Originally Posted by vic_orthdox
Yeah, was just going to come back in and edit and say that I don't think that Johnson's performance will be what wins Australia the series. It may well put Australia in advantageous positions, but it will be what the other three bowlers do when he's not bowling that will determine how effective Australia's bowling will end up be. That was the biggest difference between the series' at home and away in South Africa.
Shane Warne managed 40 wickets in 2005, and yet England remained on top for a large majority of play. It required all four bowlers to be performing for sustained pressure to really exist.
Johnson in South Africa looked an even better bowler than his performances in Australia. Largely because he didn't have to carry the attack, and play both as the stock bowler and the strike bowler.
If Johnson ends the Ashes series with 20 wickets at a little under 30. That is a good result as it means he hasn't had to bowl the bulk of the overs. Probably means one or two other bowlers have taken 20-25 wickets at similar averages.