Player ratings

[Son Of Coco]

Originally Posted by slippyslip

I didnt say he played badly. Just that he never made runs under a lot of pressure like Hussey did at the Oval.
And by the time North made those runs at Edgbaston the game was already heading to a draw. Only the most optimistic English fans thought they had a chance of winning.

The pressure of knowing you're going to get thrashed?

[slippyslip]

Originally Posted by zaremba

In case you're having some kind of difficulty reading what's been written in this thread, no-one's actually said anything of the sort. What is being said by DCYE, GIMH and me is that a rating of 2 is ridiculously unfair on him. As you seem to accept yourself, since you've given him 4.5. Australia may well have won without him, but as Son of Coco put it, Clark put Australia in a winning position.

Australia were already in a strong position before Clark bowled his first ball. And it wouldnt have mattered if Clark played or not. Australia were always going to win that test.

England were 3 for 42 when Clark took his first wicket.

Obviously England were smashing Australia and without Clark's THREE wickets we would have lost that test.

Three for forty-two

Three wickets

Big, fat, stinking deal. Instead of winning of winning by an innings an 80 runs Australia might have only won by 10 or 9 wickets and had to bat again. What a disaster. I'm glad Clark was tehre to save Australia with his THREE wickets.

I mean Siddle cleaning up the tail, something Australia failed to do in 4/5 matches had nothing to do with. People go on about Clark's THREE wickets more than Siddle's five. Yeah, 4/5 wickets were tail enders. Someone remind me how the English tail performed at Cardiff please.

[zaremba]

You still seem to be conducting a lone tilt at the "Australia would have lost without Clark" windmill. Enjoy it!

Anyhow, think about the 2nd innings at the Oval - England 3 down for bugger all - Australia could have done with THREE more quick wickets at that stage, don't you think?

[hitmanpaul]

Originally Posted by kingkallis

Strauss 8/10
Cook 3/10
Bell 3/10
Collingwood 4/10
Trott 7/10
Prior 5/10
Flintoff 5/10
Broad 8/10
Swann 7/10
Harmison 2/10
Anderson 3/10
------
Katich 7/10
Watson 6/10
Ponting 6/10
Hussey 2/10
Clarke 8/10
Haddin 5/10
North 7/10
Johnson 4/10
Clark 2/10
Siddle 7/10
Hilfenhaus 6/10

matt prior only 5/10?!!!