Our Ashes woes: blame the mechanic
Roar Guru By vinay verma, 27 Jul 2009 Vinay Verma is a Roar Guru
- Tagged:
- Andy Flower, Cricket, edgbaston, Mitchell Johnson, The Ashes, Tim Nielsen, Troy Cooley
Troy Cooley, Australia’s bowling coach, needs a car hoist and two balancing machines. He cannot tell the difference between a Lamborghini and a beatup Holden. Neither can he distinguish between a Range Rover and a working ute.
If he was the head mechanic of my non-existent fleet of cars I would sack him. Yes, Warne and McGrath have gone but he should keep the cars he has in running order.
Mitchell Johnson has been bowling like a car with bald tyres or more accurately as a car with misaligned wheels.
In this age of biomechanics and ice baths he seems blinded by too much knowledge.
The first priority of a bowling coach is to ensure his charges are physically fit and fine tuned. This means routine and regular checks and corrections.
A good fleet manager knows that preventive maintenance saves on downtime and is cost effective in the long run. When a car comes to a shuddering halt it is doubly expensive to put it back on the road.
Tim Nielsen is also not entirely blameless. He is still mouthing banal statements like “…there are positives..”. I am afraid this did not save the Titanic and unless the back room boys start earning their money, Ricky will never win an Ashes in England as captain. More the pity because he is, along with Tendulkar and Lara, a modern batting great.
Kerry O’Keefe pointed out in his column that it is not Johnson’s left arm that is the concern but the right side and the right arm.
He points out that the low right arm is making him fall away. Conversely it is Hauritz’s low left arm that is stopping him realise his full potential.
In 1965 Kirti Azad, who later coached Kapil Dev, was espousing the Pendulum Principle. Simple and earthy common sense.
For a right handed bowler the high left arm, to the point of inducing a stretch in your side, meant the right had to follow that arc.
Kerry O Keefe may appear light hearted but behind the Parody there lurks a razor sharp brain. He calls for the “technical purity” of Watson’s batting at the top of the order and Manou’s keeping but I think this is Kerry trying to shock the team management into action.
There needs to be only one or at the most two changes for Edgbaston. Clark for North would be an attacking move and would show faith in the bowlers who did so well in the last six months (barring Lords).
Andy Flower on the other hand has gone quietly about his business and is getting the most out of his unfashionable fleet of cars.
It is no use calling for a rocket scientist when all you need is a basic mechanic.
Recommend this story.
- Explore:
- Andy Flower, Cricket, edgbaston, Mitchell Johnson, The Ashes, Tim Nielsen, Troy Cooley
July 27th 2009 @ 12:35pm
Jameswm said | July 27th 2009 @ 12:35pm | Report comment
It might be a good toss to lose.
Clark has to come in. I would bring in Watson for North if it’s greenish. Clark then comes in for Siddle or Johnson, and I haven’t seen enough of their bowling lately to decide.
And Hauritz is a decent bat.
July 27th 2009 @ 12:35pm
Brett McKay said | July 27th 2009 @ 12:35pm | Report comment
Vinay, agreeing to disagree with you has become a given, except for a rare moment last week. I think it’s just the way it is.
My preference isn’t for a traditional batting or bowling allrounder at all; my preference is for well-balanced teams. Dropping a specialist batsman for speclialist bowler – even if you consider Haddin and Johnson allrounders – causes more harm to the balance, in my opinion.
I’ll make one final correction – you most definitely did say Australia made 400 in the first innings at Lord’s, this is a direct quote from your first post in this thread: “…they have scored 600 plus and 400 in the other two innings.”
July 27th 2009 @ 12:52pm
vinay verma said | July 27th 2009 @ 12:52pm | Report comment
Correct all you want Brett…”Except for the poor shot selection in the first innings at Lords……..scored 600 and 400 IN THE OTHER TWO INNINGS..”
Are we reading the same post? How can you be so adamant when it is clear for all to see?
Watch my lips. I did not say Australia scored 400 in the first innings at Lords.
July 27th 2009 @ 1:50pm
vinay verma said | July 27th 2009 @ 1:50pm | Report comment
ColinN agreed that England’s tail is more accomplished. Generally tailenders have improved. No more Courtney Walshes and Jimmy Higgs…though Martin from NZ classifies as a bunny. That said Swann does have four not outs that inflate the average and Hauritz has no not outs. Hautitz does have a top of 94 in a First Class game.
All said and done Swann with four FC hundreds is a more accomplished player. Runs down the order are handy but we have to expect that those picked for their batting need to deliver.
July 27th 2009 @ 4:05pm
Fred Magee said | July 27th 2009 @ 4:05pm | Report comment
Clark is the option but not for North. Unfortunately, we are not at the stage where we can stick with Johnson. Clark should be in for Johnson – straight swap. If the wicket is not going to take spin, then he goes in for Johnson and McDonald in for Hauritz. Ronald did well with the ball and interestingly, has been a key part of Australia’s last Test wins.
Two things need to happen to retain the Ashes…the top 6 need to score runs and the attack must take 20 wickets. Johnson for whatever reason is not capable of contributing to getting the twenty. We could afford to carry him at 1-1 but not at 1-0 down.
July 27th 2009 @ 5:52pm
vinay verma said | July 27th 2009 @ 5:52pm | Report comment
Fred,it is surprising how the threads veer away from the main thrust of the article. Which is that the bowling coach has to get the fleet at his disposal in working order. We have a coach and a bowling coach. What are they doing if our main spearhead is scrambling confetti at a wedding?
July 27th 2009 @ 8:53pm
sheek said | July 27th 2009 @ 8:53pm | Report comment
Vinay,
Not so long ago, Greg Russell complimented me by naming me in his dream frontrow of rugby writers. Or something like that!
Remind me to select you as my very cagey spinner in my cricket writing team. You have the full repetoire – offbreaks, legbreaks, topspinners, wrong un’s, straight balls, looping teasers, ripping medium pacers, etc, etc.
You prod, you tease, you toss em up, you drift, you dip, but mostly you tell it like it is, a master writer-spinner!
July 27th 2009 @ 9:15pm
vinay verma said | July 27th 2009 @ 9:15pm | Report comment
Sheek, I am humbled by your generous salute
I will leave you with a couple of lines from ny latest collection
Where once , I was , a guardian of Wasps
I have become, a keeper of butterflies.
July 27th 2009 @ 9:34pm
eric said | July 27th 2009 @ 9:34pm | Report comment
OK, OK, back to the point of the article about the bowling mechanic and his vehicles.
I must admit I am curious how Johnston got so many wickets up til now. Sure, he’s quick, and lefties can be awkward. He has a leg cutter, but doesn’t appear to have the lefties stock inswinger (to right handers). He has always bowled a lot of rubbish, but the lack of bounce in England has him stuffed.
O’Keeffe is not saying anything remarkable. Everyone knows you need to get your leading shoulder and arm up. I haven’t noticed Johnston “falling away”, and he is still quick, which indicates his action is OK. I think he needs to pitch it up, in the corridor, and get the seam up. And if Brett Lee did the same, he’d be as good as Dale Steyn.
July 27th 2009 @ 10:14pm
vinay verma said | July 27th 2009 @ 10:14pm | Report comment
Eric, Up until South Africa Johnson got the majority of his wickets in Australia with pace and bounce. He had been working on the ball coming in to the right hander and going away from the left. He had this working in south Africa and got a few of the top right handers out LBW . He also snared a few lefties caught at slip.
When you have this left handers outswing the batsmen are not sure if they can let it go so they play nearly every ball.
What is happening now is that Johnson has lost this ability and both right and left handers just let him go. And if he pitches short or full he gets hammered. His line is all over the place and his length is based on a hope and a prayer. A misfiring car with the right blinker going when he is about to turn left.
For a more technical explanation you may have to talk to our resident expert,Jameswm. I dont know where he has disappeared to.
Steyn is good but look out for Shane Bond. He has been picked to go to Sri Lanka and I expect him to give Sanga and Co a big hurry up. Dan Vettori finally has a strike bowler of the highest class.
July 27th 2009 @ 10:00pm
davido said | July 27th 2009 @ 10:00pm | Report comment
Great article… would you say johnson has enough confidence to start tinkering with his action during an Ashes series?
July 27th 2009 @ 10:17pm
vinay verma said | July 27th 2009 @ 10:17pm | Report comment
Thats just the point of this article,Davido…Get the mechanic on the case.
Personally, I think he can turn it around. His captain is supporting him and he just has to stand up and be counted. No more excuses. His 63 in the second innings showed he is not altogether a shot duck.
July 28th 2009 @ 1:10pm
Jameswm said | July 28th 2009 @ 1:10pm | Report comment
Johnson has got lots of wickets from his off cutter (away from the right hander), and also from hitting the right spot and moving it slightly across the right hander. He also reverse swings it across the right hander.
He gets bounce and this has worried people (esp Strauss and Graeme Smith).
Really, he only started bringing it back in to the right hander in South Africa, and he’d been going perfectly well before then without it. Too much is being made of it, as it was during the Whit’s career. There are so many left handed top order batsmen around these days, do we only pick right handed seamers who bring it back to the left hander? What’s the difference?
The fact is he does NOT need to bring it back to the right hander to be successful. All he needs to do is bowl accurately at good pace, and have the ball do a little one way or the other. It’s as simple as that.
July 28th 2009 @ 1:31pm
vinay verma said | July 28th 2009 @ 1:31pm | Report comment
James,you made the point a few weeks ago that now is not the time to be tinkering too much. On reflection Johnson is trying to do too much. If the inducker to the rhb is not working he should just concentrate on his pace and L & L.At his pace he can get the openers LBW and the rhb’s caught behind.
I believe he will be a more complete bowler when he has the inducket to the rhb under control. But now is not the time to fret.
He also needs to get some energy thru the bowling crease.
July 28th 2009 @ 9:52pm
eric said | July 28th 2009 @ 9:52pm | Report comment
It seems to me the expert observers can’t agree on Johnston’s strengths and problems. Jameswm says he off cuts it away from right handers. I presume you mean leg cutters. If he can reverse swing an outswinger to a RHB, then he should be able to bowl the inswinger when the ball is newish. Vinay, “energy through the bowling crease”? I’m not sure what that means in Johnston’s case, and what it will achieve.
Johnston isn’t the first bowler to struggle in England. Gillespie last tour totally lost his mojo too. What would Pigeon’s advice be?
July 28th 2009 @ 10:26pm
vinay verma said | July 28th 2009 @ 10:26pm | Report comment
Eric, James means leg cutter to the RHB. Johnson is not a firstup new ball bowler and will come on first change. With Johnson if you go back when he first played in the one dayers in Malaysia he was finishing his follow through in the batsman’s face. That is enrgy through the bowling crease. Now he seems to pull up and is sluggish like a car with the handbrake on.
Pigeon’ would keep it simple and in the corridor. He would keep his line and length and bring the odd one in. He made the batsmen play. If Hilfenhaus can adjust so can Johnson. Stuart Clark has to come in as he is the nearest we have to a McGrath. I would still have Johnson in my team as he is out and out the quickest we have. He has had two average Tests on his way to 102 wickets and has led the attack well in the last 18 months.
July 29th 2009 @ 7:58am
eric said | July 29th 2009 @ 7:58am | Report comment
Vinay,
Just explain what will be achieved by following through to the batsmans face, apart from a longer walk back to your mark. Will it make him faster or more accurate or do something more with the ball? I am not saying you are wrong, but I’m trying to nail specifically the technical or mental problems.
I disagree on your remark of McGrath “making the batsman play” . Bowling in the “corridor of uncertainty” inevitably means that a batsman will let a few go. That is part of the bigger plan. If you make them play, it means you’re bowling at the stumps. That inevitably leads to middle and leg balls being turned for easy runs. It is much harder to set a field to that sort of bowling.