies series and did not play. All the pacers were very tall. Patterson and Bishop were quick. Patterson perhaps the quickest. Ambrose and Walsh were very bouncy, fast-medium. Walsh more skillful, Ambrose deadly accurate. Ambose was quicker than Walsh. All of them bowled lots of hostile bouncers at the batsmen's body.

[express bowling]

Release speed alone bothers batsmen when it is bowled 145k plus leading 150-155. Other than that' date=' you need to combined it with movement to be really successful.[/quote'] True. If we consider pacers with 200 + test wickets and averages of 26 or less ... they mostly are of 2 broad types 1) Pacers who swung the ball At high pace or at least brisk pace Had good bouncers Some had mastery over seam movement too. Lillee, Marshall, Hadlee, Roberts, Imran, Wasim, Waqar, Donald, Lee, Gillespie, Steyn would fall in this category. Our Umesh and Shami are pacers of this category too. Only, their ability to bowl good bouncers consistently is not yet fully developed. 2) Pacers who got steep or sharp bounce consistently Usually are very tall or maybe very quick too Atleast fast-medium pace , maybe fast too Got seam movement Often very accurate Bowled great bouncers Garner, Holding, Walsh, Ambrose, McGrath, Thompson, Pollock would belong here. Our Ishant ,Pankaj and to some extent Aaron would fall in this category. Mostly these two types of pacers combine well in an attack and make it more potent like Steyn, Morkel McGrath, Lee, Gillespie Marshal, Roberts, Garner, Holding. Lillee, Thompson Johnson, Harris Donald, Pollock We should invest in such pacers and combinations.