Re: Mitchell Johnson- How shit is he?

by Fred Nerk Wed 01 Jan 2014, 11:03

Thanks MB

Well I got that one right - even when you set an arbitrary 'more-than-Johnno' 7-Test limit, which of course is brutal if that's all your country played, Pup only comes in at no 11, so wouldn't make a 17 man touring squad based on the numbers.

Won 5, lost 6, drew 2 as Akela too - so no Mike Brearley spot either.

by CT Wed 01 Jan 2014, 11:07

Henry wrote:
Fred Nerk wrote:Fine Pete but what does 'personal exasperation' have to do with Trev and MJ? If I was an England follower, I'd get exasperated with KP and Carbuncle and Prior and Jimmy - not with the blokes on the other team, they can play as gormlessly or as ineptly as they like.

I wasn't "exasperated" by Johnson. As a guy who watches quite a lot of cricket, I was pointing out that he was shit. Recently he's been less shit. I prefer to comment on what I see at the time, and I don't care if years down the track, when the player has turned things around, some bored Aussie forummer decides to resurrect a thread to try and point out that actually, I was wrong. Well I wasn't wrong at the time that I started the thread. We were all pretty much in agreement- Johnson was shit. Verging on a laughing stock (He bowls to the left....)

I'm an England supporter, but a cricket fan. I didn't notice any manual that stated I'm not allowed to pass judgement on players from other nations, or indeed that I should be more considerate of other forummers who might have a nerve well and truly (and frequently) struck by my posts.

WELL YOU WERE WRONG so there Razz

.

by embee Wed 01 Jan 2014, 11:12

taipan wrote:What filter did you use. I don't seem to see Dhawan.

400 runs

Dhawan got 319

by taipan Wed 01 Jan 2014, 14:03

embee wrote:
taipan wrote:What filter did you use. I don't seem to see Dhawan.

400 runs

Dhawan got 319

So on the criteria you used Smith is the top opener.

by tac Fri 14 Feb 2014, 12:24

Not really that shit

by Fred Nerk Fri 14 Feb 2014, 12:32

He definitely has been shitter.

by Guest Fri 14 Feb 2014, 14:20

If he'd been this good throughout his career then Aus would have never lost their number 1 ranking.

by Ethics? The Gall! Sat 15 Feb 2014, 06:59

vilkrang wrote:If he'd been this good throughout his career then Aus would have never lost their number 1 ranking.

more importantly wed never have lost the ashes as long as he was fit

by CT Sat 15 Feb 2014, 15:14

12 wickets for the match and wins the game for oz. says it all Mitch you good thing

by lardbucket Sat 06 Dec 2014, 01:01

This is still a great read ... after his devastating opening gambit, Trev returns to again woof Mitchell Johnson on to greater future deeds towards the bottom of page 7 before going on at the top of page 8 to effectively rule out Harris and Siddle as serious threats by the time England tour in 2013

by horace Sun 07 Dec 2014, 23:47

to be fair I think most of us have had cracks at Midge...only Mudge raised this to an artform of woofery

by Brass Monkey Tue 25 Aug 2015, 16:28

11 wicktets @ 39.81

TREEEEEEVVVVOOOOORRRRRR? Anyting?

by LeFromage Tue 25 Aug 2015, 17:28

15 wickets @ 35 actually. I did the numbers and added colours and everything. He was a red.

But I think it was a bit misleading as, to my mind, he bowled far better than Starc or Hazlewood, who ended up with better figures.

by Brass Monkey Tue 25 Aug 2015, 17:41

Oh that makes a big difference - 3 wickets a match for 105 runs. Whoop-a-di-diddly-do. Furthermore, it's the principal of the matter, Smokey, we're talking principalities here. Furthermore, your name is NOT Trevor. Not to me. Same player-noting skills, but NOT the same person. So... would you kindly back away from the thread and let TREVOR take over.

All-in-all, I wasn't saying a lot, fine bowler at his best, was unluckyish in the series, though wasted opportunities to put us under the pump. A lot of admiration on how he handled the Barmy Army as well.

by Guest Wed 26 Aug 2015, 12:41

Yeah thought he was a total thunderqunt before the series. Gone up in my estimation at least a little bit with how he handled the crowd, was a good sport.

by Guest Wed 26 Aug 2015, 12:41

It's also easier to like a bloke when he isn't destroying your team and laughing in their faces.

by Sponsored content