Cricket Player Manager

View Poll Results: Who will score more runs in the 2009 Ashes?

Voters
28. You may not vote on this poll
  • Mitchell Johnson

    24 85.71%
  • Stuart Broad

    4 14.29%
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345
Results 61 to 75 of 75

Thread: Johnson vs Broad with the bat

  1. #61
    Eternal Optimist / Cricket Web Staff Member GIMH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Remembering The Prince - 63*
    Posts
    49,144
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    Between 1998 and 2000 he was picked because people thought he was good at both disciplines, and in fact he was **** at them both. As I say, since 2003/04 he'd have played as one of the (often the) first names on the teamsheet purely as a bowler if he didn't know one end of the bat from the other.

    Flintoff for me has been a bowling-all-rounder throughout the portion of his career which is significant - ie, the time he's been a good Test cricketer. That doesn't mean he's a shocking batsman, just that he's quite clearly better as bowler than batsman.
    Probably would have played as a batsman in that period even if he couldn't bowl, though
    Phil Hughes 1988-2014

    RIP Craigos. A true CW legend. You will be missed.

  2. #62
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Really not sure about that, at all. Maybe, sometimes, he might have (in the aftermaths of his two greatest triumphs, Australia '05 and India '05/06), but I myself would completely disagree if he did.

    It's, obviously, not possible to be able to bowl and not bat; there have been occasions wher he's batted for a little while (for Lancashire) without bowling and never been remotely considered.

    He did play ODIs in 2000/01 as a specialist batsman, and it was frankly ridiculous.
    RD
    Appreciating cricket's greatest legend ever - HD Bird...............Funniest post (intentionally) ever.....Runner-up.....Third.....Fourth
    (Accidental) founder of Twenty20 Is Boring Society. Click and post to sign-up.
    chris.hinton: h
    FRAZ: Arshad's are a long gone stories
    RIP Fardin Qayyumi (AKA "cricket player"; "Bob"), 1/11/1990-15/4/2006

  3. #63
    Eternal Optimist / Cricket Web Staff Member GIMH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Remembering The Prince - 63*
    Posts
    49,144
    Played a couple of ODIs as a specialist bat in 04, played a few in 06 as well (though they were a failure).

    Given that between 03 and 06 he averaged somewhere around 40 with the bat, it's not unreasonable to suggest he'd have been in the team anyway. Especially as without bowling he might have scored more runs (might).

    Averaged 42 in ODIs with the bat in that period, SR of 89.25, there's approximately 0 arguments against him making that team based on batting alone.

  4. #64
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Certainly not in ODIs (though as I say, in 2000/01 it was utterly stupid). But in Tests, absolutely not. If Flintoff ever had played a Test as a specialist bat, regardless of what his overall average was, I'd have been disgusted.


  5. #65
    Eternal Optimist / Cricket Web Staff Member GIMH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Remembering The Prince - 63*
    Posts
    49,144
    Yeah, but I wasn't talking about whether you would or wouldn't have agreed with the selection, rather the fact that I reckon he would have been successful. And quite frankly in the years I stated I think he would have done bloody well.

  6. #66
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Well, he did play (not as batsman but as all-rounder, bowling or otherwise) and didn't in my view do exceptionally.

    It's quite fair enough for two different people to hold two different classifications. If you think Flintoff is a better batsman than me - as you do - then you're bound to do so.

    "Batsman\bowler\all-rounder" isn't some sort of must-be-defined thing.

  7. #67
    Eternal Optimist / Cricket Web Staff Member GIMH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Remembering The Prince - 63*
    Posts
    49,144
    Yeah, agree

    Mind you, I do believe he'd have scored more runs if he hadn't been a bowler as well but obviously there is no way of knowing. At least not until I can sort some time travel.

  8. #68
    International Regular simmy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Kent, England
    Posts
    3,039
    Seeing as Broad is in for his batting atm, I would say he has the edge over MJ.

  9. #69
    RTDAS pasag's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Looking for milksteak
    Posts
    31,678
    Going to need a big one from Mitch to win this.

    168 vs 94.
    Rest In Peace Craigos
    2003-2012

  10. #70
    Eternal Optimist / Cricket Web Staff Member GIMH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Remembering The Prince - 63*
    Posts
    49,144
    Broad's had more chances to bat tbf, and both failed when their middle order collapsed.

  11. #71
    Englishman BoyBrumby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Gone too soon
    Posts
    45,341
    Quote Originally Posted by GeraintIsMyHero View Post
    Broad's had more chances to bat tbf, and both failed when their middle order collapsed.
    TBF to Broad he stood up when they went all deck of cards in the 2nd dig at Leeds. Pressure was arguably off by then I suppose, but that didn't help Messers Bopara, Bell or Collingwood to a score tho.
    Cricket Web's 2013/14 Premier League Tipping Champion

    - As featured in The Independent.

    "I don't believe a word of Pietersen's book, but then I don't believe a word anyone else has said either."
    - Simon Barnes renders further comment on KP's autobiography superfluous in a sentence

  12. #72
    Global Moderator vic_orthdox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    25,473
    Quote Originally Posted by BoyBrumby View Post
    TBF to Broad he stood up when they went all deck of cards in the 2nd dig at Leeds. Pressure was arguably off by then I suppose, but that didn't help Messers Bopara, Bell or Collingwood to a score tho.
    As Damien Martyn stated, lets see him (and Swann) bat like that in a first innings.

  13. #73
    Cricketer Of The Year zaremba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Burgess Hill
    Posts
    8,994
    Quote Originally Posted by vic_orthdox View Post
    As Damien Martyn stated, lets see him (and Swann) bat like that in a first innings.
    Edgbaston?

  14. #74
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by vic_orthdox View Post
    As Damien Martyn stated, lets see him (and Swann) bat like that in a first innings.
    Why a first-innings? Why not a time when there's something much at stake, regardless of innings, rather than generalised which-innings questions.

  15. #75
    State Vice-Captain Debris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    sydney
    Posts
    1,305
    Think I back MJ here more for his destructiveness than for any extra runs. More likely to win you a test match with a freak innings.

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Mitchell Johnson v Stuart Broad
    By ozone in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 130
    Last Post: 31-08-2010, 02:51 PM
  2. hughes and johnson to lead the way
    By cowboy up in forum Ashes 2009
    Replies: 50
    Last Post: 25-08-2009, 02:02 AM
  3. Chris Broad At It Again
    By Cevno in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 18-12-2008, 05:59 PM
  4. Tait or Johnson?
    By Legga in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 52
    Last Post: 29-12-2006, 11:52 PM
  5. Old but Still Gold
    By What-A-Player in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 71
    Last Post: 07-06-2006, 04:50 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •