• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Bill Johnston vs Keith Miller

Better bowler

  • Total voters
    16
Coronis

Coronis

Hall of Fame Member
Johnston was definitely better.

Prior to his knee injury (1947-1953)

29 tests 132 @ 21.75 6 5’fers

Post knee injury (1953-1955)

11 tests 28 @ 34.10 1 5’fer

iirc Davidson and Burge had to stretcher him off against the Windies in his final test, reinjuring his knee twice in the field during that series, being unable to bat or bowl in his final two tests. (notably his 1 5’fer post injury was all spin)

Also worth noting ofc he only got the new ball when Lindwall or Miller broke down. Had to change his action post injury which removed a lot of his deadliness. Sadly ruined by injury but yeah Johnston was definitely better imo.
 
Last edited:
sayon basak

sayon basak

International Coach
Coronis said:
Johnston was definitely better.

Prior to his knee injury (1947-1953)

29 tests 132 @ 21.75 6 5’fers

Post knee injury (1953-1955)

11 tests 28 @ 34.10 1 5’fer

iirc Davidson and Burge had to stretcher him off against the Windies in his final test, reinjuring his knee twice in the field during that series, being unable to bat or bowl in his final two tests. (notably his 1 5’fer post injury was all spin)

Also worth noting ofc he only got the new ball when Lindwall or Miller broke down. Had to change his action post injury which removed a lot of his deadliness. Sadly ruined by injury but yeah Johnston was definitely better imo.
Click to expand...
Shouldn't have played cricket post injury then.
 
DrWolverine

DrWolverine

International Captain
Coronis said:
Johnston was definitely better.

Prior to his knee injury (1947-1953)

29 tests 132 @ 21.75 6 5’fers

Post knee injury (1953-1955)

11 tests 28 @ 34.10 1 5’fer

Davidson and Burge had to stretcher him off against the Windies in his final test, reinjuring his knee twice in the field during that series
Click to expand...
That’s sad.
 
capt_Luffy

capt_Luffy

Hall of Fame Member
Coronis said:
Johnston was definitely better.

Prior to his knee injury (1947-1953)

29 tests 132 @ 21.75 6 5’fers

Post knee injury (1953-1955)

11 tests 28 @ 34.10 1 5’fer

iirc Davidson and Burge had to stretcher him off against the Windies in his final test, reinjuring his knee twice in the field during that series, being unable to bat or bowl in his final two tests. (notably his 1 5’fer post injury was all spin)

Also worth noting ofc he only got the new ball when Lindwall or Miller broke down. Had to change his action post injury which removed a lot of his deadliness. Sadly ruined by injury but yeah Johnston was definitely better imo.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but he was a fragile boy
 
Coronis

Coronis

Hall of Fame Member
sayon basak said:
He was simply not an ATG, no need to take durability into account for that. Take that in, he is inferior to Miller.
Click to expand...
Interesting, since in matches pre knee injury he outperformed Lindwall, and including post injury he still took the same amount of wickets, at a slightly higher average.
 
shortpitched713

shortpitched713

Cricketer Of The Year
Johnston was a very high quality bowler, and more versatile, and had a greater workload. I don't see why anyone would fall into the Miller camp here.
 
kyear2

kyear2

Hall of Fame Member
I think Johnston was more important to the team, don't think there's any question about that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top