Page 4 of 13 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 195
Like Tree10Likes

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

  1. #46
    International Coach uvelocity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    seamy road
    Posts
    11,644
    Hang your head for replying to ceep
    Quote Originally Posted by sledger View Post
    I just love all kinds of balls.

  2. #47
    School Boy/Girl Cricketer Carn_the_pies's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Victoria
    Posts
    85
    Don't get narky floglocity
    VICTORIAN PRIDE

    We love Patto cause he's a Victorian!

  3. #48
    Hall of Fame Member Goughy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    All Over
    Posts
    15,078
    Quote Originally Posted by Expressway76 View Post
    A match winning 10fer yields only an 8 for Anderson?
    Not that I need to but here goes:

    Was it the best I have seen? No. There goes the 10.
    Was he by far the best bowler for England? Yes. That is reflected in the rankings.
    Did he bowl very well? Yes. I gave a score of 8.
    Were there times in between the good stuff where he, along with the other looked a little flat - including being a witness to a 10th wicket celebration of batting? Yes. I dont quite believe it was a 9. It is a solid 8 in a low scoring game and he was a clear match winner in part because England's other bowlers were so poor in addition to Anderson being good.

    That 13 over spell was magic though and he is clearly World class with both the new and old ball.
    Last edited by Goughy; 16-07-2013 at 03:48 AM.
    If I only just posted the above post, please wait 5 mins before replying as there is bound to be edits

    West Robham Rabid Wolves Caedere lemma quod eat lemma

    Happy Birthday! (easier than using Birthday threads)

    Email and MSN- Goughy at cricketmail dot net

  4. #49
    State Vice-Captain
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    1,019
    Quote Originally Posted by Goughy View Post
    Not that I need to but here goes:

    Was it the best I have seen? No. There goes the 10.
    Was he by far the best bowler for England? Yes. That is reflected in the rankings.
    Did he bowl very well? Yes. I gave a score of 8.
    Were there times in between the good stuff where he, along with the other looked a little flat - including being a witness to a 10th wicket celebration of batting? Yes. I dont quite believe it was a 9. It is a solid 8 in a low scoring game and he was a clear match winner in part because England's other bowlers were so poor in addition to Anderson being good.

    That 13 over spell was magic though and he is clearly World class with both the new and old ball.
    The way he worked out Agar from around the wicket once the ball started reversing was poetry. Just top-drawer skill. At a decent pace too, he kept reaching 87 pretty consistently.


  5. #50
    U19 12th Man Cooky Monster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    England
    Posts
    239
    Watson 5
    Rogers 5
    Cowan 0
    Clarke 1
    Smith 5
    Hughes 6.5
    Haddin 7
    Agar 8.5
    Starc 5.5
    Siddle 8
    Pattinson 6.5

    Cook 5.5
    Root 4
    Trott 4.5
    Pietersen 6
    Bell 9
    Bairstow 3
    Prior 4
    Broad 7
    Finn 1.5
    Swann 5
    Anderson 10

  6. #51
    Hall of Fame Member grecian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Moeen is a perfectly fine bowler FFS.
    Posts
    15,026
    Watson 4
    Rogers 5
    Cowan 1
    Clarke 1
    Smith 6
    Hughes 7
    Haddin 7
    Agar 8
    Starc 5
    Siddle 8
    Pattinson 6

    Cook 5
    Root 5
    Trott 6
    Pietersen 6
    Bell 8
    Bairstow 2
    Prior 3
    Broad 8
    Finn 4
    Swann 6
    Anderson 9
    Do I contradict myself?
    Very well then I contradict myself,
    (I am large, I contain multitudes.
    Walt Whitman

  7. #52
    First Class Debutant Swingpanzee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Indonesia
    Posts
    800
    1st Test, Trent Bridge:

    England:

    Cook - 6: Good fifty in 2nd innings. Average captaincy overall but was good when it cames to taking/not taking reviews.
    Root - 4: Pretty mediocre as opener, struggled a bit but it's his first Ashes and opener test so a bit generous here. He made it up with the important wicket though.
    Trott-4: Not sure about innings 2, but pretty good batting on day 1 until that horrendous dismissal.
    Pieterson - 6: Showed plenty of grit in the second innings and partly helped England rebuild their innings on days 2 and 3. A shame he didn't go all the way.
    Bell - 8 : Great ton, just when England needed it.
    Bairstow - 2 : Struggled and didn't look good at all.
    Prior -3 : Ok with the glove, looked promising with the bat in the second innings but overall not anything noteworthy
    Broad -7: A vital batting innings in the second half. Impressive bowling on day 4. And bonus points for the hilarious shoe time wasting.
    Finn - 0 : Absolute rubbish. Feel sorry for him and would have liked to give more considering he was on a hat-rick, but his **** far exceeded any merit he presented.
    Swann - 2: Looked dangerous at times but ended up as mediocre and pretty tame.
    Anderson - 10 :Absolutely stunning performance. A bit inconsistent at times but you can't give him less than full marks.

    Australia:
    Watson - 3: Same promising yet ultimately disappointing Watson.
    Rogers - 6: Good batting in both innings.
    Cowan - 0: Eeek.
    Clarke - 1.5 : Poor captaincy, poor batting. Points only awarded for that good catch of Cook's edge.
    Smith - 4:Fighting innings on day1/day 2 but just so-so afterwards.
    Hughes - 6.5:Shame he's no. 6. Very good batting from him.
    Haddin - 7: Mediocre keeping tbh but great batting that almost steered Oz to victory in the 2nd half.
    Agar - 6.5: Great 98 on day 2 but not really effective with the ball.
    Starc - 5: Good enough and was certainly dangerous on day 2 with his 2 wickets of Root and Trott, but overall inconsistent.
    Siddle -8.5:Good bowling, very experienced and consistent.
    Pattinson - 9: Great bowling, unlucky many times, and an equally fabulous bit of sensible batting at the end.

  8. #53
    Global Moderator Spark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    A Blood Rainbow
    Posts
    32,253
    How on earth does Pattinson get a 9 yet Siddle get an 8.5 (and Clarke's captaincy was actually very good, referrals aside and the decision to take the 2nd new ball)?

    Bizarre.
    + time's fickle card game ~ with you and i +


    get ready for a broken ****in' arm

  9. #54
    School Boy/Girl Cricketer Carn_the_pies's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Victoria
    Posts
    85
    How does Agar get 6.5?

    First game, saves the batting lineup with a 98 batting at #11 highest score in history) and only gets a 6.5?

    Thats pissweak

  10. #55
    International Debutant Adders's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    HMP Oz.
    Posts
    2,232
    Lost points for being a Victorian can be the only reason.......perfectly valid too tbf.

  11. #56
    Hall of Fame Member FaaipDeOiad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    19,102
    I don't understand how Rogers can be seen to have had a much better test than Watson, unless people are rating based on performance relative to potential rather than just contribution. Made similar amounts of runs, had fairly similar dismissals batting at the same time against the same bowlers, and Watson bowled a bunch of overs and took a catch.
    I know a place where a royal flush
    Can never beat a pair

  12. #57
    International 12th Man Tangles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Polar Vortex
    Posts
    1,599
    Didn't get injured bowling 4 overs.

  13. #58
    Eternal Optimist / Cricket Web Staff Member GIMH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Jason Koumas is having a party
    Posts
    48,141
    Quote Originally Posted by Spark View Post
    How on earth does Pattinson get a 9 yet Siddle get an 8.5 (and Clarke's captaincy was actually very good, referrals aside and the decision to take the 2nd new ball)?

    Bizarre.
    Reviews are such an important part of captaincy, though. Better use of them could, in theory, have swung the result. He deserved to be rated down for that alone and I didn't think his captaincy was anything special on this occasion other than that (and the same goes for Cook - his use of the review system was really the only standout part of his captaincy in this Test).
    "It was an easy decision to sign. I could have gone elsewhere, I had calls, but it never entered my mind it's not about the money."
    Jason Koumas

    SWA

    RIP Craigos. A true CW legend. You will be missed.

  14. #59
    Cricketer Of The Year Cabinet96's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    9,321
    Quote Originally Posted by FaaipDeOiad View Post
    I don't understand how Rogers can be seen to have had a much better test than Watson, unless people are rating based on performance relative to potential rather than just contribution. Made similar amounts of runs, had fairly similar dismissals batting at the same time against the same bowlers, and Watson bowled a bunch of overs and took a catch.
    People seem to be not just rating based on performances, but rating on how much they like the player and how good they are. Watson getting rated below Rogers isn't the only example, Bairstow has been rated miles below Trott by many, despite scoring a similar amount of runs in the game and not getting out in such terrible modes of dismissal (dragging on from a really wide one, and getting out to Starc). Grecian's ratings where Trott gets a 6, and Bairstow gets a 2 would be the best example.
    Quote Originally Posted by Flem274* View Post
    This English top three are cornflakes. They're not the most exciting thing out but they're pretty effective. Then the middle order are the sugar. Would be too much on their own but added to the cornflakes they add some much needed interest

    When KP returns he will be the banana..

  15. #60
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend Uppercut's Avatar
    Tournaments Won: 1
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    .
    Posts
    23,481
    Cook 6- Just like England, terrible shot first innings and a scrappy, important knock second innings. Australia know where to bowl to him much better this time around.
    Root 4- Bonus mark for picking up a wicket but his complete lack of a front foot makes him too easy to bowl to up front. If he gets any runs opening this series they'll be hideous.
    Trott 5- Didn't get the runs. Got a great ball second innings.
    Pietersen 6- See: Cook.
    Bell 9- The best batsman of the match by miles. Unlikely to have put an end to the "easy runs" label but is in reality a quite-good test bat.
    Bairstow 4- I really don't rate him but he wasn't terrible. His second innings will look worse than it was because he saw off a very tough spell of bowling.
    Prior 5- Took some good catches and a useful second innings knock. Could do better.
    Broad 6- A crucial if astonishingly lucky second innings, and broke a couple of big partnerships. Should have bowled much earlier in the first innings.
    Swann 6- Got a few wickets but a bit too inconsistent in length and didn't live up to the commentators' hype. Has to take some of the blame for the massive left-handed 10th-wicket partnership. Australia seem to find him easier to play than they do other top-class spinners.
    Finn 2- Two big wickets on day one but holy jesus he was bad. His match is a strong argument against continuing to pick players that somehow take wickets bowling ****e.
    Anderson 9.5- Much better than everyone else.

    Watson 6- Unlucky with the ball. Same old story with the bat.
    Rogers 6- Didn't quite get the runs but definitely looks like justifying his selection. Didn't at any stage actually look like getting out.
    Cowan 2- Unfortunately doesn't look quite up to it. Played some horribly loose shots for a batsman renowned for his leaving ability, suggesting the pressure of his lack of runs might have got to him.
    Clarke 2- No runs and a crucial balls-up with the review system. Widely seen as pivotal to the series, which puts him under a lot of pressure. England bring on their best bowlers and visibly try harder when he's at the crease.
    Smith 5- Looked encouraging but didn't quite get the job done. First innings dismissal suggests his shot selection when set might not quite be suited to batting in England.
    Hughes 6- Useful first innings knock but when Swann is bowling it just seems like a matter of time.
    Haddin 6- Got a good ball early on in the first. Decent effort in the second but ultimately didn't get the job done.
    Starc 6- The weakest Aussie bowler but certainly didn't bowl any filth. Looks really awkward to face.
    Siddle 8- Probably slightly lucky to get so many wickets but bowled some really good stuff too.
    Pattinson 7- Maybe slightly unlucky. Looks almost certain to be world-class but just gave away a touch too many runs.
    Agar 9- Not sure what else to say. Great batting, very good bowling. Already feels odd that his selection was seen as a bad joke.
    Quote Originally Posted by zaremba View Post
    The Filth have comfortably the better bowling. But the Gash have the batting. Might be quite good to watch.

Page 4 of 13 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... 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, 03:38 AM
  2. Player Ratings - As We Go By...
    By benchmark00 in forum Ashes 2010-2011
    Replies: 147
    Last Post: 05-01-2011, 01:48 AM
  3. CW Player Ratings
    By nick-o in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 65
    Last Post: 01-04-2010, 02:03 PM
  4. Ind Vs Pak - The player ratings
    By deeps in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 18-04-2005, 07:35 AM
  5. Player Ratings
    By iamdavid in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 08-12-2003, 08:34 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
  •