Player Ratings - As We Go By....

[morgieb]

Warner 7 - one poor shot to ruin a brilliant start, one innings where Australia didn't really need to do anything. Hard to judge.
Rogers 6.5 - pretty strong knock in the first innings.
Watson 5.5 - not great. Bonus points for his bowling, which helped spark the first innings collapse.
Clarke 9 -
Smith 4 - not good, but did take a key wicket.
Bailey 6 - important knock in the first innings to help prevent a full-blown collapse should be looked upon highly.
Haddin 9 - it was kinda chancy, but it was still a ton where Australia were still looking kinda edgy.
Johnson 10 - wow. Could lose a mark for taking a bit of a clattering on the fifth morning, but by then the match was long gone.
Siddle 8 - very good bowling in the second innings, didn't need to do much first up.
Harris 7 - not outstanding with the ball, but his batting was fun and he never bowled badly.
Lyon 5 - not his best work.

Cook 1 - oh dear.
Carberry 6.5 - good stuff in the first innings, but played a dire shot to ruin his second dig.
Root 8 - showed some major fight, well done.
Pietersen 5.5 - lolworthy first innings, much better second dig.
Bell 6.5 - see Carberry.
Stokes 5 - potential. Did stay out there a while in the second dig.
Prior 6 - finally started to wake up, but it was too little, too late.
Broad 5 - probably the best of the English bowlers.
Swann 3 - meh. Don't really remember him doing much.
Anderson 4 - not much to write home about, apart from taking two wickets in the one over, and even by then the match was long gone.
Panesar 4 - good bowling at times, but was often carted by Clarke and Haddin.

 

[JontyPanesar]

Matt Prior gets a higher grade than Monty? Monty bowled quite well and created a good set of chances. When batsmen use their feet well, you're inevitably going to drop it short...something Dobell and Kimber don't quite comprehend (though leaking singles,2s, and 3s at a higher econ rate is somehow more permissible). Monty unleashing his inner Tugga against the short ball was admirable.

Matt Prior was a Garbage Time Superstar in this match. More interested in defending his place in the side by claiming some easy runs with an old ball on a flat pitch, rather than grinding it out, valuing his wicket, and opening up the possibility of a draw had the threat of rain come (as was in the forecast). When you play that many high-risk shots, you're giving your team zero chance of saving the match. He pulled a Gambhir@Mumbai and has the wool over everyone's eyes apparently

 

[benchmark00]

Prior's rating of 6 must be the most generous rating I've ever seen since people on CW started doing these things. His keeping was barely par, his dismissal in the first innings when carnage was going on was horrible (fishing outside off stump so early on) and his dismissal, and at times reckless play, on the 5th day when there was rain around and attempting to save the game was abhorrent.

 

[Spark]

Yeah, look, Prior's 60 was useful for getting form but really not great for the team given that he only made Australia bowl for one hour on the final day.

 

[Burgey]

Prior's rating of 6 must be the most generous rating I've ever seen since people on CW. His keeping was barely par, his dismissal in the first innings when carnage was going on was horrible (fishing outside off stump so early on) and his dismissal, and at times reckless play, on the 5th day when there was rain around and attempting to save the game was abhorrent.

Worst CW rating ever was Tricia McMillan saying "I like benchmark00.

 

[morgieb]

It did help push it towards a fifth day I guess. Didn't really notice much wrong with his keeping either. Generous maybe but meh

 

[benchmark00]

Worst CW rating ever was Tricia McMillan saying "I like benchmark00.

Good reference, will pay.

Unlike Jono and his legal fees.

 

[marc71178]

Carberry 6.5 - good stuff in the first innings, but played a dire shot to ruin his second dig.

What about deducting points for his crap fielding, especially late on Day 1, I reckon at least -4 for that drop alone.

 

[morgieb]

Rogers 6 - important knock in the second innings to take a strong position and put a win out of reach.
Warner 9 - he may be a **** but fair batting
Watson 8 - hard to judge him too much for his runs coming when Australia were a long way on top, and he played a useful role with the ball.
Clarke 4 - not his best, but he was due and gets some extra credit for captaining the side towards victory.
Smith 9 - very crucial knock when Australia were in a sticky situation first innings, well played.
Bailey 3 - not much to say, equaling Lara's record for the most runs in a Test over deserves some credit though.
Haddin 7 - edgy but important 50, kept well on a horror wicket.
Johnson 7.5 - to maintain the performance of the first two Tests was too much to expect but he still bowled well.
Siddle 7 - well bowled first innings, somewhat ineffective second innings though still bowled well.
Harris 7 - bowled his first dodgy spell in the second innings in a long time.
Lyon 7 - did what was asked of him mostly, chipped in with some crucial wickets.

Cook 6 - good knock first up to get England off to a solid start, not a lot he could've done in the second innings.
Carberry 5 - got a start twice only to throw them away.
Root 3.5 - hard to judge, got a cruddy decision first innings and did spend time at the crease in the second.
Pietersen 4 - moderate. Very uncharacteristic knock first up, needed to do more second time around.
Bell 6.5 - fought hard first up and put some pressure on Australia in the second innings.
Stokes 9 - very well batted in very testing circumstances.
Prior 2 - as bad as he was, he did put on some form of a partnership with Stokes in the second innings which probably made Australia feel somewhat nervous.
Bresnan 4 - what's with him and injuries? Lost crucial zip and was generally ineffective, but he did fight hard in the second innings.
Broad 3 - the stuff he bowled against Smith was ridiculous after England had them on the ropes.
Swann 4 - was bowling OK until Watson went to town. Took a couple of key wickets first up, kept it tighter than he had in the second.
Anderson 4 - actually bowled pretty well in the first innings.

 

[GIMH]

England series ratings so far

Cook 2 - looked decent in two innings, owned in the rest
Carberry 5 - solid foundations but unable to kick on
Root 4 - handling the pace better than most of his peers but thrown away a few starts
Bell 5 - still looks in decent form at points but struggled at other times
Stokes 8 - the bright spark in a dismal tour
Prior 2 - will the real Matt Prior please stand up?
Bresnan 4 - a shadow of himself with the ball
Broad 8 - been largely excellent
Swann 2 - bowled well in the second dig at Perth, owned the rest of the time
Anderson 3 - way below his best
Tremlett 4 - not awful but very much mediocre
Panesar 2 - not good
Trott - N/A

Depressing and I've probably been generous

 

[morgieb]

OK, here goes the series:

Cook 4 - not great. As a leader he was awful, his captaincy was tactically terrible and he was generally uninspiring. With the bat he often seemed stuck between attacking and defending, and just seemed lost. When he did get a start he actually looked pretty good, but this was rare.
Carberry 5 - a mixed bag. In all tests he got a start, but a high score of 60 is pretty poor. He often batted too defensively and the Root/Carberry partnership seemed to heavily bog down England and caused a ****load of collapses. What does he add that Carberry didn't?
Trott n/a - I don't feel like grading him given the circumstances. Given his problems it was little wonder he struggled in his lone Test. Hopefully he plays again, but it isn't looking good.
Pietersen 5 - at times looked pretty good, and indeed at Melbourne looked England's only bat who was comfortable with the conditions. But still he was inadequate, and the fact that he was England's leading run scorer says it all.
Bell 4 - a shadow of the Bell we saw in England. Did little of significance except for his partnership with Stokes at Perth and a slog at Adelaide.
Root 4 - one good innings, and a few other innings where he spent long periods at the crease, but with Carberry bogged down England a lot. He likely has a fulfilling future but he's gonna have to learn how to get into a run-scoring mindset.
Prior 2 - a disaster. A shadow of the bat he was - looked like a #11 out there except when the pressure was way off, and his keeping was awful in the third Test. Is he done?
Broad 7 - the one England player that lived up to his reputation. Took a six-fer in the first innings, then after that was generally a consistent threat with the ball. Should be embarrassed by his team-mates.
Swann 3 - his career finished up in ugly style, with Australia deliberately targeting him in their plans, pitches not suiting him and him not having a proper Plan B. Laughable with the bat as well, despite having a decent reputation as a lower-order biffer.
Tremlett 5 - a trundler in his lone Test, but still actually bowled some decent balls.
Anderson 5 - occasionally bowled some strong spells, mainly with the new ball. But often bowled too short and seemed down on zip at times. He did get a little better towards the end of the series though.
Stokes 7.5 - the one player England can be happy about. Unlike most of the side he was out there to fight and he played key roles with bat and ball. The guy has a huge future.
Panesar 2.5 - like Swann, his bowling was targeted and he struggled to get much luck with the ball. Getting bowled behind Root in Melbourne is not a good look at all.
Bresnan 4 - gun barrel bowling in the two Tests he played, what is with him and injuries? Added little with the bat too.
Bairstow 1.5 - did little of note with the bat, and was pretty poor with the gloves. Not England's best gloveman.
Ballance 2 - nothing Test for him, I'm afraid. Looked particularly bad in the second innings.
Borthwick 3 - some talent is there but going for more than a run a ball is never a good look regardless of how the batting was. Wickets at the end felt like gimmies.
Rankin 1 - bowled well...rank. Was toothless and bowled way too short.

Warner 8 - world class in his first three Tests, only looked like getting out when he threw his wicket away. Did poorly in the two dead rubbers though.
Rogers 7.5 - a rarity among Aussie bats in that his form actually was better in the last two Tests than the proper Tests. Beforehand he was solid-ish, but didn't have a big defining innings of the series.
Watson 6.5 - a couple of good innings, but most of them seemed to be when the pressure was off. However his bowling was very crucial, kept things tight and seemed to chip in with handy wickets. I don't think 3 is his position though, pick him at 6 where he has a licence to attack.
Clarke 8 - two strong tons in the first two Tests, and then the series was done. Was quiet afterwards but picks up extra points for his captaincy, which was excellent and also led us to a rare whitewash.
Smith 7.5 - two good innings, but little else. Those two tons were massively crucial to Australia's hopes though, with him coming into the crease with Australia in a lot of strife.
Bailey 4 - the one player that didn't make much of a contribution for Australia. Was often prone to nicking off and all his innings seemed scratchy. Equaling Lara's record for most runs in a Test match over and a key role in a couple of strong partnerships the only things he managed to achieve with the bat. Should be dropped, probably won't be while Australia keep winning.
Haddin 10 - amazing. With the bat, always seemed to get Australia out of sticky situations, and without him the series would've looked a lot different. Generally very good with the gloves, I don't remember him making much horror errors at all and his movement was generally very good.
Johnson 10 - probably could've beaten England on his own. Turned from a washed up hack to a love-child of Wasim Akram and Jeff Thomson. From Clarke telling him to bowl around the wicket, he never seemed far way from big hauls.
Harris 9 - world-class. Quasi-Lillee esque, even. Always was a threat with the new ball, and in the last Test picked up a deserved 5-fer for his troubles.
Siddle 8 - played the stock bowler role very well. Took key wickets when the two stars weren't able to get breakthroughs and was for the most part very solid.
Lyon 7.5 - the one bowler who had Tests where he seemed average, but at his best he tested the batsmen heavily with good bounce and turn. One of the more under-appreciated players in world cricket, and is only getting better.

 

[GIMH]

Not sure Cook deserves 4

 

[Tangles]

4 for batting. -2 for captaincy.

 

[Burgey]

Omg

 

[Johnners]