Why Australia can win the Ashes 5-0 -- Part 5

I played my final season of cricket at the Australian National University when Mitchell Johnson burst onto the international one-dayer scene. This was during the period in which Australia was experimenting with one-day bowlers to accompany McGrath and Lee: Mick Lewis, Mitchell Johnson and Brett Dorey all made their debuts in the 2005-6 season. While the bookends have been recycled, MG Johnson is probably better now than ever. Dorey who must surely hold the record as Australia’s tallest cricketer, was beset by (understandable) back and joint ache; Lewis may not have recovered from being belted for a luckless 113 from his ten overs during that run-chase in Johannesburg.

Because of Brett Lee’s retirement and Shaun Tait’s self-imposed exile, Johnson has remained the only seasoned out-and-out quick bowler in the Australian Test squad. It makes sense to refer to Johnson as the ‘leader’ of the pack of bowlers, even though he is no longer thrown the new ball. The reasons he deserves his place at the top of the pile are his pace and surprising bounce.

Anyone with a pinch of cricketing sense expects Bollinger to extract bounce from a wicket: tall man, high arm action, bowling at pace: QED. But Johnson’s bowling from a much lower height also extracts bounce, and at times surprising amounts. Not only is the Mitch shorter than the Doug, but the former’s slightly slingy and round-arm action delivers the ball from lower still. He also appears to amble in, rather than steam in express-from-Roma-Street-style. But the strong shoulders and long arc traced by his left arm in preparing to deliver the ball generate the surprising pace, and thus the surprising bounce.

I remember in 2009 I led the Balliol College team to Cambridge for a two-day game. As we were having breakfast on the second morning, some of the players were trying to analyse a similar situation: why our big and bustling fast bowler delivered the ball more slowly than his shorter opening partner. Numerous explanations abounded— one of those on the edge of sanity was that the shorter opening bowler actually bowled more slowly, but he appeared to be faster, since he bowled a ‘heavy ball’. I stopped with a spoon of Weetabix raised mid-way to my mouth and declared that such substitution of equipment would be highly irregular, even in a pre-season friendly. But no, these people were serious! “The ball is actually travelling more slowly, but it ah ... feels as though it’s travelling more quickly since, ah ... it was delivered with more force.” Oh yes, I know what you are thinking. Surely if it were to be delivered with more force it would actually, and not just apparently, travel faster. This occurred to some of the saner players, but it was shot down by the wise old men of Gotham who smiled, shook their heads and said ‘It doesn’t work like that’. Indeed.

But anyway, back to Johnson.

It would probably be a bridge too far to suggest that Johnson’s batting would give him the nod over a truly great bowler like a Glenn McGrath. But it is a point worth stressing that there are many worse No. 8 batsmen in the world. Indeed, his batting gives the selectors an option, or at least denies then another excuse, to play five specialist bowlers. Bollinger, Johnson, Hilfenhaus, Smith and Hauritz would cover most eventualities, but such a combination is unlikely given that Shane Watson is still seen as being able to shoulder some of the seam bowling duties. The counter to this is that, sure, once upon a time this was true, but them were days when Watto used to break down more frequently than an English scrum. Yes, he can still send down some overs, but the Tests in India show that the taking of 20 wickets is our main concern. This contra-counter should lead people, ever so gently, towards the five-bowler attack, taking solace in Johnson’s ability to offer a rearguard defense or lower-order onslaught, if need be.

Whether or not he manages to sneak a ball with a centre of lead onto the field, he has the effect of bowling a ‘heavy’ ball, inasmuch as it tends to surprise the batsman. I do not think it premature to predict then that it will be the difference in lengths, rather than in lines, that will separate the two teams in the Ashes series. That Johnson naturally bowls a (deceptively) slanting line across the right handed batsman — he bowls quite close to the stumps and due to the low arm he almost delivers over the batsman’s leg stump — means that his bouncer will be naturally the most well-directed. Pace and bounce are his weapons, with swing on the second tier — the reverse of, say, Hilfenhaus. Expect a few to clatter into the helmets of Strauss and Cook and for gully and point to be dealt their fair share of catches.