HippoSucks Posted February 12, 2015 Posted February 12, 2015 Many people are saying that Johnson's career records are much worse than Steyn's. Steyn obviously has better statistics, but by how much? Steyn Mat Inns Balls Runs Wkts Ave Econ SR Tests 78 147 16486 8932 396 22.55 3.25 41.6 Johnson Mat Inns Balls Runs Wkts Ave Econ SR Tests 64 123 14411 7879 283 27.84 3.28 50.9 Not a huge difference. Johnson played around 20 innings less and has 113 wickets less. Strike rate is up up 10 balls, but still not bad. In ODIs they are practically equal. Steyn's career in the long run has the edge of Johnson (by a respectable margin), but Johnson in his prime is much better than Steyn in his.
MCGGG Posted February 13, 2015 Posted February 13, 2015 Many people are saying that Johnson's career records are much worse than Steyn's. Steyn obviously has better statistics, but by how much? Steyn Mat Inns Balls Runs Wkts Ave Econ SR Tests 78 147 16486 8932 396 22.55 3.25 41.6 Johnson Mat Inns Balls Runs Wkts Ave Econ SR Tests 64 123 14411 7879 283 27.84 3.28 50.9 Not a huge difference. Johnson played around 20 innings less and has 113 wickets less. Strike rate is up up 10 balls, but still not bad. In ODIs they are practically equal. Steyn's career in the long run has the edge of Johnson (by a respectable margin), but Johnson in his prime is much better than Steyn in his. Much better than Steyn? Nah.
BlueBee Posted February 13, 2015 Author Posted February 13, 2015 Many people are saying that Johnson's career records are much worse than Steyn's. Steyn obviously has better statistics, but by how much? Steyn Mat Inns Balls Runs Wkts Ave Econ SR Tests 78 147 16486 8932 396 22.55 3.25 41.6 Johnson Mat Inns Balls Runs Wkts Ave Econ SR Tests 64 123 14411 7879 283 27.84 3.28 50.9 Not a huge difference. Johnson played around 20 innings less and has 113 wickets less. Strike rate is up up 10 balls, but still not bad. In ODIs they are practically equal. Steyn's career in the long run has the edge of Johnson (by a respectable margin), but Johnson in his prime is much better than Steyn in his. 20 innings and 113 wickets is no joke.
Precambrian Posted February 13, 2015 Posted February 13, 2015 Many people are saying that Johnson's career records are much worse than Steyn's. Steyn obviously has better statistics, but by how much? Steyn Mat Inns Balls Runs Wkts Ave Econ SR Tests 78 147 16486 8932 396 22.55 3.25 41.6 Johnson Mat Inns Balls Runs Wkts Ave Econ SR Tests 64 123 14411 7879 283 27.84 3.28 50.9 Not a huge difference. Johnson played around 20 innings less and has 113 wickets less. Strike rate is up up 10 balls, but still not bad. In ODIs they are practically equal. Steyn's career in the long run has the edge of Johnson (by a respectable margin), but Johnson in his prime is much better than Steyn in his. Good sarcasm.
HippoSucks Posted February 13, 2015 Posted February 13, 2015 jhonson better than steyn:hysterical: I said Johnson in his prime e.g. 2013 Ashes or the 2014 series against South Africa.
nevada Posted February 13, 2015 Posted February 13, 2015 If you selectively pick a purple patch in a player's career as the sole criteria for deciding who is better, then you can prove whatever you want. "Peak" Steve Smith is the best batsman in the modern era then.
HippoSucks Posted February 13, 2015 Posted February 13, 2015 If you selectively pick a purple patch in a player's career as the sole criteria for deciding who is better' date=' then you can prove whatever you want. "Peak" Steve Smith is the best batsman in the modern era then.[/quote'] Don't engage in selective responding. I clearly said Steyn has a better career in the long run, "but Johnson in his prime is much better than Steyn in his."
MCGGG Posted February 13, 2015 Posted February 13, 2015 I think Steyns a better bowler overall, but lately Johnsons probably become a better strike bowler, I've pictured myself facing both and IMO MJs major weapon is his lengh is harder to judge, it almost looks like he's bowling short every ball ( from the other end), reckon he'd be a nightmare in real life, and we all know he is, but he bwls a lot of rubbish too. Give me Steyn on a flattish wkt, but if there's variable bounce I'd pick MJ.
Temujin Khaghan Posted February 13, 2015 Posted February 13, 2015 I like Jimmy Anderson more than Johnson.
sourab10forever Posted February 13, 2015 Posted February 13, 2015 PwoGuZBtm8Q Every thing looks like chucking in slow motion
nevada Posted February 13, 2015 Posted February 13, 2015 Don't engage in selective responding. I clearly said Steyn has a better career in the long run' date=' "but Johnson in his prime is much better than Steyn in his."[/quote'] Using the same logic - Rohit Sharma's prime ODI form beats everybody else's prime form hands down. At his peak he averages 264 per inning.
Precambrian Posted February 13, 2015 Posted February 13, 2015 I said Johnson in his prime e.g. 2013 Ashes or the 2014 series against South Africa. Its not Steyn's fault he has not played in more than 3 tests in a single series. And what do you define by "peak"? One series? Lol, if that's the case, then Steyn's career is riddled with such peaks. Steyn's performance during the India tour to SA in 2010, is statistically almost exactly similar to Johnson's performance in SA tour. Any indicator of their career, Steyn is miles ahead of Johnson as a bowler.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now