Adelaide?Against good players of pace we've yet to see if Johnson can be penetrative on those kinds of pitches, hard to say whether Port Elizabeth was simply an outlier or an indication that Mitch is going to find it really tough to be a matchwinner on those kinds of pitches against teams like SA and NZ
Dunedin and the current Seddon Park would negate his bounce a bit, like PE and the UAE did (the UAE being the extreme example).Blokes been bowling his brains out for 18 months (ODI's included), and suggestions like this still astound me. Mitch has not just been successful because "conditions" (obviously they have helped), he's been every bit as good as an "all-round" bowler as Harris which is what makes them so dangerous together. The series in UAE showed this if nothing else.
Indeed but being able to pick off some wickets and maintain decent figures is different to being a matchwinner, not anything against Johnson but it influences how the two teams shape up against each other on certain pitches. I can't remember how fast the Adelaide pitch was but I do recall he struggled a bit in the second dig so it's hard to sayIIRC he averaged under 30 in the UAE over two Tests as well?
I'm not sure this last part is true at all. Cummins/Richardson/Bird/Starc/Pattison/Bollinger/Hilfenhaus all won't play in the first Test tomorrow. That's outrageous depth. Nigh on all of those guys would be picked as our third seamer.
Yes and no. Watling is world-class, Latham, Neesham and Craig all average over 40 with the bat, and Craig has (somehow) twice bowled NZ to victory, Anderson hits it harder than Klusener used to, and NZ is probably 2nd only to South Africa in pace bowling depth
The only Mitchell that should make either test side is that Johnson guy. I hear he's quite good.I'm not sure this last part is true at all. Cummins/Richardson/Bird/Starc/Pattison/Bollinger/Hilfenhaus all won't play in the first Test tomorrow. That's outrageous depth. Nigh on all of those guys would be picked as our third seamer.
Compare that to Wagner (if not picked)/Milne/Henry/McClenaghan etc, and South Africa have very raw back-up options who have played very little Test cricket at all.
Don't really buy this. India played good competitive cricket in that series, just like they had in South Africa were they also nearly drew a test series. For whatever reason, they fell apart in the second half of the England tour, but I don't think a 1-0 result v India can be used as evidence that NZ would be pasted by Australia (at least not on home soil anyway).