Page 5 of 13 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 195
Like Tree10Likes

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

  1. #61
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend Uppercut's Avatar
    Tournaments Won: 1
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    .
    Posts
    23,519
    Quote Originally Posted by Neil Pickup View Post
    Think most people's summed ratings would give this: Australia's performance was closer to their ceiling than our efforts were.
    Yeah that's probably true. I also don't think it'd be especially controversial to say they played the better cricket over the test. Only lost by 15 runs.
    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.

  2. #62
    Hall of Fame Member Goughy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    All Over
    Posts
    15,083
    Quote Originally Posted by Uppercut View Post
    Agar - very good bowling.
    Quote Originally Posted by Uppercut View Post
    I also don't think it'd be especially controversial to say they played the better cricket over the test. Only lost by 15 runs.
    Not convinced you watched the Test
    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

  3. #63
    Hall of Fame Member FaaipDeOiad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    19,104
    I'd say on the whole England batted better and with a lot more discipline, and Australia bowled better, which isn't really a huge shock. Australia would have lost heavily without the Hughes/Agar stand in the first innings, but then Bell/Broad saved England in a similar way since 200 odd certainly wouldn't have been enough as a target. Pretty even test overall as the final score suggests.
    I know a place where a royal flush
    Can never beat a pair

  4. #64
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend Uppercut's Avatar
    Tournaments Won: 1
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    .
    Posts
    23,519
    Quote Originally Posted by Goughy View Post
    Not convinced you watched the Test
    On Agar I really don't know, I'm not an expert on spin bowling. He gave it a tweak and picked up a couple of wickets, should have had one more. If you say he's actually dire I'm not going to argue.

    I think I misphrased the second. What I really meant was that it wouldn't be unreasonable to suggest Australia played the better cricket over the game. I wouldn't say so but it's a fair enough position given how tight the match was. I definitely think they bowled better.


  5. #65
    International Coach Pothas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Surbiton, UK
    Posts
    11,611
    Yeah, can't disagree with any of that and just because Agar got his runs at 11 does not mean they were some kind of fluke. It was a part of the match in which Australia played much better than England.

  6. #66
    Global Moderator Spark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    A Blood Rainbow
    Posts
    32,421
    Agar didn't look special but he certainly didn't look entirely toothless either. He caused the English left-handers in particular to think carefully about how they were going to play him and obviously he really should have had at least one more wicket (which would've made his figures look much better)
    + time's fickle card game ~ with you and i +


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

  7. #67
    Hall of Fame Member Goughy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    All Over
    Posts
    15,083
    Quote Originally Posted by Uppercut View Post
    On Agar I really don't know, I'm not an expert on spin bowling. He gave it a tweak and picked up a couple of wickets, should have had one more. If you say he's actually dire I'm not going to argue.

    I think I misphrased the second. What I really meant was that it wouldn't be unreasonable to suggest Australia played the better cricket over the game. I wouldn't say so but it's a fair enough position given how tight the match was. I definitely think they bowled better.
    Australia, IMO, had a golden opportunity to put themselves miles ahead in the first session and they bowled gash. It was a perfect opportunity wasted. The new ball bowlers didnt make the batsmen play in extremely difficult batting conditions. To have England only two down at lunch was a complete waste and the advantage was lost and the game back on an even footing. Siddle bowled well after the break but the chance to blitz England had already gone. It was a huge failure IMO.

    Overall I dont think they bowled poorly as a unit but I watched virtually every ball of this Test -- some thing I hadnt been able to do for a while -- and I was a little disappointed in Starc and Pattinson having seen little of them before and knowing them more from reputation than first hand viewing.

  8. #68
    U19 Vice-Captain
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    London UK
    Posts
    559
    Quote Originally Posted by Goughy View Post
    Australia, IMO, had a golden opportunity to put themselves miles ahead in the first session and they bowled gash. It was a perfect opportunity wasted. The new ball bowlers didnt make the batsmen play in extremely difficult batting conditions. To have England only two down at lunch was a complete waste and the advantage was lost and the game back on an even footing. Siddle bowled well after the break but the chance to blitz England had already gone. It was a huge failure IMO.

    Overall I dont think they bowled poorly as a unit but I watched virtually every ball of this Test -- some thing I hadnt been able to do for a while -- and I was a little disappointed in Starc and Pattinson having seen little of them before and knowing them more from reputation than first hand viewing.
    Similarly, our bowlers managed to squander a killer position with their bowling during the Agar onslaught. Never mind the missed stumping, bowling low pressure filth at such a crucial stage was nearly our undoing.

  9. #69
    Hall of Fame Member grecian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Moeen is a perfectly fine bowler FFS.
    Posts
    15,215
    Quote Originally Posted by Cabinet96 View Post
    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.
    Well I don't think Trott was out. Also thought JB looked incredibly nervous. 2 possibly harsh though I'll agree.
    Do I contradict myself?
    Very well then I contradict myself,
    (I am large, I contain multitudes.
    Walt Whitman

  10. #70
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend Uppercut's Avatar
    Tournaments Won: 1
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    .
    Posts
    23,519
    Quote Originally Posted by Goughy View Post
    Australia, IMO, had a golden opportunity to put themselves miles ahead in the first session and they bowled gash. It was a perfect opportunity wasted. The new ball bowlers didnt make the batsmen play in extremely difficult batting conditions. To have England only two down at lunch was a complete waste and the advantage was lost and the game back on an even footing. Siddle bowled well after the break but the chance to blitz England had already gone. It was a huge failure IMO.

    Overall I dont think they bowled poorly as a unit but I watched virtually every ball of this Test -- some thing I hadnt been able to do for a while -- and I was a little disappointed in Starc and Pattinson having seen little of them before and knowing them more from reputation than first hand viewing.
    You know, I'd completely forgotten that first session had ever happened. Seems so long ago.

    I'm pretty sure I agreed at the time.

  11. #71
    International Captain Maximas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Footmarks
    Posts
    6,102
    Those saying Clarke's captaincy was marred by DRS use, consider that the keeper and bowler are the main culprits in poor DRS use, especially the keeper, I would exonerate Clarke from blame there to some extent. Agar was good with the ball, was bowling with a dodgy finger and he kept it tight and picked up two good wickets. As for the Rogers/Watson debate, consider that Watson was first to go in both innings, Rogers played a role in continuing the thread in the second dig (not helped at all by Cowan) and stemmed the flow somewhat in the first innings, he also gains half a point for keeping the ball in good nick maybe.
    There are two colours in my head

  12. #72
    Hall of Fame Member Furball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Anyone But England
    Posts
    19,944
    Quote Originally Posted by Maximas View Post
    Those saying Clarke's captaincy was marred by DRS use, consider that the keeper and bowler are the main culprits in poor DRS use, especially the keeper, I would exonerate Clarke from blame there to some extent. Agar was good with the ball, was bowling with a dodgy finger and he kept it tight and picked up two good wickets. As for the Rogers/Watson debate, consider that Watson was first to go in both innings, Rogers played a role in continuing the thread in the second dig (not helped at all by Cowan) and stemmed the flow somewhat in the first innings, he also gains half a point for keeping the ball in good nick maybe.
    I also docked Clarke points for not setting a 3rd man to Bell. It will cost Australia hundreds of runs this series if he doesn't do it.

  13. #73
    Hall of Fame Member Furball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Anyone But England
    Posts
    19,944
    Quote Originally Posted by GingerFurball View Post
    Watson - 0 - usual **** **** innings, wasted a review, bowled floaty unthreatening rubbish.
    Might as well just do Watson's now.

  14. #74
    International Coach morgieb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Dishing out broken ****ing floggings
    Posts
    11,024
    Quote Originally Posted by GingerFurball View Post
    Might as well just do Watson's now.
    Heh.

    At least he dismissed Cook.
    5-0

    RIP Craig Walsh (Craig) 1985-2012

    Proudly supporting the #2 cricketer of all time.

  15. #75
    Hall of Fame Member FaaipDeOiad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    19,104
    Like I said in the other thread, if Watson gets a 0 I don't know what the other Australian batsmen get. I'd rather a handsome 30 and an LBW over getting to 12 and then slogging to mid-off or whatever. There's already like three articles on cricinfo blaming him for Rogers getting out and/or the entire collapse too. The only Australians who have done anything of much value this test are Harris, Siddle and maybe Smith and Clarke. Watson still contributed more than most though.

Page 5 of 13 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... 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
  •