Player Ratings thread

[morgieb]

As is customary for every series that is big enough to demand a subforum.

Cook 1 - dear god. Probably couldn't do a lot about his first innings dismissal tbf, but that was not a shot that should've been played that early in the second innings. Very poor work.
Stoneman 7 - can feel proud of the efforts he did this game, looked very solid and worked hard. Took two peaches to get him.
Vince 7.5 - very well batted first innings to silence the critics somewhat, 95% of the time he would've been safe in the run-out so hard to criticise him that much for it. Getting out nicking second time around not a great look but he did get a very good ball.
Root 5 - didn't look very comfortable first innings, better second innings but got out at a very bad time for England. Captaincy innovative, but lacking in experience.
Malan 5 - don't really think he's up to it, despite scoring runs first innings. He didn't rotate the strike enough and seemed to rely on poor balls to score his runs. Dismissal in the first innings not good either.
Ali 5 - middling sort of game from Moeen, two starts without going on and bowled OK but without venom (though will give him a bit of a pass due to the finger injury). Looked uncomfortable when Australia pitched it short too.
Bairstow 4 - kept OK, but didn't score enough runs. Second innings dismissal one to forget as well.
Woakes 2.5 - the kindest thing I can say about Woakes is that he at least got some form of partnership going with Bairstow and wasn't as bad as Ball. But still, not good.
Broad 8 - very well bowled.
Ball 1 - pretty much was free runs for Australia. Only wicket was kinda gifted to him. Very poor.
Anderson 7 - see Broad. Gets less marks as he didn't quite seem the same level of threat throughout.

Warner 6.5 - first innings shot was braindead given the circumstances. Second innings doesn't completely alievate this, but at least looked very comfortable doing so in a situation where Australia might have collapsed had he failed.
Bancroft 6 - failed first dig, contributed nicely second dig. Unlike Warner though he did have some nervy moments.
Khawaja 2 - looks village against spin. Has to find some way of surviving else he'll be too much of a liability to keep.
Smith 10 - actually god. In terms of the status of the match and the sheer difficulty of getting him out this might well have been his best innings yet. On a wicket where not many people manged high scores, he didn't even look like getting out.
Hanscomb 2 - didn't do enough. Looked vulnerable whenever the ball was pitched full.
Marsh 6 - annoying in that he did enough to stay in the team but not enough to really help Australia out. But if he had failed then Australia probably lose the match. And in that way, contributed well.
Paine 4 - not much to say re: his batting, dropped one catch but made up for it with a nice stumping and a supersonic review.
Starc 5 - not great. Some good balls but a bit too loose. Doesn't feel comfortable doing a Johnson 13/14 impersonation.
Cummins 8.5 - top-class. Not a massive haul but easily looked the most threatening of the Australian quicks. Very important innings too.
Hazlewood 6 - first innings was about as bad as he's bowled since the 2015 Ashes. Second innings better, but still not his best work.
Lyon 8 - a weapon. Like Cummins didn't take a massive haul but looked dangerous with the ball all match.

 

[Burgey]

Little harsh on Haze overall imo, thought early on in the second dig he was top shelf.

 

[stephen]

Smith's rating too low really.

 

[S.Kennedy]

Cook 1 (simply awful)

Rocky 7.5 (consistent but needs to convert those forties and fifties)

Vince 7.5 (very elegant first innings - unfortunate not to get a century)

Root 5 (one extra for some of those weird field settings which clammed the Aussies up but I didn't like the way he approached his batting in the slightest)

Malan 6.5 (decent, if scratchy, first innings)

Ali 6 (another consistent, without converting English batsman but bowling let him down so I've docked him one)

Bairstow 6 (solid behind the stumps, under par with bat)

Woakes 5 (under par)

Broad 8 (see Anderson)

Ball 2 (bowled dross throughout)

Anderson 8 (same for Broad, England's consistent performers in an uneven attack; even when not picking up wickets their economies were excellent)

Bancroft 7.5 (got the job done second time round)

Warner 6 (looked a bit below his usual form, albeit on a squidgy wicket, but saw his team through)

Khawaja 1 (Awful)

Smith 9 (highly important test winning knock; old school also, had to reign his natural attacking instincts in - Root could learn a lot from how Smith applied himself here; didn't agree with all of his captaincy though, particularly not playing Cummins early fourth day. He was the difference between the two teams)

Handscomb 1 (awful)

S, Marsh 7 (solid little defensive knock, hanging around very well with Smith)

Paine 7 (he hung around a bit with the bat; missed one but made up for it with that M. Ali stumping)

Starc 4 (picked up wickets but bowled a lot of dross)

Cummins 7.5 (average first time round but terrifying spell at beginning of England's second innings end of third day; should have bowled immediately 4th day)

Hazlewood 7 (solid sort of unheralded performance)

Lyon 8.5 (the pick of the Aussie bowlers by a good distance; caused England all sorts of problems)

 

[quincywagstaff]

Largely agree with the ratings although reckon Marsh should be higher; underrated innings in the context of the match as if he went early than Australia could've easily been skittled by end of Day 2.

 

[TNT]

Warner looks to be short changed, its like scoring runs in the 4th innings chasing a target is quite easy against Broad and Clouderson.

 

[Starfighter]

Cook: 1 - didn't get a pair but that's about the only positive.
Stoneman: 6 - good start in both innings, but didn't go on. Needs to rotate the strike more.
Vince: 7 - first innings was good, although the dismissal was disappointing. Got a good enough ball second. As with Stoneman needs to find singles.
Root: 5 - batted better second but a clear technical issue to be sorted. Captaincy nothing special, not putting Broad on after tea on day two let Marsh settle.
Malan: 5 - good first innings, all too inevitable dismissal in the second. I think Lyon will have his number this series.
Ali: 5 - again batted well enough but not long enough. Perhaps hampered by his finger but nowhere near Lyon's class.
Bairstow: 4 - threw away his wicket when it was vital for him stay in the second innings.
Woakes: 1 - nothing suggesting he'll carry anything but a modicum his home batting ability here and practically ineffectual as a bowler.
Broad: 7.5 - bowled well but was lacking in support.
Ball: 0.5 - gets that for dismissing Warner, otherwise complete trash. Has nothing to suggest he'll succeed in tests, especially away from home, and never has.
Anderson: 7 - looked a little less threatening than Broad, otherwise let down by the support.

Warner: 6.5 - threw it away after a decent start first innings, batted well with much less pressure second time.
Bancroft: 5.5 - failed first, same as Warner second.
Khawaja: 1 - inability against spin is farcical. At least he was solid in the field.
Smith: 10 - God
Handscomb: 1.5 - looked vulnerable and contributed little in the end
Marsh: -49,994 - actually a 6, but -50k for being Marsh. Made good fifty in a vital situation. Also made by far the worst fielding mistake. Would still drop. Of course.
Paine: 4 - one drop, one good stumping, one review, was otherwise practically invisible. Certainly no Wade in sledging.
Starc: 4 - bowled complete trash after his first spell but picked up wickets against a mentally fragile batting team. There is no justice in this world.
Cummins: 8.5 - easily the best fast bowler on show and played a vital innings too.
Lyon: 8.5 - the best I think I've seen him bowl in a home test and was very accurate to England's leftie heavy order. Was less threatening to the right handers and perhaps a little quick at times. If he bowled more than three straighter balls in the match could have picked up even more wickets.
Hazlewood: 4 - the worst I've seen him bowl, clearly undercooked, but still got important wickets in the second innings.

 

[S.Kennedy]

I didn't think Woakes was that bad. I mean Ball was absolute shite but to have only 0.5 separating the two seems imbalanced. I thought Hazlewood bowled quite well really.

 

[Starfighter]

I do have an anti-Woakes bias for some reason.

 

[S.Kennedy]

I think we all roughly agree and it just shows both teams are weak really, Smith, Lyon, Cummins, Broad and Anderson being the exceptions. You assume Root, Warner and (possibly) Starc, Cook and Bairstow will arrive to the party eventually.

 

[TNT]

Cook 1.5 Looked like he would have prefered to have been somewhere else.......Stoneman 5 Showed some character........Vince 5 Good in the first but then went awol.......Root 5 Just when you thought he was going to be a threat......Malan 5 played half a game, test cricket is two innings......Ali 5.5 Tried, allways wanted to be in the match......Bairstow 5 could have done more......Woaks 4 just didnt bring it.......Broad 5.5 bowled well (needed to inspire the team with his bowling but seemed happy to be economical).....Ball 2 good effort to be at the match on time.......Anderson 5.5 same as Broad ( played like a support bowler when he should be the strike bowler).......Warner: 7 easy to mess up batting 4th, brought home the bacon.........Bancroft: 6 impressive for first test........Khawaja: 1.5 Usman you are the weakest link.......Smith: 9 would have given him ten but I'm hoping he will improve.......Handscomb: 2 unlucky not to get a second bat......Marsh: 6 showed a bit of grit but must stay awake in the field......Paine: 5 could have been better and could have been worse........Starc: 5 Didnt have a great match but if thats his worst then no probs.......Cummins: 7 solid, need to look after him.......Lyon: 8 what a match, he looked in control and I could see fear in the english batsmen eyes........Hazlewood: 6 dependable and reliable, hope he makes it his summer.

 

[Cabinet96]

Cook: 2 -
Stoneman: 7.5 - Impressed with him tbh. We can't have had many openers look as assured as he did against high quality seam bowlers as he did over the last five years.
Vince: 7 - Top dig first knock. Less than Stoneman for running himself out and failing in the 2nd innings.
Root: 5 - Best of a bad bunch in the 2nd innings but still not enough. Some interesting plans in the field but got it wrong after Lunch on day 3.
Malan: 6 - Did more than I expected he would but still not sure I rate him.
Mooen: 5.5 - Pretty much the definition of an average game.
Bairstow: 4 - Gets two extra points for head butting the debutant before he even was even selected, loses three points for falling into the most obvious third man trap ever set.
Woakes: 2.5 -
Broad: 7.5 - If only the rest could bowl like him.
Ball: 2 - Not sure he's test level but probably not helped by being rushed back either.
Anderson: 7 - If only the rest could bowl like him.

Warner: 7 - Imagine if he got rid of that stupid pull shot
Bancroft: 6.5 - Solid stuff 2nd dig.
Khawaja: 2 - Village stuff against Moeen
Smith: 10 - It's probably only Australian dominance that can stop him surpassing Cook's 10/11 run tally. Took four catches as well.
Handscomb: 2 - First time I've really watched him and he has an interesting style to say the least.
Marsh: 7 - Pretty solid contribution at a critical stage in the match. Going on from here will be the test for him.
Paine: 4 - Drop, meh innings, good stumping.
Starc: 5.5 - Good nut to get Cook first up but his figures probably flattered him after that.
Cummins: 8.5 - Probably the best seamer in the match and a crucial innings with the bat.
Hazlewood: 7 - Disappointing 1st innings but broke the back of England as Australia moved in front in the game.
Lyon: 8.5 - A very good bowler and an outstanding runout of Vince.

 

[vcs]

Lyon was terrific and his runout deserves a mention, that was a massive moment in the game.

 

[TNT]

Anderson didnt do a lot in this match, his only wickets in this match were Hanscomb and Paine, I think that is a fail for a leading bowler.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Nah Clouderson bowled quite well IMO

*when it was overcast

 

[stephen]

Yeah Anderson was the pick of the Poms with the ball. He was the only one offering any real threat.

 

[TNT]

Yeah Anderson was the pick of the Poms with the ball. He was the only one offering any real threat.

Only problem was they needed someone who could take wickets, Clouderson should have attacked the batsmen more and taken them on. If he bowls like that for the rest of the series as a strike bowler then I'm happy.

 

[Starfighter]

Attacked them more how? Given them a whole lot of half volleys? He doesn't have a brilliant short ball or anything. The way he bowled was perfectly fine in the conditions. He beat the bat often enough too. There was simply no pressure when the batsmen only had to wait for a bowling change in a few overs to get runs.

 

[Spark]

Anderson and Broad were comfortably England's best players in this Test. Did everything that could have been reasonably asked for them; the lack of support they had from the other bowlers and, at times, the captain wasn't their fault.

 

[TNT]

Anderson and Broad were comfortably England's best players in this Test. Did everything that could have been reasonably asked for them; the lack of support they had from the other bowlers and, at times, the captain wasn't their fault.

That does not mean they bowled well, FFS they only took ten wickets for the match and clouderson only took 2/77. dismal. You dont get anything for beating the bat.