Cricket Player Manager
Page 3 of 13 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 195
Like Tree10Likes

Thread: Player Ratings - As We Go By....

  1. #31
    U19 Vice-Captain
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    London UK
    Posts
    559
    Quote Originally Posted by hazsa19 View Post
    Someone who watches a lot of cricket can't honestly believe this?
    No, spinners who average under 30 at test level with a s/r under 60 and an economy rate under 3 are ten a penny, especially those who bowl more than half their careers in non subcontinent conditions

  2. #32
    International Coach flibbertyjibber's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Mrs Miggins pie shop
    Posts
    12,033
    Quote Originally Posted by Arachnodouche View Post
    He is an average to good bowler at best who has been allowed to bowl above his level for far too long. All there is to it.
    Better than any Indian spinner though.

  3. #33
    State Vice-Captain
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    1,044
    Just saying that global spin-playing stocks have gone down drastically over the past five years. Don't get me wrong, Swann is a good, steady, consistent bowler but his bluster and modern techniques in general - even subcontinental techniques - give him far too much respect. I'll wager even middle tier batsmen like Sidhu and Ranatunga from twenty years ago would've played him far better.

  4. #34
    U19 Vice-Captain
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    London UK
    Posts
    559
    Quote Originally Posted by flibbertyjibber View Post
    Better than any Indian spinner though.
    But remember he's been "allowed" to bowl above his level for those 53 tests. Just wait till they really get after him now they've sized him up for the last 5 years.


  5. #35
    Hall of Fame Member grecian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    RIP
    Posts
    15,832
    Quote Originally Posted by Burgey View Post
    He looks like Adam Scott IMO.
    Paul Rudd circa Clueless IMHO.
    Do I contradict myself?
    Very well then I contradict myself,
    (I am large, I contain multitudes.
    Walt Whitman

  6. #36
    International Debutant hazsa19's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Buckingham
    Posts
    2,244
    Broad deserves higher ratings than most have given. His innings was crucial to England winning this match. It doesn't matter if you think he should have been out. agar was out for 6 but it hasn't detracted from Hid score. Broads bowling on the 4th evening was also superior to Jimmys at the time. He made the all important breakthrough twice, dismissing Australia's two most dangerous players.
    Quote Originally Posted by GIMH View Post
    Just think, if we'd bowled them out for zero we'd still be struggling

  7. #37
    Cricket Web Staff Member / Global Moderator Neil Pickup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Oxford, England
    Posts
    26,874
    Quote Originally Posted by NUFAN View Post
    Morgie Australia defeated England 66.5 - 61.5
    Cabinet Australia defeated England 67.5 - 65.5
    Think most people's summed ratings would give this: Australia's performance was closer to their ceiling than our efforts were.
    MSN Messenger: minardineil2000 at hotmail dot com | AAAS Chairman
    CricketWeb Black | CricketWeb XI Captain
    ClarkeWatch: We're Watching Rikki - Are You?

    Up The Grecians - Exeter City FC

    Completing the Square: My Cricket Web Blog

  8. #38
    Cricket Web Staff Member Burgey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    The Castle
    Posts
    42,364
    It's curious that some people are saying Australia's lower order won't add runs through the series after the first test, but are happy to say the top order won't do anything at all based on the same sample size.

    Anyway, time will tell.

  9. #39
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend Furball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    #banblocky
    Posts
    20,443
    Quote Originally Posted by Burgey View Post
    It's curious that some people are saying Australia's lower order won't add runs through the series after the first test, but are happy to say the top order won't do anything at all based on the same sample size.

    Anyway, time will tell.
    It's not the same sample size though is it?
    ​63*

  10. #40
    International Debutant Adders's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    ***RIP THE PRINCE***
    Posts
    2,687
    Quote Originally Posted by hazsa19 View Post
    Broad deserves higher ratings than most have given. His innings was crucial to England winning this match. It doesn't matter if you think he should have been out. agar was out for 6 but it hasn't detracted from Hid score. Broads bowling on the 4th evening was also superior to Jimmys at the time. He made the all important breakthrough twice, dismissing Australia's two most dangerous players.
    This.

    I was very happy with Broads performance in this test, he looks back to being somewhere near his best. He'll never be consistent like Jimmy, we all know that but I reckon he is a shoe in to win us at least one of these 5 tests off his own bowling......lock him in for an Oval 2009 or Lords 2013 type performance at some stage this series.

  11. #41
    Cricket Web Staff Member Burgey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    The Castle
    Posts
    42,364
    Ummm yeah it is. If you want to say how poorly the top order has gone, including India as an example, then check out how the lower order went there as well.

  12. #42
    International Coach social's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    AUSTRALIA
    Posts
    12,849
    Quote Originally Posted by 91Jmay View Post
    I agree your tail are going to add runs consistently throughout the innings, but your 11th wicket added 230 runs. That's not happening again.

    A big problem for England bowling at tailenders is how bad Swann is when a batsman is coming at him. Its a real hole in his game.
    Australia has averaged more than 40 runs for the last wicket for the last 17 tests and that is no small sample

    Fact is that we have 4 guys who could easily bat at 8 so whilst it is unreasonable to suggest that the last wicket will put on 100 every time, I think it's fair to assume that the last 4 combined will do it more often than not

  13. #43
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend Furball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    #banblocky
    Posts
    20,443
    Quote Originally Posted by Burgey View Post
    Ummm yeah it is. If you want to say how poorly the top order has gone, including India as an example, then check out how the lower order went there as well.
    4 years isn't a small sample size.

  14. #44
    School Boy/Girl Cricketer Carn_the_pies's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Victoria
    Posts
    85
    Anything less than a 9 for Agar is a bloody disgrace

    hang your head in shame youse blokes
    VICTORIAN PRIDE

    We love Patto cause he's a Victorian!

  15. #45
    International Vice-Captain Riggins's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    The Prince
    Posts
    4,889
    hang your head for saying youse.

Page 3 of 13 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Player Ratings
    By Spark in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 134
    Last Post: 11-09-2011, 04:38 AM
  2. Player Ratings - As We Go By...
    By benchmark00 in forum Ashes 2010-2011
    Replies: 147
    Last Post: 05-01-2011, 02:48 AM
  3. CW Player Ratings
    By nick-o in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 65
    Last Post: 01-04-2010, 03:03 PM
  4. Ind Vs Pak - The player ratings
    By deeps in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 18-04-2005, 08:35 AM
  5. Player Ratings
    By iamdavid in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 08-12-2003, 09:34 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •