Ashes 2nd Test player ratings

I think you've been very harsh on Richard Dawson.

I can only agree with DrRichie re.Richard Dawson...

I had heard a rumour about the Collingwood streak, but to have it confirmed by someone else is good.

Doug the Rug deserves another point for being on the end of the best sledge of the test, when Jonathan Trott told him to 'Keep his hair on'...

You wrote

"Ricky Ponting - 1
...he looked so downbeat that some travelling England fans almost admitted feeling sorry for him."

I think you meant to write:
"Ricky Ponting - 1
...he looked so downbeat that some travelling England fans admitted almost feeling sorry for him."

Important distinction, me thinks ;-)

Wow, three hair/wig references in just over three lines. Such amazingly varied, biting and original wit.

Surely Doherty should pick up one mark for having the coolest first name of the Aussies!

I agree with all but Ryan Harris. Think Harris would deserve a 7 given at least an average batting performance, but a number 8 landing on a king pair I think should lose at least 1 mark

Tom – Are you sure you’re not just baiting He Who Must Not Be Mentioned by giving Collingwood an 8 ? Not sure how you were are able to give 3 different marks to 3 of the Australian bowlers, Siddle, Bollinger and Doherty.

Bit harsh on Katich. Blameless for his 'diamond' duck, and then batted pretty well in the second innings on only one leg.

Have only read the English (/SA) ones but...
I agree with your initial comment that Cpt Strauss did not earn a 7. i think 5 would be as high as i would go. I also think the rest of the scores are a bit high.... If you give KP 10/10, what will you give Swann when he takes another 5 wickets in the 3rd test and somehow scores 200+ with the bat? (which is obviously going to happen)

Ok so my example may be wishful thinking, but i do think you have scored them all too high.

Now to read the Aus scores....

Tom, I think you are being a bit harsh on Siddle. At least he ran in and gave it everything, which is more than can be said for Bollinger - for whom the champagne turned flat very early.

I agree with you on Ponting. I have witnessed England being ritually smashed by Australia for the last 20 odd years, but I do have some sympathy for Ponting. First he is a truly great batsman who perhaps deserves better than having to captain this bunch of also-rans and secondly, he comes across very well. Yes, he gets grumpy at times, but can anyone blame him?

With England, you are maybe a bit over generous on Colly, but as #7 says perhaps there is an ulterior motive for that! You were also kinder to Strauss than we were - he gets five out of five for his captaincy, but not much for his batting. This time!

Who would you bring in for Broad? Tremlett seems the best option and could do very well at the WACA in particular. Bresnan can't play in a four man attack and Shahzad is perhaps not quite there yet.

2nd Test Marks out of 10: England https://bit.ly/gCDFcp & Australia https://bit.ly/hA24zr

England about right

harsh on Katich... I don't rate him but he can't lose six points for one error, lot of fielding and a gritty 2nd innings knock with a dicky achilles

harsh on Watson... despite conversions, two half centuries should get him a seven - he can take a point off Harris (bowling wasn't that good, plus a king pair)

Doh Boy... You can't give him nothing, he turned up!! Should also get a bonus point for looking like his Mum's confiscated his favourite toy for the whole match - quality!

@icelandic-superlion - "Wow, three hair/wig references in just over three lines. Such amazingly varied, biting and original wit"... said baldy!

Yeah I agree, a bit harsh on Katich; called for a run that wasn't on and batted on one leg. A lot of heart shown there.

I had a cracking weekend in Adelaide. Brilliant cricket, gorgeous ground, KP's century and double century all in one day, and the best steak I've had in a long time: Gaucho's Argentinian restaurant on Gouger Street. If anyone is ever there, go. You won't need to eat meat for a week after.

Dont see how Harris can end up with the same score as Broad.

Strauss a 7?? Way too much.

He is a batsman, and failed with the bat.

His decisions were not really inspired, more his players were incredible.

I would give him a 4.

Oh, and KP deserves his 10. Imperious.

So you're saying Eng were great and Aus were pathetic? i think one of those is true, but not both.

Good ol' English media - you wait until they beat us in the next test. I expect this hype for Football, not Cricket

I really fail to see how Prior gets such high marks after a drop and Collingwood's place would be in jeopardy if he were not part of a winning team. In fact there there is still a case to move Bell up one and bring in an additional bowler especially with the injury to Broad.

I think the question of Broad's replacement is an interesting one, given the control he has been offering. I think Tremlett would be the natural choice given the type of wicket normally seen at the WACA but would he give that control that we need?

we look good but how do bell,and colly get 8 and watson and hussey get less.we want to celebrate the easy win fairly-no need to be biased.

Interesting ratings by Tom. England played as a team whereas their opponents did not. KP was outstanding and made a huge contribution in this historic win. 10 out of 10 for KP and 8 and 9 for many others shows that it was indeed a team effort. Congrats.



Dr. Cajetan Coelho

always such an outpouring of gloating etiquette on these pages.

Personally, my marks are:

England 110 Australia 8

Great achievement there is managing in one sentance to be harsh on both Dawson and Doherty!

Dawson was not that bad, rather unlucky and limited and thrown to the wolves I admit but hardly his fault.

Doherty was not only thrown to the wolves but was also wrapped in a coating of bacon and had a sign saying free lunch hung on his neck. The guy actually performed as many expected, he was just never first class quality to begin with. To give him a 0 is extremely harsh when he performed as well as he could do.

18. At 09:02am on 08 Dec 2010, southspur wrote:

we look good but how do bell,and colly get 8 and watson and hussey get less.we want to celebrate the easy win fairly-no need to be biased.

------------------------------------

I think Bell deserves his 8. He batted confidently and was only stopped from getting more runs by the declaration. Probably agree with you on Colly, although his contribution of 42 was useful and he held his catches (and catches win matches). Hussey probably deserves 8 as well. If not for him Australia wouldn't even have been in with a sniff, but I don't think Watson looks an 8; for an opener he just isn't converting his 50s into 100s.

What has Richard Dawson ever done to you!?

Cook deserves 10, but then again Pietersen probably deserves 11! A bit blinkered I think. Over scored Colly and Strauss. Harsh on Katich most definitely and Watson should get a 7.

I feel pretty sorry for Ricky Ponting. Yes he batted poorly in this match and is going through a bad trot but all batsmen do - any player with a Test average over 50 doesn't become a bad batsman overnight. What is causing him a problem is that, up until, say, 18 months ago he was captaining a very good, highly talented side which was winning. In March last year they hammered SA away in the two 'live' Tests they played. Since then they lost a very close series in England 2-1, and from there beat lower qualty teams (Pak, WI, NZ) up to the India series, which perhaps hid their lack of quality. Now this has been exposed by two of the best sides in the world, India and now England.

He has always had an 'out' in the bowlers - when he first started it was Warne/McGrath, then Brett Lee. Mitchell Johnson looked to take up that mantle for a while but as his form has dropped, so have Australias results and there is not enough quality in the bowling department that you expect anybody to step up to the plate. Without a go-to bowler who can make something happen, a captain looks impotent and desperate when they try something new (although 3 men on the square leg boundary is too far, I suspect). It doesn't make him a poor captain. Vaughan was a good captain but was helped by the presence of Flintoff. Strauss is a good captain but is helped by the presenec of Swann. Ricky Ponting now has the same problem that Mike Atherton had when he was England captain, in that he can set any plan in the world but he doesn't have the bowlers with the necessary quality, speed, consistancy or guile to carry them out. Ponting is now having to work much harder in the field to try and get something to happen using limited resources. That has to hamper your ability to concentrate when batting at 3.

I think you've been generous to Strauss - I don't think this win required great genius from the captain, it was just a case of having players superior to the opposition in all aspects of the game (and I am really struggling with the concept of saying that about an England side in an away Ashes test - perhaps 20+ years of watching the Aussies steam-roller us has left permanent mental scarring).

Collingwood should probably be pushed down to a 7 - 42 runs and a couple of catches is no better than you'd expect from a solid pro in the context of this match.

Difficult to know how to rate Bell's performance - looked in the sort of form that could have yielded a big hundred if we'd had time to bat on, but didn't get the opportunity.

Also I think you've been a mark generous for each of our seamers - Anderson had 1 great spell but was less effective in the 2nd innings, and neither Broad nor Finn really had a big enough impact on the game to merit marks showing good and very good performances. All played well enough throughout with occasional outstanding moments.

Regarding the Aussies -
Katich probably merits 5 - the run out was just one of those things.

Watson - agree that he shouldn't be opening. Keeps getting starts but doesn't convert them to the sort of scores that change matches. If the Aussies had more openers, he'd be playing at 6 in a Collingwood-esque role of batsman that bowls. For this performance, I think his rating is about right.

Hussey perhaps should drop 1 mark for the poor dismissal in the 2nd innings, which effectively ended any Aussie resistance (and who really expected them to capitulate so easily?)

Harris may have been the pick of the Aussie bowlers, but considering what else they had, that's not saying much. Batted at least 1 spot too high, although at least he's in good company with his king pair - the only other Australian to have had that (dis-)honour is Gilchrist.

Even as an England fan, I hope Australia sort out some of the deficiencies in their bowling, sufficient to at least pose a challenge to England. I wouldn't mind though if they wait till after we've guaranteed at least retaining the Ashes.

A bit harsh on Ponting. Much as I love to see an Aussie skipper praying for help, I feel he's now experiencing what Atherton often did - great player surrounded by a less than great team. However anyone who says they're not enjoying the collective Australian hand wringing is a liar...or an Australian.

I think your England points are fair. It is hard to disagree when all units function as one in such a fashion as they did.

Harsh on some of the Aussie plays me thinks! Collectively they failed but there were some good individual performances.

Katich - gained a lot in my book, to perform like he did in the obvious discomfort he was in is testament to his mental powers. Facing the England bowling attack getting into the 40's, a real fighting performance that deserves more credit.

Clarke - give him a 7, nowt he could do in his 1st innings dismissal, it was a jaffa. 2nd innnings, great form!

Hussey - this guy is a legend, another really gutsy effort while all around him collapsed. A 10 for me, what else could he have possibly done, more than he did.

Haddin - you have dinged a keeper big time for poor batting. He is a keeper who bats, as is Prior. He dropped one, so did Prior. He has scored alot more runs than Prior also!

North - well if you are going to give XD a fat 0, then give one to North too. He has offered nothing to Australia for two tests now.

XD - poor chap; he is only the one Aussie I feel sorry for. He should not be anywhere near a national team, he has been thrown under the bus by Ponting and co.

On another note Fordyce, some excellent blogs from you through the series, great reading, thanks.

It's not often I laugh out loud at blogs, but you got me with a double whammy there, Tom. First this:

"it soon became a case of hell toupé."

Then, just as I was regaining my composure, this:

"would have been pulling his hair out if he hadn't paid so much for it."


Top class!

I think Strauss maybe a 6, for decent captaincy, would be a bit fairer.
Katich maybe a 5/6 for a gritty 40 odd but all those saying the run out wasn't his fault I have to disagree there. He must take at least half the blame as there was quite clearly a single.

The Collingwood issue is the one that I have the biggest opinion on, and lets be very clear it's all about opinions.
Having someone like Colly in the side does so much more than you perhaps see in terms of bare stats. He brings a massive amount to the changing room I believe, he's a gritty experienced fighter who the younger lads appear to look up to and I also believe that he helps Strauss massively.
Add in an average of 40, outstanding hands and the fact that he gets runs when they matter most, admittedly to himself as well as the team. I just don't understand the constant pressure from the public for his place.
The Aussies would give anything at present to have someone out of the Collingwood mould.

Finally Tremlett for me in Perth, but I think they'll give Bresnan the nod who I don't think will let us down.

I too think this is very harsh on richard dawson, he wasnt as bad as this guy.... also he coached me and hes such a nice guy...

For Marcus North, you say "To English eyes he is a solid batsman who made big runs in the last Ashes series in Blighty."

Really? I see North as a walking wicket and a totally ineffective bowler. This is probably the cue for some big runs now...

Generally I would agree with the ratings but disagree on the following players.
Strauss - 5 As was said about Ponting two years ago I could have captained this England team to victory! I would only have contributed 1 less run as well! He still leans towards over-cautiousness
Katich - 6 Oh that all the Aussie batsmen were that gritty.
Doherty - 1 Got to give him a point as he tried his heart out.
Collingwood - 5 His catches were important, his batting not so.
Broad - 5 Did very little although the injury hampered him late on.

Love your blogs but the Bollinger/Hair puns are getting a bit tired. Don't overplay your hand or I'll start to wig out!! Sorry, I just had to!

High marks overall. Like a previous poster said reminds me of the football media overhyping wins to go on and slate poorer performances.

That said it was a magnificant performance. KP, Cook, Swann and Jimmy deserve all the praise they get.

I also think that our most in form batsman is Bell. He's looked a different animal over the last year or so (I think our woeful batting this summer would have been different had he been fit) and is wasted at 6. I'd much rather see him striding in at 5 with Morgan at 6, but I've never been a fan of Colly.

Oh and you forgot one rating. Papa Shango must get 20/10 for keeping these discussions going for much longer than they otherwise would do.

But actually it would be quite hilarious for the pap-meister to come on here and post his ratings. Swann would probably get 2/10 for only getting 2 REAL batsmen out etc etc

I can't believe I have actually posted this. Aplogies to all.

In fact there there is still a case to move Bell up one and bring in an additional bowler especially with the injury to Broad.
------------------
What???

Quite the opposite actually. Without Broad the tail lengthens already, are you really advocating taking out a batsman in those circumstances?

A five bowler attack for England requires at least two bowlers who can bat properly, most likely Broad and Swann.

Far better just to bring in Tremlett as a straight replacemetn with the ball.

"Only the successes of the men above him in the batting order have prevented him from scoring more." (on Ian Bell)

He was also unlucky in the first test with Siddle's hat-trick. Bell was coasting towards a ton before that happened and ultimately it left him with nowhere nearly as much time at the crease as he might have had. It might be worth moving him up to number 5 as the previous poster suggests.

"Apologies" for my typing too

agree with most of those. Here's my blog and England ratings: https://jamesheneghan.blogspot.com/

Feel free to comment

It's interesting to make a comparison with the player ratings made by the Sydney Morning Herald.
https://www.smh.com.au/sport/cricket/second-ashes-test-player-ratings-20101207-18o71.html

" 15. At 08:51am on 08 Dec 2010, TimmyNorfolk wrote:

So you're saying Eng were great and Aus were pathetic? i think one of those is true, but not both.

Good ol' English media - you wait until they beat us in the next test. I expect this hype for Football, not Cricket"

Mate, this is the first time since 1986 that England have beaten Aus by an innings. Yes England were great, and as a team effort Aus were really bad. They had a couple of oustanding performances (Hussey with the bat and Harris with the ball).

And as for hype - If the result was the other way round, do you think the Aus press would be "restrained" in their analysis.

Justin Langer summed it up beautifully - and he was a an Aussie batting legend and should know a thing or too about TEAM cricket - https://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket/9263057.stm

Tom don't worry about bias - I've only ever seen England win the Ashes 4 times in my lifetime, and had to suffer the Aussie crowing for too long.

Don't have any issues with the marking, esp Colly - Gets 8 for the streak on its own, lol

Agree with #36 to an extent. If we were one-nil down with one to play then there would be an argument for playing the extra bowler. So our line-up would be top 4 as is, Bell, Prior, Bresnan, Swann, Anderson, Tremlett, Finn. But without Broad and the fact we are in front and only having to draw the series to retain the Ashes they are not going to start messing about with it too much. I'd like to see Tremlett play the next test as it looks on current form that we have more than enough batting already, without having to include Bresnan at number 8.

Despite my comments regarding Collingwood’s marks above on the previous test match people’s suggestions regarding his position in the team are misguided. A successful team must have balance, it is not simply picking your 6 best batsmen, a wicket keeper and 4 bowlers.
First of all from the batting point of view you need batsmen with different qualities for different scenarios. In the past we had Graeme Thorpe. Now if he went out to bat at 280 – 3 you knew he wouldn’t score any runs, but make that 28 – 3 and he would. He scored tough runs and was gritty. I am not suggesting by the way that Collingwood is as good a batsman as Thorpe, because he isn’t (Thorpe is one of England’s most under-rated batsmen).
Also if you are playing 4 bowlers and then you have to a reasonable 5th bowler amongst your batsmen, particularly in Australia. 4 bowlers cannot bowl 200 – 230 overs in a test match (FACT as our dear friend says). None of our current batsmen can bowl. Please do not suggest Pieterson, as he bowls self-acknowledged pies. Useful experiment for a couple of overs, but not a 5th bowler. Trott doesn’t bowl and for some reason Bell appears to have given up his bowling (I remember him being a reasonably tidy little swing bowler in his youth). Strauss and Cook don’t bowl at all.
So anybody suggesting Morgan as a replacement for Collingwood does not understand the real demands of Test cricket. I rate Morgan highly and would love to see him playing for England. Unfortunately for him Bell and Pieterson are in such good form, he can’t get a look in. The only alternative to Collingwood in the squad is Bresnan. It would be a plausible argument to suggest replacing with him and moving Prior up to 6. However I believe this would lead to both Prior and Bresnan batting one position too high.
Therefore as much as I hate the principle of “bits and pieces” cricketers, Collingwood is necessary for the team. Of perhaps greater concern is that none of the batsmen currently in the wings can fulfil the role of 5th bowler (with perhaps the exception of Bopara). What happened to batsmen who could provide a few useful overs in the manner of say Gooch or Trescothick? (Little trivia fact is that I believe Gooch was the last man to open both the batting and bowling for England, but then again I may be wrong).

I think everyone is being very unfair on Strauss. Yes, he only scored one run, but he only had the one chance to bat in the game. He got a duck in the first innings in the first test and look what happened in the second innings!

I think he captained the team very well, making all the important decisions, making the right bowling changes at the right times (eg Pietersen on day 4), setting fielding traps that came off - the dismissal of Watson in the first innings, for example - and timing the declaration to perfection.

He well deserves his 7 in my view. Looking forward to Perth - let's win these ashes before Xmas!!

Go easy on Dawson - Tanya Aldred says he's better than Swann...

https://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/content/player/11848.html

# 15 Timmy Norfolk

We're talking about an innings defeat here. This means that one team has totally outplayed the other.

So the answer to your question is yes. England were great and Australia were bad.

An innings defeat of this magnitude would be equivalent to a 6-0 defeat in football or a 50+ winning margin in rugby.

Boikey – You’ve let yourself down, you’ve let your family down.
If you can’t help yourself wear a pair of boxing gloves until you can learn self-control before typing.

In line with a longstanding obsession of mine with the vital importance of number three in any England cricket team, I noted the 9 given to Trott and the fact that no-one else seems to have thought him worthy of any mention.

Only when England get a "proper" number three do they build up the kind of confidence that the current side is showing: and a three really shows his value when-as has happened twice in two tests one of the openers goes for a duck. We have seen what can happen so easily with the collapse of the Australian side- suddenly 3 wickets down with none of the board.

The worrying thing from way back to at least Chris Tavare is that such a player may get "promoted" to open-- leaving Three a "barn door".

In a previous upturn in England's fortunes three hardened Surrey players- Butcher, Thorpe and Stewart- provided a backbone- and I would suggest that in this batting line up Trott and Collingwood are very important in that sort of way.. And perhaps Kevin Pieterson learned something by watching his team-mates just occupy the crease and wear the Aussies down. That is aggressive cricket as well- as was shown in the famous Headingly Test when the combativeness of both Ian Botham and Geoffrey Boycott was crucial in the batting effort.

Cass

Re: Colly/Hussey différence. Huss had a match-affecting impact in only one sense: he miss-cued Finn to mid-on in 2nd inns. Perhaps that awful gaff figures in Tom's scoring system. Colly is innocent on that front.

Punter & Pup must be having nightmares about thé Big Ben stunt. Could we have a blog (Tom, are you listening?) on Ashes psychology? The Big Ben stunt failed. England waited until arriving downunder to riposte. England's refusal, for whatever reason, to attend that Gala lunch before thé warm-up games was straight out of Waugh's famous text on the subject. Thé snub said: 'We're not hère to socialise and eat prawn sarnies'.

Harsh assessment on Katich and he deserves a better score than 4. Not blameless for the run out but neither was he entirely at fault. Trott is given credit for the fabulous throw and I think it should be left there.
As for his second innings and fielding, he stood up to be counted when his country needed him despite the achilles injury. I'm sure he won't recall the test fondly but he can hold his head up with some pride whereas others should be ashamed. I wish him a speedy recovery and I hope he does get a chance to play test cricket again despite his age.

And Ponting deserves a 2. He won the toss remember and did the right thing by choosing to bat. Plenty of others have got that wrong in the past.

How has Australian cricket gotten into such a state? It appears as if England have learned from Australia over the past 20 years and Australia have learned everything they know from England. Isn't it wonderful!!!!??

#48 - you're right, but I've apologised. Twice actually. Fact.

What more do you want?

If it's any consolation, I agree with your post #43. Quite insightful.

I have often thought of Collingwood as a bits & pieces cricketer, more suited to one dayers, even when he makes a ton and silences the critics. But you're right he does fulfill a key role given the other players we have. And since 2005 we have proven (fact!) that it's not wise to chop & change the team too much.

Three other reasons to keep him in the team - (1) if it ain't broke don't fix it (why change a winning team?) (2) Broad, whilst perhaps not a true all rounder, is a bowler who can bat a bit, so his absence means that we can't afford to drop a batsman who can bowl a bit (esp if we choose Tremlett) and (c) he did make a few runs in his last innings.

Am I forgiven now?

46. At 10:12am on 08 Dec 2010, Nick Beresford wrote:

Go easy on Dawson - Tanya Aldred says he's better than Swann...

https://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/content/player/11848.html
-----------------
At that point (when he was playing for England) 90% of us would have probably agreed. A couple of years can make a huge difference.

only 9 for swan what does he have to do get the recognition he deserves as englands consistently best player he had one ordinary match and you tried to write him off do you watch cricket?

Generally agree on the ratings but probably a couple of marks too high for Doherty

Just read the Sydney Morning Herald ratings. The ratings had me laughing and worth a look.

BTW, interesting to see that the Aussies have now risen (yes, I said risen) to #3 in the ICC rankings. All because Sri Lanka couldn't beat the weather and the West Indies, apparently.

Actually you're wrong about Ryan Harris, it isn't statistically impossible to do worse with the bat, at least he managed to face two balls for his two dismissals. You can get run out from the non-strikers end at least once (or even twice!) so he could go at least two notches worse. What kind of brainless, incompetent-muppet would get himself out without facing a ball though...

at 46/53

Thats probably the best misjudgment I have ever seen!

I take your point hackerjack that Swann was poor 3 years ago, but still had promise. The fact she quotes him as a wet-nursed bowler is just fantastic and some definite humble pie is needed for Tanya. He has always showed promise in my opinion!

Hilarious!!

Re Colly - This guy is a backbone player for England: Nuggity runs in the same vein as Thorpe (yes Thorpe was far better, but sorry but he has retired now), great athletic fielder (only Jimmy A is better) and can bowl more than just "a bit". On a day 4/5 pitch his off-cutters can be just as lethal as a full tweaker, but more importantly he can bowl to contain and thus build pressure which benefits the strike bowler at the other end.

Most importantly - ne never gives up, head does not go down. He is the ethos of team spirit around which a touring party is built. He's not flash, but he is very important.

The Richard Dawson reference was actually a typo by Tom. He actually meant Richard Dawkins. It is a little known fact that Xavier Dohery is a militant atheist.
The slightly lost look he had on the field was due to Shane Watson’s assertion of the importance of non-adaptive processes in evolution.

Boikey apologises twice for reasonable post, Clarke apologises for not walking and Tom, on behalf of the British Broadcoping Castercation, retracts statement on-line. How the world Spirit has advanced. Me, if I so much as make a typo or one of those irritating French characters I self-flagellate until a mildly tingling sensation sets in!

Hi all- new on here today.
Wonderful to read the comments and the insightfulness (is there such a word?) I generally agree with the points awarded, but would it be possible to have scores for all the umpires as well? I am sure that would create some discussions

Having read through the Aussie papers it's refreshing to see that the cricket journalists are making a good fist of the novel sensation of having to be balanced, and even go so far as praising some of the England players. Reading the comments from the public though is great fun. Plenty of gallows humour and a great deal of moaning about the quality of the current Australian line-up. The prevailing mood however is that England haven't played well so much as Australia have performed abominably!

It's reassuring to see that the average Aussie punter won't go so far as to credit the England side with actually being much good...most stating that "their granny could hit a ton against the current Australian attack!" Some habits die very hard indeed but I suppose that when you've been fed a 20 year main-course of triumphalism, on top of an appetiser of long-standing, ill-defined grievance, it's hard to come to terms with the fact that your players are, in fact, mortal after all!

From anger we go to denial...the journey unfolds!

Steak and Ale

Absolutely right about Collingwood - he may not be a glamorous and flamboyant middle order stroke player, but for the last half dozen years he's been a vital component in the England machine. With the bat, he's the guy we want coming in if we're at 30-3 and the ball is moving all over the place - low backlift, soft hands and good adjuster mean he's our best 'bad wicket' batsman. There are times when scoring 75 in 4 hours is vital, and Colly has been our man for that. At the moment this role looks a little redundant because the other batsmen are going so well (and Trott to some extent does a similar shoring up job at 3 if we lose an early wicket) and because the Aussies have a toothless attack.

For bowling, I also wonder why Bell doesn't bowl any more - he looked to be potentially as good a fill-in seamer as Collingwood. However, given the current setup of the team, having Colly chip in with 10 overs for 40 in each innings is helpful in the context of the 3 seamers + 1 spinner attack we have. OK, he's unlikley to run through a team unless conditions are really in his favour, but he can chip in with occasional wickets and is unlikely to release the pressure on the batsmen by allowing them too many easy runs.

I do think Pietersen is slightly under-used as the spin bowling equivalent, although he is a bit the opposite in that he will bowl some loose stuff but then produce a real jaffa.

Richard Dawson once got 4/134 in a test

Can't see Doherty ever getting near that

All this user's posts have been removed.Why?

#66 - "Doherty did ok". WHAT???? Are you completely stark raving...

Oh, it's you Papa.

Does that mean Doherty goes on to the ever increasing list of better spin bowlers than Swann then Papa?

66. At 11:09am on 08 Dec 2010, papa shango wrote:
Doherty did ok, the pitch only became helpful when Swann came on to bowl.

If 1-158 in 27 overs is OK, then 5-91 in 41 is surely the best bowling performance ever. FACT!

Do not think the scores mean much to either side,
should remember a wounded Ozzie is a dangerous beast! that needs putting out of its misery!

#59 - Robert. I agree with you about Collingwood, but the reality is that he only bowls "a bit", even if he "can" bowl more. For example, 7 overs out of 180-odd in this match. But perhaps you're right that he would bowl more in different conditions

Great blog and some acerbic comments for poor Doug the Rug !! thought Katich deserved at least a 5 for bravery in the 2nd innings and though Seter Piddle tried hard enough for a two !!

On the whole, accruate.

#66 Papa and his v short memory

1st innings
Swann - 29.0 2 70 2
Doherty 27.0 3 158 1

Doherty got KP only once they had got into 20/20 mode on Day 5 when the pitch was turing big.

Swann day 1 on a flat deck and he manages to get 2, and admits to bowling "like a child"

KP did better, and he openly admits he throws puddings!

"Doherty did ok..."

Sorry, stats did not come out there

1st Innings comparisons
Swann 29 overs, 2 maidens, 70 Runs, 2 Wickets
Doherty 27 Overs 3 maidens, 158 runs, 1 wicket

" 40. At 09:54am on 08 Dec 2010, Twiddlepin wrote:
It's interesting to make a comparison with the player ratings made by the Sydney Morning Herald.
https://www.smh.com.au/sport/cricket/second-ashes-test-player-ratings-20101207-18o71.html"

Thank you for posting this link Twiddlepin - really interesting to see how the Aussie's score the players. I think there is always a natural inclination towards slight bias for one's own team, and certainly the Aussie reporter writing these ratings is guilty of that - there are some questionably high scores for one of Australia's worst performances in living memory. However, their appraisal of the English performance was very selfless and reflects a lot of what Tom has written. Referring to Cook as being regarded as Joe Average before this series to becoming "one of the best test batsmen in history" is no small comment from an Aussie cricket pundit!

I have to agree entirely on the comments on Jonathan Trott - not nearly enough praise. I think true no. 3 batsmen are hard to find, and I rate Trott to be one of the best in the world at what he does. Outside of Cook (and possible Pietersen if he continues in form) I predict Trott will finish the series with one of the best averages of either side. He stabilises an innings - his ability to 'drop the shutters down' on any momentum created by an opening wicket falling shows a lot of integrity. Happy with his mark definitely.

As to Strauss, I think I have to agree with most of the criticism - you have to take his batting and captaincy in equal measure, and whilst the latter can't be questioned, in this match, he couldn't have batted worse. Therefore by definition he shouldn't get above 5 - obvious praise to his captaincy though.

Now Collingwood - poor old Colly. I have to admit to finding your rating of him overly generous as he was pretty average. However purely on the grounds of his partly-naked 'kid on a dance floor' slide, I advocate giving him 10!! Love hearing this sort of stuff - though it'll never top drunken Freddie stealing a pedalow.

I think there are several ways to take the ratings - either purely based on the one match (i.e. the max/min are only understood within the confines of that one game), set against the context of the series (hard to do until the end), or against universal test cricket markings (hard to do when you consider the history involved). I think match by match is fair enough, and leaves room for more debate and input.

With this in mind, I think it's very hard to justify ratings for any Aussie above 5, if their ratings are understood in the context of England's performance. Closer ratings would imply a closer outcome - this was a crushing defeat when the odds were against England and given there were no decisive performances from any of the Aussies, should they be getting high scores?? This to me would undermine entirely the result, and indeed the deserved ratings of the English bowlers, and top order batsmen.

Hussey 7, when Bell gets 8? Somethings not quite right with that. The fact that Clarke could have potentially saved the match for Australia, but instead fell victim to Pietersen's part-time spin, actually makes his failure even bigger - not to mention stopping in his exit from the pitch.

An opening batsman not being able to convert, or being able to to hold out an innings? That's a problem Bangladesh should be facing, not Australia. Totally agree - Watson is a glorified number 6 puncher.

If I were being picky, I'd bump Bell up to 5, drop Collingwood for Morgan to give the lad a chance, and put Tremlett in for Broad.

As an aside, slap on the back to all on here - really enjoy reading your posts (even P _ _ _ - S _ _ _ _ )

there si so much stick given out about how poor the azzies are and they dont compare to the steam roller of the late 90's but that team had four of the best cricketers of all time in it
we are on the other hand not giving the england players as much credit as they deserve. Cook Pieterson, Strauss and maybe Bell are all very high class test players, all have averages in the 40's with KP and cook both nearly 50 and both will end up over 50, which is right up there all time.
collingwood has an average in the 40's too but maybe world class isnt there BUT his grind, dtermination, and defo world class fielding is of the higest order in any era.
bowling wise ANderston right now is as good as any era fast swing bowler and the late developer of swann is accumulating wickets as fast as anyone in test cricket right now.
so give the lads more credit rather than saying hey beat a mediocre auzzie team.. its all they can doo beat them,,and how!!!

Agree with the ratings for the most part, but don't agree with the sensationalist maths on the averages of Cook and Trott, at least not in the Test Series. Maybe they made hay while the sun shone on the warmup games, but on the 3 innings that England have played in the Ashes test in Brisbane and Adelaide, I calculated an average of 150 (235+67+148+450? divided by 3)for Cook and 81 (29+78+135=242) for Trott. Mighty fine figures anyway and I expect they will keep it up.

With Australia running scared and changing their lineup every match, not to mention with an injury to Katich forcing their hand, I see at least one more England win which will guarantee the Ashes staying at home. Unless Australia buck up their ideas, they may well end up with nil on the series board.

sorry that should have been 235+67+148=450

my bad

All this user's posts have been removed.Why?

Strauss looking almost Brearley-ish in his Captaincy

i.e. doesn't matter if his own batting falls apart so long as he gets the best out of the talented individuals and makes them play as a team.

(Also took a few decent catches btw)

0 rather harsh on Clarke - a man who scored 80 after all.

RoverOnTour, the averages carry over from a not out innings.

So Cook effectively had one innings for 383

Once again, great work Tom. I think you're spot on with the England marks. All this 'criticism' of Strauss would hold sway if we were used to beating Australia by an innings but we're not and regardless of the merits or otherwise of this aussie team I thought he led us superbly to a historic victory. Perfect declaration and excellent management of the bowlers in the second innings being vital in pursuit of victory. Yes, he's there to bat but a captains job is never easy (unless you've got Warne and McGrath).

I feel sorry for Bell, the guy is in the form of his life and has even got Warney referring to him as 'The Terminator'. He just can't get enough time at the crease (or partners in Brisbane 1st innings) to get the big score his majestic batting deserves. It's a far cry from those American Pie jibes. I think he has to bat at 5 in Perth.

Prior can definitely improve which is good for us but can someone please give him a new cap. The sweat stained one he wears atm makes me feel nauseous!

The bowlers worked well as a unit keeping the pressure on with very few easy runs on offer. Broad will be a big loss. He may not have taken wickets but his economy rate was excellent and he gets under the opponents skin which can lead to lapses in concentration. Swann is my hero, as long as he keeps taking 'easy 5 fors' I'll be happy.

Australia on the other hand were poor, very poor. One interesting question is whether they are just out of form or whether we have made them look out of form. I believe the latter with many of them entering this series with averages in the high 40's/early 50's. Our bowlers have risen to the challenge so far and their bowlers have gone missing.

Katich may deserve another point for soldiering on, especially with regard to batting but surely his stubborness was counter-productive in the field and may have worsened his injury. Watson is an almost nailed on 50 and an almost nailed on wicket soon after, nothing special bowling and a plodder in the field - 6 is generous. Clarke 6 is about right. Out for nothing first innings, but it was a peach of a ball, and gave away his wicket at the end of day 4 'trying to get off strike' but he did give them a chance of saving the game. Hussey 7, a tad generous. He triggered the collapse on the final day playing a poor shot. If that was Pietersen he'd have been hammered for it. Harris 7 is very generous. He was the pick of their bowlers but 620-5, come on and a king pair to boot. More like 5 I'd say. Others scores spot on.

This is not gloating or triumphalism, just reflections on a very convincing victory. But remember it's only 1-0. Tell yourselves there's a long way to go yet. The aussies will definitely come out fighting and fired up in Perth so we need to wipe the slate clean and play as if it's 0-0 and a must win game. Roll on next week (and well done getting to the end of that if you stayed with me)!

Hi Papa!! Before the series you were critical of Swann and Cook, two of our stand-out performers, and declared without a doubt that England would be one-nil down by this stage.

We should have a rejig of this team who are underperforming by only beating Australia by an innings and more on a flat track (it's so unfair the Aussies had to bat on a minefield). Key should be brought in to stabilise the top order. Bring back Tufnell - him v. Warne should be a frightening tussle. Pattinson should be put in for Anderson, whose paltry display only saw him remove Ponting and Clarke in the opening overs, when Australia should clearly have been 6 down. KP has just got to go - he's a walking wicket. Bring in Afzaal there. Mascherenhas should come in for Broad, who has really gone off the boil since his injury.

#83 - you forgot Mahmood

#82 -

"Hussey 7, a tad generous. He triggered the collapse on the final day playing a poor shot. If that was Pietersen he'd have been hammered for it."

Very true indeed. Hussey's rash shot illustrated very starkly the importance of not giving away yuor wicket. Look what happened to the rest of them once he was out.


"But remember it's only 1-0. Tell yourselves there's a long way to go yet. The aussies will definitely come out fighting and fired up in Perth so we need to wipe the slate clean and play as if it's 0-0 and a must win game."

Even truer. Let's celebrate this pasting (for that is what it was), but it only counts the same as a 1 run win. We need to start again from scratch and not let compacency creep in.

Hussey desrves at least an 8, if not a 9 for his batting, especially in the 1st innings.Dont forget he scored those runs off our world class bowling attack rather than Harris and the pie slingers.But he did drop an easy catch and threw away his wicket in the 2nd innings with a careless shot......
And I agree Collingwood deserves his extra mark for his slide in the rain LOL!

#79 Papa

"Doherty not ready for test cricket" Tim Jenner, Aussie Spin Guru - https://www.smh.com.au/sport/cricket/hauritz-best-spin-option-jenner-20101206-18mu2.html

Enough said

oops, sorry that should have read Terry Jenner, Shane Warne's coach

https://news.bbc.co.uk/sportacademy/hi/sa/cricket/newsid_2657000/2657735.stm

Kapnag, thanks for the clarification.

One thing to remember before we get too triumphant is that Australia are unlikely to play so poorly again this series.

In Watson, Ponting, Clarke, Hussey and Haddin they have the basis of a good batting line-up. OK, Punter is yet to fire, but he won't go through the whole series as a bunny - he's way too good a player for that. OK, there are issues with the opening positions and 6 (where Watson should be batting, and which would suit his 50 and out each innings better than opening does).

There are a few more issues in the bowling department -
Mitchell Johnson is their one really penetrative bowler, but his performance in the 1st test was awful, and consistent with his form over the last few months.

Harris looked OK in this match - at least he kept going while all around was disaster.

3rd seamer is entirely up for grabs - Hilfenhaus, Siddle, any young promising guy?

As for picking a spinner, perhaps we should lend them Monty so he can get a game. Replacing Warne was always going to be difficult (especially with MacGill retiring very shortly after), but I dion't think anyone expected it to be THIS big a problem.

Does papa Shango know anything about cricket after all he was a phoney witch doctor gimmick from the WWF

Doherty is nowhere near the class of Swann. Even Hauritz is better than the rubbish that Doherty produces - averaging over 40 in first class cricket per wicket

If Swann was in the Aussies side he would be the star bowler in the same way Warne was and still is according to some desperate Australians who want him back !

All this user's posts have been removed.Why?

#77 - there's nothing sensationalist about Tom's maths, that's the standard way in which batting averages are calculated. It's runs per dismissal, rather than runs per innings (which is what most people assume). An average of 50 doesn't mean you score 50 runs every time you bat, it means you score 50 runs before next being dismissed (on average, obviously). Those runs could be spread across several innings.

Over the course of a career it's rare to find batsmen averaging even in the high 50s, but it's quite common over the course of a test series to see averages above 100. All it takes is one or two 'not outs'. When SA played a two-match series against India in 2009/2010, Hashim Amla finished with a series average of 490!

Ponting deserves more for his honesty.......out batted....... out bowled and out fielded.
The problem with rating Australia soooooooh poor actually suggests therefore that the marks for England are too high!! An excellent performance against non hopers isn't much to write home about really is it?

#89 dummy_half

Totally agree. Aus have a good batting line-up that will probably fire at Perth, but only up to 6. And that is where their problems lie - "6 out all out" is the phrase that ian Chappell used about England in the '90s, and that is Australia's problem right now.

Only Hussey seems to be able to form a back-bone to support the very fragile tail, unless they bring back Mitchell Johnson; that's where their other problems lie - The bowling.

They need to take 20 wickets and in 2 tests running have failed.

Yes they are a wounded animal right now and we should not be complacent, but I just don't see them beating England with both a bad tail and weak bowling.

papa shango wrote:
#83 you make yourself look a but stupid with those comments.

-----------------

the irony!

91. At 12:22pm on 08 Dec 2010, papa shango wrote:

#83 you make yourself look a but stupid with those comments.


papa... pot... kettle... black!

5. At 08:07am on 08 Dec 2010, stewz1970 wrote:
Surely Doherty should pick up one mark for having the coolest first name of the Aussies!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, he does. Unfortunately he loses one for having pretentious parents

Please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please ignore he who's name should never ever be mentioned again. Let him continue with his ridiculous, absurd, daft comments. He has all the maturity of Kevin the teenager, but none of the charm. He's shown that he can't be reasoned with, and that he is your typical pub bore who will disagree with anybody merely for the sake of it.

I know its tempting to reply when you see him post something outrageous, but we all need to show team work in sending this guy to Coventry for ever.

As i scrolled down through the comments, I found myself increasingly worried. However, to my relief, I saw that, at #66, papa shango finally entered the arena. Phew. You write a helluva blog, Tom (and I'm glad you bumped Katich up, but papa sure knows how to make a worthwhile comment.

Loving the series so far, and I think the sign for me that we're doing well is that I found Trott's 78 to be disappointing. I mean, who doesn't get a ton, these days?

Loved this on Twitter: Just landed in London it's freezing and was welcomed by press and photographers asking am I making a comeback ? What have I missed ??? - Shane Warne