*Official* Australia in Sri Lanka 2016

[Black_Warrior]

O Keefe and Zamba should be tried in India next year.

 

[straw man]

Lyon: - Doesn't even deserve a ranking. For all the talk that Moeen Ali gets the label as "The least **** spinner in England," at least he's the best in the country at what he does (arguably). Completely unwilling to give anything flight as per usual. Unsurprisingly, his shtick of darting in it quickly short/short of a length and hoping it spits up and bounces at the batsman to catch him off guard once again failed in spinning conditions.

Needs a new training regime obviously - should double the pies and milkshakes if he wants to emulate the top spinners going round atm.

 

[morgieb]

O Keefe and Zamba should be tried in India next year.

O'Keefe was tried, he just got injured in the first Test. Else he'd be ahead of Holland surely?

 

[TheJediBrah]

O'Keefe: 10 - Outbowled Lyon and he wasn't even here for most of the series.

yesssss

 

[viriya]

Burns: 0 - Critics labelled his performance everything from **** to ****in ****. Zero confidence in his attacking strokes when not charging down the deck to loft the spinners but his Queenslander spirit failed him in the end, trying to be too positive in such a negative and New South Welsh team environment.

Warner: 1 - All his points are for fielding, which was seriously on point. Batted worse than I've ever seen him on sub-continental pitches, if Burns had no confidence in attacking, Warner started off with just about no confidence at all in surviving. Batted like a pitbull with a severe brain impediment that ought to have been put down years ago.

S.Marsh: 10 - The only glimmering beacon of light in the dark and cold Mausoleum of Australian cricket. Almost revived it with the greatest sub-continental knock since VVS 281. Was actually confident in playing late and didn't try to absolutely maul everything when coming down the wicket.

Khawaja: 0 - If I could go into negative integers I would. Memories of the glory years against Swann where he batted like he had concrete blocks around his feet. A pimple-infested teenage virgin trying to take off a bra for the first time would look less clueless than Usman looked here. But I guess he deserves more time because he'll make runs on flat, docile wickets.

Smith: 1 - Gets a singular point for his ton, but the rest of the time my word. Delivered a captaincy spectacle akin to whoever was in charge when the unsinkable Titanic sunk. Albeit that gives us too much credit to say we were unsinkable, followed by the unthinkable occurring. For one we sailed suspecting very highly that we'd hit the iceberg directly ahead, and two - Bernard Hill in the movie captained his ship with grace in the final hours as he went to the chilly depths. Instead Smith once again showed his completely inability to not be utterly petulant under pressure and delivered substance-less captaincy in response.

Voges: 1 - One good catch, and a month of being completely unable to play the straight one. No doubt his average will recover unlike Australian cricket in general.

Henriques: 0 - One small cameo of bowling followed by two incompetent dismissals. Thrown to the sharks and duly fed upon. Quite possibly the most pointless inclusion in an Australian side in some time. Might as well have played with 10 hacks instead of 11.

M.Marsh: 4 - Bowling was never going to be that effective but in between some dirty aids with the bat as is always the case he threatened to shine quite brightly. Unfortunately he chose his time to shine when a big collapse-a-thon was in progress.

Nevill: 2 - I recall a few drops in his first appearance in the sub-continent, still better than the eunuch bogan though. Batting was quite cringe bar that failed stonewall attempt, think he'll be under pressure in the summer with the casuals throwing their spotlight to the only thing that matters - the batting average.

Starc: 10 - Where does this rate in ATG performances in losing series? Certainly has to be up there with Warne in 05 because he was the only thing keeping us from innings defeats. If I was nitpicking I'd say he still needs to work on his general lines but they're much improved and he's bowling much more like a wicket-taker now in Tests. A pity we won't deliver pitches for the home summer that tailor to his abilities barring the D/N test.

Hazlewood: 3 - I think a better rating would be 'absent'. Never really looked like taking wickets but was economical, thus was horrendously underutilized in the final test as Lyon and Holland did whatever it was they were doing.

O'Keefe: 10 - Outbowled Lyon and he wasn't even here for most of the series. Best performance was saved for the pub back home.

Holland: 2 - Didn't bowl Test quality stuff, but was still better than Gaz.

Lyon: - Doesn't even deserve a ranking. For all the talk that Moeen Ali gets the label as "The least **** spinner in England," at least he's the best in the country at what he does (arguably). Completely unwilling to give anything flight as per usual. Unsurprisingly, his shtick of darting in it quickly short/short of a length and hoping it spits up and bounces at the batsman to catch him off guard once again failed in spinning conditions.

I think you are underrating Smith. Sure, his captaincy was mostly **** and he didn't bat to his standards, but he still top scored for Aus @ 41 for the series.

Also Lyon, he didn't do a fatty but he got 16 wickets @ 32 vs a team at home which isn't terrible. Same applies to Hazlewood.

This series loss is on Aussie batting. Aside from Smith and to a lesser extent Mitch Marsh all the others were **** or close to it.

 

[Prince EWS]

I think you are underrating Smith. Sure, his captaincy was mostly **** and he didn't bat to his standards, but he still top scored for Aus @ 41 for the series.

Also Lyon, he didn't do a fatty but he got 16 wickets @ 32 vs a team at home which isn't terrible. Same applies to Hazlewood.

This series loss is on Aussie batting. Aside from Smith and to a lesser extent Mitch Marsh all the others were **** or close to it.

When no-one gets between 4 and 10 and only three players get between 2 and 10 you can happily mark the post up as an emotional rant and move on without engaging IMO.

 

[morgieb]

When no-one gets between 4 and 10 and only three players get between 2 and 10 you can happily mark the post up as an emotional rant and move on without engaging IMO.

Personally I'm still in shock that people take Gnske seriously.

 

[TheJediBrah]

I thought it was a quality post

 

[Prince EWS]

I thought it was a quality post

This really just adds weight to my point.

 

[Gob]

Personally I'm still in shock that people take Gnske seriously.

He was groomed by weldone apparently. CW's equivalent of Bruce Wayne and Ra's al ghul

 

[Gnske]

When no-one gets between 4 and 10 and only three players get between 2 and 10 you can happily mark the post up as something which I can't even perceive correctly due to the fact I'm such a pleb, I wish I could read in between the lines like good posters of the honestbharani and Xuhaib quality of men

Fixed.

 

[morgieb]

OK more serious player ratings from me:

Burns 1 - awful, awful application shown. Marked his cards by his two shots in the second Test. This will probably be his last Test opening, I suspect.
Warner 3.5 - got a few starts, but batted absolutely braindead at times. Was just far too aggressive for the conditions.
Khawaja 1 - has to be one of, if not the worst specialist batsman against spin in Test cricket today. Was all at sea. Never play in Asia again.
Smith 5 - our best batsman to play in all of the Tests, but his dismissals were very concerning. What's worse is that he's the most capable player of spin in the side and should've shown more maturity. Captaincy was pretty crap too.
Voges 2.5 - I suppose he ate up some deliveries, but otherwise did little of consequence. The ultimate FTB/minnow basher.
M Marsh 5 - wasn't terrible, I guess. Actually showed some decent signs with the bat but needed to kick on with one of his starts. Bowling was meh, but conditions were an issue.
Nevill 3 - OK with the gloves, but the only thing he did with the bat was an attempted deadbat in the first Test. There has to be questions asked about his place here.
O'Keefe 5 - wasn't too bad before his hamstring gave way. Bonus points for his valiant attempts at saving the first Test.
Starc 9.5 - utter monster. Pretty much carried the team. At this point he is arguably the best overall bowler if you take all formats into account...and probably will be the #1 bowler in Test cricket in about 12 months. Only loses half a mark because at times he was expensive.
Lyon 4 - disappointing. Given how Sri Lanka bowled he should've thrived in these conditions, instead he was swept into oblivion and didn't contain very well. Bowled a bit better in the last Test but by then the series was already gone.
Hazlewood 6 - kept it tight. Conditions weren't the best for him so it wasn't that surprising he didn't take all that much wickets, but bowled quite a bit better than the spinners.
Holland 3 - bowled a few good deliveries but was a bit too inconsistent, I felt. I hope he enjoyed his Test career, because I don't see him wearing the Baggy Green again.
S Marsh 9 - excellent. Quite probably should've been playing all along, and probably has earnt an extended shot in the side. Unlike everyone else he actually played the ball on its merits, rather than falling to balls that didn't turn.
Henriques 1 - shouldn't have been picked as a batsman, and so it proved. Was terrible.

Karunaratne 0 - Mitchell Starc's bitch. Managed a start in the last innings but threw it away in hilarious fashion. For that he does not get a mark.
Silva 5 - again was owned by Starc, but at least converted his start into a crucial century. Well batted.
Mendis 8 - his second innings at Pallekele was one of the innings of the year, changed the course of the match dramatically
Mathews 4 - managed some important runs in the second Test, otherwise did little of consequence. Captaincy wasn't all that special I felt.
Chandimal 6 - one great knock to change the game, not a lot else though.
de Silva 8 - like Mendis, another impressive find. Managed starts in all his innings and was great in the last Test. Also offered some useful offies.
K Perera 6 - I feel like his impact was better than his numbers, made a lot of quick starts that knocked confidence out of the Australian bowlers that they gained from knocking Silva and Karunaratne. Did some great things with the gloves when keeping too.
D Perera 8 - one great Test in the second Test, but otherwise was a bit too darty. That said, he did take a few key wickets in the third Test. Also made some key blows with the bat.
Herath 10 - machine. Was scary. Sri Lanka have to be hoping he stays around for a few years left, and if his body is up to it he's certainly in the form that he can last that long.
Sandakan 7 - see Perera, except his day out was the first Test. He lacked accuracy in the other Tests I felt and he didn't have the impact that Perera had with the bat.
Pradeep 5 - bowled well in limited chances.
Fernando 3 - only bowled two overs so impossible to judge. Took a wicket but also bowled a lot of crap.
Lakmal 5 - took the key wicket to ingite the first innings collapse, otherwise was nowhere to be seen.

 

[Daemon]

Not a lot of consistency (the good kind) there in either team besides Starc, Herath and de Silva

 

[Top_Cat]

That's horrendous captaincy. Really is. There's honesty and then there is burning your players publicly.

Yeah it is. Giving your underperforming gun a rocket publically is one thing but Henriques may not play another Test at this rate.

EDIT: Not that he deserved a Test pick on performance. Shouldn't have gone on the tour, really. But that's the point, was given no chance to come into the tour with any confidence and this just piles on top of that. Can already see the future CW posts where someone says he had a chance but didn't take it.

 

[hendrix]

That's horrendous captaincy. Really is. There's honesty and then there is burning your players publicly.

Yeah it is. Giving your underperforming gun a rocket publically is one thing but Henriques may not play another Test at this rate.

EDIT: Not that he deserved a Test pick on performance. Shouldn't have gone on the tour, really. But that's the point, was given no chance to come into the tour with any confidence and this just piles on top of that. Can already see the future CW posts where someone says he had a chance but didn't take it.

I'm struggling to see what is wrong with what Smith said.

"he was picked primarily as a batsman. Obviously he also bowls".

is there something wrong with that?

 

[viriya]

When no-one gets between 4 and 10 and only three players get between 2 and 10 you can happily mark the post up as an emotional rant and move on without engaging IMO.

Good point.

 

[mr_mister]

basically saying he has no chance of replacing Marsh since he is the "all-rounder in the team" (like you can only have 1). Pretty much shutting down one of his avenues of potential success, in fact most people would say he had a greater chance at becoming a test number 6 who was the 5th bowler rather than a specialist number 5 bat

 

[Black_Warrior]

The best thing about these rating systems is that one of the most unfairly maligned players on CW is getting full marks unanimously

 

[Burgey]

basically saying he has no chance of replacing Marsh since he is the "all-rounder in the team" (like you can only have 1). Pretty much shutting down one of his avenues of potential success, in fact most people would say he had a greater chance at becoming a test number 6 who was the 5th bowler rather than a specialist number 5 bat

Wasn't he saying he had no chance of replacing Marsh for this particular test rather than in general? I dunno though. They're both not up to batting in the top six in tests atm.

 

[91Jmay]

I'm struggling to see what is wrong with what Smith said.

"he was picked primarily as a batsman. Obviously he also bowls".

is there something wrong with that?

Yeah not sure what Smythe really said that was wrong there. Just said we picked him as a batsmen in this test.