So the unthinkable is going to happen. Mitchell Johnson, the humilated buffoon of the 2010/11 series, will return to Ashes cricket in three weeks’ time. And might he end up having the last laugh?
It now looks almost certain that Super Mitch will take the third bowling slot for Australia (alongside Harris and Siddle) at the Gabba on 21st November. He’s just been called back from India to prepare. And that’s for two reasons. Firstly, there probably isn’t anyone else who’s fit enough. James Pattinson, Mitchell Starc, Jackson Bird and Pat Cummins are all laid low by back stress-fractures, and to varying extents are ruled out for at least the immediate future. Secondly, Mitch has been bowling very well recently.
By all accounts, he has hit a remarkable purple patch of form: faster than ever, swinging it viciously late, and for the first time, reliably accurate. His action – erratic and wayward in the past – has hit a rhythmic groove of precision and penetration. He has a new run-up, too. And Mitch’s technical advance has given him a new confidence.
According to Australia’s bowling coach Craig McDermott, “Mitchell is bowling very well at the moment. He’s bowling fast, that’s for sure. He’s getting a bit of shape back into the right-hander, which is important, and his seam position is better”.
Experience tells us to take Ocker hype with a hefty pinch of Vegemite. But Aussie claims aren’t always wrong. Has Mitch really reinvented himself from pantomime clown into a cross between Wasim Akram and Malcolm Marshall?
From an English view, Mitch has always been an enigma. Before he first played against us, we were promised to expect something extraordinary. A “once in a generation” bowler, with “the X Factor”, boasted his mentor, Dennis Lillee. In the event, the nearest Mitch came to The X Factor was his resemblance to one of the daft contestants whom everyone laughs at in the auditions – more Chico than Leona Lewis.
In the 2009 Ashes, we struggled to see what the fuss was all about. He bowled well at Headingley, but like a spray-gun in a woeful display at Lord’s, and was surprisingly anonymous in the other tests. Looking at his stats, I was surprised to see he took as many as 20 wickets, and at 32.55, as I could barely remember many good spells, Leeds aside.
2010/11 was, famously, Mitch’s nadir, and I need not remind you of the Barmy Army lyrics. Apart from one brilliant half-hour at Perth, he was absolutely dreadful, and more to the point, became a complete laughing stock – the very symbol of Australian impotence and decline.
Since then, he has been in and out of the test side, but dropped after Australia’s tour to India last March, and not even considered for the 2013 summer Ashes, even though he came to the UK for both the Champions Trophy and NatWest ODI series which bookended it.
And in those one-dayers against us, Mitch was probably Australia’s best bowler. In the four NatWest matches, his figures were an impressive 10-2-36-2, 5-0-20-1, 9.3-0-64-0, and 10-1-21-2. He dismissed – usually by pace alone – Trott, Root, and Michael Carberry.
He’s also bowled well recently in India, but the question is – can he transfer his ODI form to the test arena? Mitch’s Ashes career has been characterised by extraordinary inconsistency: terrible for three spells, adequate for a fourth, and then irresistible in his sixth. He veers, literally, from the sublime to the ridiculous.
In ODIs, Mitch knows he only has to bowl ten good overs in the match, and mostly with a new ball. He probably knows exactly when he’ll bowl, and what the circumstances will be. But in a test, he ventures into the unknown – up to twenty overs a day, sixty in the match, when the ball could be old, the pitch flat, and the batsmen on top. In limited overs cricket, Mitch is inside his comfort zone. In tests, he is the non-swimmer who must venture out from the safety of the handrail into the deep end.
In short, there is a very real chance he will bottle it, which is certainly what we English supporters will hope for. And that’s without taking the psychological elements into the equation. On our last tour Down Under three years ago, Mitch was bullied and pummelled into submission by England supporters, press, and players alike. He still bears very deep mental scars, and from where I’ve been sitting, Mitch’s problems have always seemed more about mental pressure than bowling technqiue. Put simply, when he steps on to the Gabba’s turf, he will be bricking it.
Will he skittle us for peanuts, or bowl dross all day long? The beauty of cricket, and the endless fascination of Mitchell Guy Johnson, is that no one knows.
The best news I’ve heard all month! Mitch is back in the side! He may bowl a good spell, even have a good match. However, sooner or later as sure as Chris Tremlett getting injured again at some point, Mitch will crumble. If our batsmen don’t get him, the barmy army will! He seems to be mentally fragile which on its own is enough to rule him out as a test cricketer.
Now do me a favour Mitch, don’t prove me wrong.
Probably a huge mistake by Australia. The Aussies had our batsmen in trouble during the summer because they bowled with aggression and control (most of the time) and really contained our batsmen. England’s run rate rarely got above 3 an over; in fact, we batted ourselves into a coma on many occasions. By picking Mitch, the Aussies are effectively abandoning this strategy. Throughout his career, he has always taken wickets but bowled too many boundary balls. I can see him taking a few wickets, but more importantly his presence will ease the pressure on our top order, and undo the good containing jobs done by the likes of Harris and Siddle. I really think England will relish his inclusion.
Is he an improved bowler? He might be going through a purple patch at the moment, but I suspect this means very little. His action is exactly the same; therefore he’ll still be erratic when the heat is on. He can’t suddenly reinvent himself now he’s into his 30s and hasn’t tinkered with his action one bit. With Johnson, his seam position etc is always a matter of chance. It’s going well now, but his overall method is too loose to suddenly produce consistency.
I agree.
Part of England’s slow scoring was the pace of the pitches, of course. Counter-intuitively, England’s batmen much prefer the pace and bounce of Australian pitches.
The other part was the clever and disciplined lines Australia bowled. Only Ryan Harris really has the talent and discipline to execute the plan properly. Siddle probably has the discipline, Johnson the talent, both of them are lacking.
I think if Johnson really does take the pitch, the crowd and the players will play with his head until he can’t even hit the pitch.
The Aussie’s do like a left armer.
I think he can do a job and crucially for the Aussies won’t be part of a four man attack so can bowl 4 3-4 over spells a day without it being match losing.
England however couldn’t contemplate such a selection.
Somebody linked this recently, it is my first time looking at this one. In regards to your assessment, James…*chortle*
This is why I never make forecasts.
IMO, the pressure’s on the BA to come up with a new, witty and biting welcome
for him. History beckons.