Johnsons batting

[GVGjr]

In his brief test career he has shown a bit of ability to become a bowling all-rounder. Some of his shots remind me a bit of Wasim Akram who was a dangerous number 8 when switched on. I don't think Johnson has the same attacking flair that Akram's batting possessed but hopefully he can become a consistent batter at number 8 and work with the top order.

[ledge]

At the rate the top order is going he will be opening soon with Katich!
What top order? Dont you just mean Ponting? ; )

[azabob]

At the rate the top order is going he will be opening soon with Katich!
What top order? Dont you just mean Ponting? ; )

Think we are forgetting M Clarke has had a fairly good summer against both NZ and South Africa. It has been either him or Ponting making the runs

[ledge]

Clarke i wouldnt consider top order, he is middle.
But i agree he has certainly matured and made good scores under pressure, i like his batting but his bowling should be retired.

[GVGjr]

Clarke i wouldnt consider top order, he is middle.
But i agree he has certainly matured and made good scores under pressure, i like his batting but his bowling should be retired.

I probably should have been a bit clearer but the way I intended the question was more about Johnson's ability to bat with one of the established guys ie 1 to 6/7.
A good number 8 or 9 can go a long way to helping build a big score. They don't necessarily have to make a big score themselves but if they can stick around and work with one of the established guys, they are invaluable.

[Happy Days]

How far off is he from being considered a genuine all-rounder?

[dog town]

How far off is he from being considered a genuine all-rounder? A fair way off. He needs to improve his average by about 15 or so. He is a bloody handy lower order player though. He is a bit like Daniel Vettori in a lot of ways.

[ledge]

Siddle isnt doing too bad with the bat either, one of the aussies strengths over the last 20 years has been the bowlers being able to bat.

[lemmon]

Jesus he hits the ball hard, not much footwork or finesse involved its a very simple see ball hit ball technique. A little bit of Flintoff perhaps?

[Mantis]

I think in another thread I discussed that Johnson had progressed ahead of Lee (when fit) in the batting order. He showed in this innings that this thought is probably on the money.

I think Johnson has the ability to average 25-30 over his career with the bat which is very handy for a guy coming in at no.8. (He is averaging 25.32 at present)

Putting it into perspective our two most recent no 8's have been Shane Warne who averaged 17.32 & Lee who average is 20.12.

[ledge]

Now that surprises me i always thought Warne was a heap better bat than Lee.

[bulldogsman]

Now that surprises me i always thought Warne was a heap better bat than Lee.

Once Warne made it past double figures he was great, terrible at start of innings. I think its Warne who has the most test ducks just ahead of McGrath.

[mighty_west]

Mitch has a very good batting technique, hits that ball hard, but also watches the ball closely which alot of lower order batsmen don't do, he already has two test half centuries, and won't be too long before he notches up his first century.

He will be a much better bat than the likes of Warne & Lee, also has a deadly arm in the field.

One thing that fat clown Botham said was that the Aussies have no one coming through with the ball, well, he obviously hasn't watched too much of Mitch Johnson......or Siddle for that matter, he also impresses me with the ball, and can bat a bit as well.

[hujsh]

Once Warne made it past double figures he was great, terrible at start of innings. I think its Warne who has the most test ducks just ahead of McGrath.

I think it might be neither. Pretty sure it's Walsh

[mighty_west]

I think it might be neither. Pretty sure it's Walsh

Certaintly is Walsh, with 43.

http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/content/records/283087.html

[mighty_west]

Is Mitch now regarded as a "true" all rounder?

96 not out against Sth Africa, whilst day 2 & 3 would be considered the best days for batting, he still had to get out there against the best bowling attack going around, not only take them on, but just blast them all over the park.

[GVGjr]

Is Mitch now regarded as a "true" all rounder?

96 not out against Sth Africa, whilst day 2 & 3 would be considered the best days for batting, he still had to get out there against the best bowling attack going around, not only take them on, but just blast them all over the park.

True all-rounder I would think not mainly because he would need to do the same on day one of a test or in the first session of a test rather than in the 2nd day.

What it might mean for the Australian side is that their is no need to play a Watson or McDonald at number 8 for perceived batting depth.

[bornadog]

I watched the majority of his innings last night, certainly from when he had 36 runs on the board. He looked very comfortable and established in his support role and can certainly drive the ball straight. When the time came for him to start swinging, it was great to watch, especially the 6 that went out of the ground. However, I wouldn't be putting him in the all rounder class, but he is a very handy number 8/9.

[hujsh]

Compare his average of 31.47 to Flintoff's average of 31.69 and you could argue he is an allrounder.

[GVGjr]

Compare his average of 31.47 to Flintoff's average of 31.69 and you could argue he is an allrounder.

Flintoff bats at number 6 and 7 not 8 or 9 though so I don't think it would be a great argument. Flintoff's bowling is also superior and he is one of the hardest bowlers to score off.
Sometimes the averages don't necessarily tell the full story.

[hujsh]

Flintoff bats at number 6 and 7 not 8 or 9 though so I don't think it would be a great argument. Flintoff's bowling is also superior and he is one of the hardest bowlers to score off.
Sometimes the averages don't necessarily tell the full story.

Of course the argument would be flawed but it's an interesting comparison

[westdog54]

Flintoff bats at number 6 and 7 not 8 or 9 though so I don't think it would be a great argument. Flintoff's bowling is also superior and he is one of the hardest bowlers to score off.
Sometimes the averages don't necessarily tell the full story.

Having said that, the only reason he batted at 9 in this test is because we have two allrounders playing in North and McDonald. If, as you say, he can start to bat more consistently, you could almost send him up to 6 or 7, with Haddin taking the alternate spot.

[Sockeye Salmon]

Flintoff bats at number 6 and 7 not 8 or 9 though so I don't think it would be a great argument. Flintoff's bowling is also superior and he is one of the hardest bowlers to score off.
Sometimes the averages don't necessarily tell the full story.

Flintoff's average tells me he's not a number 6 either.

[Sedat]

Having said that, the only reason he batted at 9 in this test is because we have two allrounders playing in North and McDonald. If, as you say, he can start to bat more consistently, you could almost send him up to 6 or 7, with Haddin taking the alternate spot.
McDonald out, McGain in and Johnson moved up to #8 looks much better on paper, and balances the bowling attack up.

[azabob]

In Sunday's Age Peter Roebuck reckons the Aussies should just back Johnsons batting in, and drop an all rounder and play another bowler. Which is what most people have been saying most of the summer.
Forget Symonds, Forget Watson, Forget McDonald, play North and Either a fast bowler or spinner and bat Johnson up the order.

[mighty_west]

In Sunday's Age Peter Roebuck reckons the Aussies should just back Johnsons batting in, and drop an all rounder and play another bowler. Which is what most people have been saying most of the summer.
Forget Symonds, Forget Watson, Forget McDonald, play North and Either a fast bowler or spinner and bat Johnson up the order.

Makes sence to me, we have Haddin as a very good bat, which is a bonus for any side having a keeper as an all-rounder, which was why Gilly was so valuable.

[GVGjr]

In Sunday's Age Peter Roebuck reckons the Aussies should just back Johnsons batting in, and drop an all rounder and play another bowler. Which is what most people have been saying most of the summer.
Forget Symonds, Forget Watson, Forget McDonald, play North and Either a fast bowler or spinner and bat Johnson up the order.

Makes sence to me, we have Haddin as a very good bat, which is a bonus for any side having a keeper as an all-rounder, which was why Gilly was so valuable.

We tried the whole 3 strike bowlers with 2 batting all-rounders in India and it didn't work. Sure Watson bowled better than expected but having White at 8 did nothing for him adding a lot of runs fpr the side.

As MW said, with Haddin being a good bat at 7 we should have Johnson at 8 and 3 more strike bowlers following him.

[mighty_west]

We tried the whole 3 strike bowlers with 2 batting all-rounders in India and it didn't work. Sure Watson bowled better than expected but having White at 8 did nothing for him adding a lot of runs fpr the side.

As MW said, with Haddin being a good bat at 7 we should have Johnson at 8 and 3 more strike bowlers following him.

Well people seem to forget that a batting wicket keeper IS an all rounder, plus Mitch would be classed as "just about" an all-rounder, he's more an all rounder than Brett Lee or Shane Warne IMO.