Player ratings thread

[morgieb]

Standard Test tour subbie thread. Obviously add your own.

Burns 8 - lucky ton? Perhaps. But a ton is still a ton, and it put England in a position that should've been quite strong.
Roy 2 - not up to scratch. That shot in the second innings has to be amongst the worst of all time given the match situation.
Root 5 - middling performance. Looked OK but his wicket was a bit of a limp on when the chance was there to put the match away.
Denly 2 - doesn't have the same kind of technical/tempermental flaws that Roy has, but generally feels short of Test class. I don't see how can survive especially with Root deciding to bat 3 again.
Buttler 1 - horror Test, really. Probably a case of lack of recent red ball form showing, though o/c it didn't stop Smith.
Stokes 5 - I could've bowled better in the first innings. But his batting performance in England's first innings was actually quite important and he looked more dangerous than the other bowlers as the innings went on.
Bairstow 2 - I guess he kept OK? Horrid with the bat though and frankly has to be close to the axe.
Ali 2 - might have been the worst 3 wicket performance of all-time. Second innings especially he looked a deer in the headlights. Feel for him, he just appears mentally shot.
Woakes 7 - not amazing with the ball but did have a great spell first innings, and probably looked England's most solid bat amongst the two innings.
Broad 8 - great first innings spell and actually a decent batting cameo too.
Anderson N/A - can't really grade him on what was only 4 overs. Terrible handling of him overall though. Hopefully this isn't the last we've seen of him at Test level.

Bancroft 1 - failure. He'll get another chance but the rope isn't going to be long.
Warner 1 - also failed on his first Test back. We'll see how he goes as the series goes on.
Khawaja 4 - not great, but his 40-odd was pretty crucial in terms of momentum.
Smith 10 - if possible probably should get a 15. First innings ton an ATG one, and he managed a really important one in the second innings. One match-defining ton in a game is usually the sign of a great game, two is basically unheard of. And to think this was his first Test in 18 months too. **** me......
Head 6 - threw away two good starts, but again the second one was crucial in the game position.
Wade 8 - OK, it was a bit chancy and the situation was good for batting, but still a ton is a ton. Great comeback from someone who was basically written off after getting dropped in 2017.
Paine 3 - fairly anonymous game with the bat, keeping was pretty mediocre and his captaincy was poor. Overall this game wasn't a winner.
Pattinson 7 - actually thought he bowled very well, was probably our most dangerous bowler first innings. Didn't get much of a chance second innings.
Cummins 8 - struggled somewhat early doors, but you can't keep him out for long. His second innings was pretty lethal.
Siddle 8 - bowled about as well as he has for a long time, and his first innings was massively important in building a partnership.
Lyon 8 - not great first dig, but showed why he's probably the best spinner in the world in the second. Almost looked like taking a wicket every ball. Bonus points for a key partnership to get Australia to a decent first innings total.

 

[Malcolm]

Smith - 10
Head - 6
Cummins - 8.5
Pattinson - 6.5
Siddle - 7.5
Lyon - 8

 

[GIMH]

Burns 8
Roy 0
Root 5
Denly 4
Buttler 2
Stokes 6
Bairstow 2
Ali 1
Woakes 6
Broad 7
Anderson 9

Can’t argue with an economy of 0.25.

A Test win for Australia that will always have an asterisk next to it due to Anderson’s injury, but nonetheless too many passengers with the bat. Just been listening to TMS Podcast and Vaughan thinks all the World Cup players haven’t got their focus. Nine days to recover now, they best get to it.

 

[Starfighter]

Can we rate the umpires? Minus one million. Specsavers is sponsoring this series, they should go get a prescription.

 

[stephen]

Smith - 10
Head - 6
Cummins - 8.5
Pattinson - 6.5
Siddle - 7.5
Lyon - 8

Pretty harsh on Pattinson. The bloke bowled one bad over. Was extremely unlucky in the first dig as well.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Burns 8
Anderson 0

A bunch of others who did nothing to enhance their reputation.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Burns ton will turn out to be great for Aus this series. He's not a good player and this will keep him in the side.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

I said that at the time, but he still gets a good rating for this match.

 

[TheJediBrah]

I said that at the time, but he still gets a good rating for this match.

Yeah he did the work, luck notwithstanding. I expect the opposition would be pretty happy to have him there all series

 

[stephen]

It's better to be lucky than good.

 

[TheJediBrah]

It's better to be lucky than good.

not in the long run, luck doesn't last

 

[SteveNZ]

Burns ton will turn out to be great for Aus this series. He's not a good player and this will keep him in the side.

Because of how he looks technically? Serious question, I don't know much about him. He did seem to ride some luck in the first dig

 

[TheJediBrah]

Because of how he looks technically? Serious question, I don't know much about him. He did seem to ride some luck in the first dig

No I have no problem with unusual techniques. I just don't think he's much good. I definitely feel comfortable as an opposition fan with him in there

 

[morgieb]

Because of how he looks technically? Serious question, I don't know much about him. He did seem to ride some luck in the first dig

Sort of, but more that he just looks a batsman that will always give you a chance if he's not in 100% prime nick. Very vulnerable outside off-stump, he's lucky Australia persisted with a dumb strategy to him and even then he gave up like 20 chances (no drops admittedly, but lots of plays and misses and edges).

 

[Burgey]

Edit: pic courtesy Sydney Sixers

 

[Starfighter]

View attachment 24843

Oh my God

 

[morgieb]

Burns 5 - two OK-ish innings, but even they needed let-offs and unlike Stokes he couldn't take full advantage of it.
Roy 0 - yikes. Two failures and dropped catches. Simply not up to it.
Root 1 - did nothing of significance. Which is kinda damning when he's your senior batsman.
Denly 4 - at least he got two starts before getting out.
Stokes 8.5 - OK there were let-offs and some of the runs were kinda easy, but a ton is still a ton, especially when a failure probably means an Australian victory. Didn't light up too many trees with the ball.
Buttler 5 - key knock second innings to ensure that England couldn't lose, even though unlike Stokes he failed to kick on.
Bairstow 6 - best batting game from him in a while, and kept OK.
Woakes 6 - quiet Test but still managed a few key wickets and the 30-odd was an important knock.
Archer 8.5 - the hype is real. Scorebook only says 4 wickets, but the impact was so much more than that. Looked as scary as any bowler since Mitchell Johnson at times.
Broad 7 - good bowling first innings. Would a better second innings performance have squeezed Australia out, though?
Leach 8 - not used too much first innings but did OK when he did, and looked rather dangerous second innings when the game was on the line.

Bancroft 2 - at least batted some time. But even then looked ugly as hell doing so. Really is not Test standard.
Warner 0 - dear god. Is it too early to say "mentally shot"
Khawaja 3.5 - is converting a start too much to ask?
Smith 9 - was looking on fire before getting clocked by Archer, and even then fought hard. Just brilliant all round, eh?
Head 6 - very good knock second innings having come in during a difficult situation.
Wade 2 - see Bancroft. Increasingly it looks like the first Test was a fluke.
Paine 1 - managed a decent partnership with Smith. But otherwise.....horrid captaincy, and played arguably the worst shot of all-time given the match situation second innings.
Cummins 8 - pick of the bowlers throughout both innings and showed far more fight than at least half the actual/alledged batsman.
Siddle 7 - more expensive than what is ideal but did take some key wickets and can point to bad luck.
Lyon 6 - bowled decently first innings and had a bit of bad luck second innings. What sort of impact does the Stokes attack have on his confidence, though?
Hazlewood 7 - brilliant spell first morning, kinda meh otherwise.
Labuschagne 7 - nearly caused a nasty collapse with an ill-judged shot, but before that looked more composed than anyone not named Smith out there with the bat. Given that he was not expecting to play for most of the match, an excellent job given the circumstances. Especially after getting clocked by Archer second ball.

 

[Burgey]

It does seem Labushagne's runs in the lead up to the test series weren't flukes, and his game is suited to English conditions. Must say I admire his moxy, too. Batting like that on a last day deck after not being in the side originally says a lot about how mentally tough he is.

I'd be very tempted to get him into the side whether Smith is fit or not. Quite possibly at three, with the Pillow moving up to open.

 

[Victor Ian]

Might something of Smith have rubbed off onto Lab coming in as his substitute? I surely hope so. If he can just be half as good he will probably be double as good as the rest, at the moment.

 

[stephen]

I'm as surprised as anyone that Labuschagne made runs. Nothing in his shield or previous test performances said he had it in him. That bouncer to the face seems to have woken him up.