Harmison and the 2005 Ashes

[Richard]

Yeah but some bowlers have a happy knack of getting wickets with "nothing" balls. Others seem to beat the bat endlessly yet not get as many wickets as they probably should.

For example, Botham was regarded by many who played against him as a "lucky" bowler. Not lucky in the sense he didn't deserve his wickets, but lucky in the sense that he had the happy knack of getting wickets, sometimes with balls which batsmen would ordinarily put away. I remember him strangling Greg Chappell down leg side for example, and having a half tracker hit straight to point. Doesn't mean he couldn't bowl though, he was just talismanic. In fact, being a "lucky" bowler (or batsman for that matter) is a pretty fair asset to have.

Then you look at a bloke like Gillespie, J. who for a period there in the early 2000s bowled some great spells without picking up many 5 fors or a great deal of wickets. Doesn't mean he couldn't bowl either.

I've heard this about Botham so many times, but I've also seen countless pieces of footage from his glory years which showed, in between the jammy-bugger wickets (which everyone and anyone gets ATT) a very considerable number of excellent deliveries which earned wickets.

The point may be valid later on, of course.

But there's a difference between this and getting whole spells of wickets with nothing balls. Harmison emphatically did so in the Test in question.