BBC BLOGS - Oliver Brett
« Previous | Main | Next »

England player ratings

Post categories:

Oliver Brett | 06:35 UK time, Monday, 17 May 2010

Never again will we wonder why Geoff Boycott and Mike Brearley opened the batting in the 1979 World Cup, nor why Mike Gatting tried to reverse-sweep Allan Border in the 1987 edition. The lbw decision that Derek Pringle never got against Javed Miandad in 1992 can be forgotten about, and so too can Ian Bradshaw and Courtney Browne's remarkable ninth-wicket stand that took the Windies home at The Oval in 2004.

After three failures in World Cup finals, and one in the Champions Trophy final, England have finally passed the winning post in a major ICC tournament. And here are my marks out of 10, based on performances across the whole tournament, for the heroes of the hour.

The victorious England team celebrate their World Twenty20 winThe victorious England team celebrate their World Twenty20 win. Photo AP

Michael Lumb - 7
A selectorial hunch paid off. Scored his runs at a really healthy rate throughout, and the theory he might struggle against spin was pretty much quashed when a score of 33 in the semi-final against Sri Lanka hastened England's victory. That was his highest score, and in seven completed innings he may have wanted something more substantial.

Craig Kieswetter - 8
After accepting his man-of-the-match award in the final, he was quick to acknowledge that he needs to work on his wicketkeeping. One could write a book about his batting, so imperfect in many ways, but when he gets it right he is capable of breathtaking shots. The coaches will want to tweak a few things, but he is clearly a very exciting find.

Kevin Pietersen - 9
He managed to dodge the ash cloud, and the only match England didn't have to win, to attend the birth of his son, and when he came back he carried on hitting the ball with the utter certainty he has possessed for the vast majority of his England career. He had a bad year in 2009 for a variety of reasons. Now he is back, and how.

Paul Collingwood captain- 7
The record books will show he could hardly buy a run in this tournament, but after a rocky period in Guyana he got his team firing on all four cylinders as England delivered one crushing win after another from the Super Eights onwards. With plenty of help from coach Andy Flower he defined and delivered a winning strategy that was based on attack, with bat and ball, at every opportunity.

Eoin Morgan - 8
Like Charles Bronson's character in Once Upon A Time in the West, Eoin Morgan goes about his business with the confident smile of the assassin. He did much of his best work on the sticky tracks of Guyana which most other batsmen detested, while there was also a wickedly-timed innings to get England home against New Zealand.

Luke Wright - 8
Wright kicked off his tournament with a wonderful 45 not out against West Indies, he fielded very well throughout, and when required to bowl an over in the final he conceded only five runs and removed the very dangerous six-hitter Cameron White. The number six role is not easy to fill, but England appear to have found their man.

Tim Bresnan - 7
Was such a model of consistency that it seemed a shock when batsmen finally hit a few boundaries off him in the semi-final and the final. Intelligently chose not to try to match the pace of Stuart Broad by dishing out short balls, instead concentrating on a tight line just back of a length, and batted very nicely against New Zealand.

Graeme Swann - 9
Shared the title of England's leading wicket-taker with Ryan Sidebottom, and did it with the best economy rate of all Collingwood's bowlers. It no longer comes as a surprise to see Swann perform out of his skin for England, and he was quite brilliant in frustrating the big Australian hitters in the final, taking 1-17 in his four overs.

Michael Yardy - 8
His selection was met with surprise, but despite being taken for 21 in a single over by David Hussey and Cameron White in the final, Yardy still ended with a tournament economy rate comfortably below seven an over, his highlight a spell of 2-19 against Pakistan. Curiously, England appear to have more use of his "darts" than Sussex.

Stuart Broad - 8
Bowled outstandingly in the semi-final against Sri Lanka, when England lost an important toss and had to work hard to restrict their opponents on the slow St Lucia wicket. Picked up the tournament's biggest run-getter, Mahela Jayawardene, with one of the best opening deliveries you could hope for, taking 2-21. Never disappointed.

Ryan Sidebottom - 8
When he kept James Anderson's out of England's first match in the tournament, armchair pundits were queuing up to scorn the selection. When he took his 10th wicket of the tournament, and second of the final, they had conveniently forgotten their earlier opinions. And he has also nailed the slower bouncer down to perfection.

Comments

  • Comment number 1.

    Well done South Africa!
    You have finally shed the tag of 'chokers'.
    Get in!

  • Comment number 2.


    England and Australia played the best cricket and they rightly deserved to be in the T20 World Cup finals. Focus, discipline, fitness and hunger to excel were well demonstrated by the finalists. Congratulations to the winners and their challengers.

    England bowlers held the upper hand throughout. Yardy, Bresnan, Ryan, Broad, Swann and Wright did every thing right. What a perfect show against another top side in the competition. The 111 runs second wicket partnership between Kieswetter and Kevin made the target look very simple.

    Good going for Andy Flower, Paul Collingwood and their supremely fit cricketers. Well played.


    Dr. Cajetan Coelho

  • Comment number 3.

    Think it was a trifle harsh on Bresnan to be lumped on seven with Lumb and Collingwood, as England's worst three players.

    But that England had no player rated worse than seven shows the consistency of all their performers. Too many other teams had too many players not in form and England were deserved winners.

    Brilliant, absolutely brilliant. Well done to the under-praised Andy Flower.

    http://sportingchameleon.wordpress.com/

  • Comment number 4.

    benny your comments are just so original. every other team seems to have players that were born outside there respected countries but all people on here seem to focus on is england having a couple of south arficans in there team, regardless of where there parents were born or where they trained.
    COngratulations england fully deserved played all round great cricket

  • Comment number 5.

    About time to to. Congrats to the players but an extra large pat on the back to Andy Flower, top man.

    Please now make winning tournaments a habit, oh, and retaining the Ashes would be nice too....

  • Comment number 6.

    T20 requires a true team effort and England showed that against all their opponents (maybe except the Irish).

    A the heart of this team were a hardworking captain and quietly supportive coach but also a talisman. KP was made for T20 and there are now a couple of young players raising their game too...

    Well done England...

  • Comment number 7.

    I have heard a lot of comments about T20 being a team event, I don't necessarily agree, Mike Hussey's solo performance in the 2nd Semi underlines how a great individual performance can negate a weak team performance. But England winning so convincingly in almost every game (V Windies the D/L was a farce) shows what impact a great team ethos employed by very good players can have, and every one of them stood up to the task when called upon.

    Swann and KP were fantastic, let's hope they can carry this confidence into the summer and on through the Ashes. Collingwoods catch to dismiss Clarke truly was a thing of beauty!! I'm going to enjoy the moment as long as possible because they don't come around very often....

  • Comment number 8.

    Fantastic performance from the boys, never really looked like losing at any stage of the comp.

    Surely now time to get keiswetter and morgan into the test side, unconventional but have so much ability ... bring on the ashes !!

  • Comment number 9.

    Given that he won player of tournament I don't think a 10 for Pietersen would be out of the question, and a 9 for Morgan might be justifiable as well.

  • Comment number 10.

    I was born in South Africa and left at 16 to be schooled in England. Give me the choice to play for England or South Africa I would choose England everytime...They have taught my cricket effectively ever since I arrived here I am grateful and over joyed at our win in the T20...Long may it continue!!

    and in case any of the doubters are wondering, didnt Dirk Nannes play for Netherlands in the last T20? Or was Ryan Giigs born in England, played for the under 19's and then played on the left wing for wales with a Manc accent.

    Hmm...Goes to show that as long as the choice is there it is never set in stone :-)

    Extra congratulations to Andy Flower...Who has transformed the team into world beaters!!!

  • Comment number 11.

    Samson bucket. I totally agree. A lot of these players have had a lot of their training playing for county sides here in the UK, so surely we have a right to play them as they seem to be products of our system. Yes at times it can be frustrating playing spot the englishman in the lineup but a lot of other nations are the same. The fact that KP, Kieswetter etc have been rejected by the South Africans surely means they don't have a leg to stand on, we've brought them on to go and beat South Africa comfortabley!

    Fantastic result by the entire team, I know there is the question of whether T20 is a team game but if there's no team spirit or drive then a group of individuals would crash and burn.

    Andy Flower has worked wonders with all forms of the game and I cannot wait for the next few years to see this relatively young team progress. Long may it continue!

  • Comment number 12.

    Very, very good from England, all the ratings above seem pretty fair along with KPs Man of the Series award. All the players have stepped up to the mark which has allowed the selection of the same eleven players (bar of course KPs little jaunt back home to become a Dad) throughout the tournament, which can only help with the overall team performance (bit like Ashes 2005). What's impressed me most was the calm and efficient way they went about things, each player carrying out the role they were assigned very well. Lets hope they can build on this, particularly with the 50 over game. They shouldn't however get carried away and start making changes to the test team because of this win. I think the only none test player in the T20 team who has the pontential to play in tests in the near future is Morgan and even then one wonders who he'd replace, though of course injuries could do the selectors work for them.

  • Comment number 13.

    10 & 11 - thanks for your intelligent comments. I was a bit irritated by the "humourous" e-mails yesterday relating to the South African connections among the England batting. (And it should be noted that the bowlers, who really set up the victories in the last two games, cannot be tarred with that brush). It has taken more than 10 years for the ECB coaching structure to begin to deliver proper results, but now the rewards are starting to be reaped. Kieswetter is a classic example of someone who had a choice to make between two countries and he chose the one where he felt his talents could be brought to fruition most readily. That is something we should be proud of, not ashamed of.

    tomcrofts - "products of our system" - that's exactly what Kieswetter, Lumb and Pietersen are.

    Andy Flower, who deserves a massive chunk of the credit for all this, was born in Zimbabwe. Are we embarrassed about that? Apparently not, maybe because Fabio Capello isn't English either, I don't know.

  • Comment number 14.

    Oliver,

    When you say England have more use of Yardy's darts than do Sussex I should point out that when Adams was still captain he always had him on alongside Mushie in the Twenty20 games, and whilst he doesn't play himself as much now that he is the captain, Yards does after all have Ollie Rayner, Will Beer, and until recently Hamilton-Brown but now Monty -- to bowl the overs, while Yardy works on those cunning plans of his that keep us moving on to ever more success!

  • Comment number 15.

    Let's call a spade a spade here.

    Nearly every country out there has utilised 'naturalised' players. Eduardo, a Brazilian playing for Croatia. Zindane - Algerian, Viera - Senegal. John Barnes - West Indian, Andrew Symonds - English. These are just a few examples from off the top of my head.

    I was born in England, but my parents emigrated to New Zealand when I was 4 ans came back when I was 14. My brother was born over there. At no point did either of us consider ourselves Kiwis.

    My wife, born in Portsmouth to a father born in Malaysia and an English mother, considers herself Scottish due to her father's parent's being Scottish.

    To the best of my knowledge, all of these guys now playing for England have at least one English parent, and have spent a large amount of time in England during their training.

    So, before you start with these puerile comments, have a look at the bigger picture, and have a little cheese to go with that whine and sour grapes.

  • Comment number 16.

    A little over a year ago I called our team the Dog and Duck XI. This year I am more than happy to call them heroes and turned round what used to be charitably called "plucky" performances into something seriously professional and aggressive. Well done lads....keep it up!!

  • Comment number 17.

    I am upset by Jonathan Anews comments about an English side. Anyone who qualifies for England has as much right to play as any Englishman born in England. It demeans the outstanding performance by the English side by carping on about who was born where. If English born players are good enough they will get into the side not "pushed" aside by players born elsewhere. Normally you write sense Jonathan but your blog from the Carribean is absolute tosh!

  • Comment number 18.

    I have said many times that these guys are not "South Africans", they all have one British parent, and are dual national. They are as British as South African.

    Neither were they rejected by South Africa, they simply chose to play in and for England and develop their game in the English system.

    And let's not forget either that in today's world where people move freely between countries, there are likely to be far more cases of dual nationals playing for "adopted" countries.

    Let's not forget that Michael Lumb's dad was a Yorkshire opener..no doubt where the cricket talent came from there.

    Fantastic that England are world chamions at T20. They truly deserve it and the whole country should be proud of them.

  • Comment number 19.

    As you've said Oliver, when peple make the comments about our batsmen they forget to mention that all the bowlers are English and they've been jsut as good as the batsmen in this tournament. No-one bats an eyelid that New Zealand take all the best Samoan and Fijian rugby players yet the English get ribbed for producing quality players who were born in other countries but brought through the English county system. I won't get too upset though as I know it's only a bit of banter and when it comes to KP it's pure jealousy. Any team out there would love to have a player like him in their side no matter where he was from.

  • Comment number 20.

    We could have done with 'Kiesy' playing a bit more rubbish on the tour.... Somerset are trying to win the County Championship you know!

    Fantastic result! Well done all!

  • Comment number 21.

    Typical BBC really with regards to Jonathan Agnew - just spent the whole tournament crushing teams, and he spends half an article talking about a tedious subject that has been relentlessly discussed since 2005. Funny how he is now excusing Pietersen from the discussion.

    It is everywhere you look, not just in cricket, but New Zealand's rugby team, athletics, football. And it's not a recent thing either, it has been like this for decades. What about Andy Flower, taking the opportunity to coach the national side away from an Englishman - why is this any different?

    PLEASE PLEASE STOP fanning the flames on this incredibly tedious discussion - THERE IS NO DISCUSSION

  • Comment number 22.

    "Think it was a trifle harsh on Bresnan to be lumped on seven with Lumb and Collingwood, as England's worst three players."

    Bresnan did a great job, though he didn't take many wickets.

    Oliver probably should have given Collingwood a mark for batting and a mark for captaincy. 5 and 9 respectively?

    And Bopara was probably our worst player!

    ---

    "Surely now time to get keiswetter and morgan into the test side, unconventional but have so much ability ... bring on the ashes !!"

    Test cricket is a completely different game to Twenty20.

    Kieswetter is simply not good enough with the gloves for T20. Morgan's domestic record is very poor and the shots that have won him plaudits in T20 aren't exactly suited to Test cricket.

    I'm not writing them off, they are young. Morgan I think will make the Test squad within a couple of years.

  • Comment number 23.

    As a Pakistan fan myself, I wanted to give alot of credit for England's victory as they were amazing in every discipline. I feel much better after being heartbroken on Friday when we really should have won. I agree with many of the comments and the article itself but I wanted to mention the bowling of the 20th over by Stuard Broad. His previous over went for 15 and I was worried the same might happen again, considering the damage the Hussey brothers have done and thus was hoping Luke Wright would get another over. But he did something that Saeed Ajmal didnt try and do (although this tactic was better suited for Abdur Razzaq) and this was to bowl wide of the off-stump and make the batsman fetch it (esp Mike Hussey) and I believe only about 5 runs came off that over, compared to the 23 that came off Ajmal in the SF so it was great cricket by England especially at a crucial time where Aus could have reached 160 plus. With regards to the ratings, I would take a point away from Yardy but give an extra point to Eoin Morgan, who I believe has to be considered for the test squad as he has been fantastic. Other than that, agree with the ratings and what most people have said. Well done England !

  • Comment number 24.

    Jibzi

    There's no question that England's bowlers have been by far the best at restricting opponents in the tournament. I don't know why Ajmal, an orthodox spinner, was asked to bowl the final over in the SF. As you suggest, Razzaq, who had overs to spare, might have been a better bet.

  • Comment number 25.

    I agree with Aggers, Kieswetter should not be playing for England (being half Scottish, half South African) but I guess winning trumps all for our selectors. I don't blame Kieswetter, I'd say I was an Aussie if a lucrative contract/career was on offer, but Davies, Foster etc must be dismayed with how they've been overlooked.

    Remember when England had a goalkeeping crisis and someone suggested Almunia after qualifying via residency. Capello answered, "Almunia, for me, is Spanish." There's not much I admire about football, but...

  • Comment number 26.

    Many people have had a pop at KP but he is one of the hardest working guys in the set-up and wasn't it just grand to see him belting out the National Anthem? Take note Rooney & Co!!!

  • Comment number 27.

    Excellent ratings and spot on i feel. People must not forget that this side was specifically picked for the T20 and should only be seen as that right now. A lot of calls for Moggie to get called up to the test squad but i dont think that will happen any time soon if at all. He is an explosive batsman suited mainly to the T20 and ODI. His style will be found out if he were to be promoted to the test side.

  • Comment number 28.

    I have just read Mr Agnew's column and must say that i found it rather disappointing that a senior journalist from the BBC would write such things after England win a world championship. It almost takes the gloss off winning a bit. I m a very pasionate Irishman but support England in the cricket, is that also worrying Mr Agnew? I feel though that its more sour grapes that he never achieved such levels as these players have.

  • Comment number 29.

    Well done to the England team on having a great tournament and having won pretty much all of their matches. Only the ridiculous D&L method tarnished it but it's safe to say that the Windies wouldn't have bettered our score.

    As for the Benny's comments, I can only assume that he's a bitter Australian with a grudge given that we battered his team off the park. No South Africans (or Brits) in this team - only ENGLISH men (Morgan, Lumb, Kieswetter and Pietersen included)

  • Comment number 30.

    Maybe even a 10 for KP. To fly home and back, and then play those 2 innings was superb. Every player has chipped in and balance of team looks great.

  • Comment number 31.

    This was fantastic long overdure achievement for English Cricket.
    Despite inventing the limited over game, never to have won and ICC tournament was an embarrasment.
    Whilst Paul Collingwood has recieved a lot of the plaudits Andy Flower to my mind is the real hero the tournament. The English team in the cup were unrecognisbale from their forebears, motivated effective in all departments of the game, flexible in the conditions and executed their gameplans to perfection, up until now we have never been able to describe our one day sides in this way. To me the real credit is due to Andy Flower who achieved in an area where Lloyd Fletcher or Moores et al only succeeded making our one day game a risible mish mash.

    CONGRATULATIONS TO ANDY FLOWER!!

  • Comment number 32.

    Only KP could play innings like he did throughout this tournament - he butchered Steyn and Morkel, looked totally at ease in the final against some seriously quick bowlers, dispatching them to all parts. Not just getting the runs, but the manner in which they were achieved was something else - each shot was a statement to the bowler, "you can't bowl at me"

    Great player, makes all the calls to drop him over the last 12 months even more comical

  • Comment number 33.

    Generally fair comment all round, personally dont rate Wright quite so highly and feel he will be found out in other forms of the game (50overs etc) but credit where it is due.

    A thought however, in the group stages England did not win a match and it fair to comment that Ireland might, just might have beaten England and put them ut of the tournament.

    One can imagine the comments being written about the team then and their ratings. Sport can be very very fickle.

  • Comment number 34.

    @29.
    The shame! Please don't call me an Australian...
    I'm South African, actually. Although, my grandmother is Italian and because of her I have an Italian passport, so maybe you'd consider me Italian. Well, as Italian as Lumb, Kieswetter and Pietersen are English, that is.
    I'm actually proud of the trio. Our actual SA team is a bunch of losers, so quite happy to see at least our other guys are doing well. Wish it was for the SA team, but that's life.

  • Comment number 35.

    Congrats England - a great game. Stuffing the Ausies is always nice!
    I thought Agnew's column was a bit churlish, although he does have a point. One wonders if there would be half the fuss if the saffers connected players all had Anglo rather than Boer surnames? In any case as it seems from other posts that they all have some UK connection through parentage, what's the problem?
    26 - you obviously don't watch much football as you will not see a harder working sportsman than Rooney, and no, I'm not a Utd fan (my name might be a clue!). As for "belting out" the national anthem, I think you can guarantee Mr Rooney will be doing that too!

  • Comment number 36.

    HMMurdoch:
    To the best of my knowledge, all of these guys now playing for England have at least one English parent, and have spent a large amount of time in England during their training.

    This would not be true of Eoin Morgan.

  • Comment number 37.

    I'm a bit disappointed at Aggers too. Never imagined I'd say that, but Aggers - be careful! As you're getting older you're getting more and more churlish and curmudgeonly. I love Boycs to bits (I really do!) but we don't need another one! You can stand up for tradition and respect (and I hope you will continue to do so) without being bitter and crotchety.

    Delighted with the tone of the comments here, and even more delighted with England's impressive and thoroughly deserved victory. Hell, it's only Twenty20, but it was a lot of fun and for all that the format can be something of a lottery, England's victory was no fluke. Well done boys!

  • Comment number 38.

    England win a world tournament and yet again some people back on the 'being English' rubbish bandwagon. Yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaawn.

    I agree with those who were unhappy with the comments Aggers made. Totally unnecessary.

  • Comment number 39.

    samsonbucket, Ryan Giggs was born in Cardiff, had two Welsh parents and was only brought up in England because his dad Danny Wilson left Wales to play rugby league for Swinton. He never played for the England under 19s, he played for England schoolboys simply because he went to school in England. I am Welsh and comments like this about Giggs really gets my goat. RYAN GIGGS IS WELSH.

  • Comment number 40.

    Michael Lum's ancestry and cricketing pedigree is from Yorkshire, so I don't see how anyone could complain about his inclusion.

    I respect Pietersen's decision to come to England and make it his home and international team, but do find it leaves a slightly sour taste.

    Oh, and just to correct a couple of issues:
    The England cricket team should really be called 'England and Wales' (because of the inclusion of Glamorgan in the county championship and therefore the lack of a separate Welsh team), but also has the rights to Scots and Irish players (in fact also players with passports from other EU countries - we actually could have claimed Shane Warne because he has a Dutch mother...) as they are not test status countries.

    Ryan Giggs was NOT born in England, but is Welsh by both birth and parentage, and therefore was never eligible for the England football team. He was however brought up in Manchester and played for England Schools (where eligibility is based on which school is attended, not on national allegiance).

  • Comment number 41.

    It should also be pointed out that Lumb is an English, not South African surname

    What makes me feel old is that I saw Michael Lumb's dad opening thhe batting for Yorkshire

  • Comment number 42.

    After England winning the T20 world cup, Surely there is a need to bring cricket coverage back to terestrial television. If the England football team won the World cup, we would be talking about it for years, but the coverage is not there from the BBC like it used to be???

  • Comment number 43.

    thegreatmeloni, please don't assume that Australians spend a lot of time commenting on the English team with some sort of bitterness problem, I love the way you just assumed Benny was an australian, Aussies realized we were beaten on the day by a better team, sadly some English people just cant resist having a go at Australians, now that's a bitterness going way back because it has taken England so long to get to this and it must have been hard watching australia fill the trophy cabinet over the years. Congrats to your team they play great cricket.

  • Comment number 44.

    All these people (mainly Australians) complaining about our batsmen, but do remind me where did the Aussies pluck Nannes from... oh yeah, that would be the Netherlands. Stop complaining I lose gracefully.

  • Comment number 45.

    I am an England fan and am pleased to see them win (and convincingly), but I don't feel at all comfortable with the number of foreign born and bred players representing England. The fact is that these guys do not represent the English system and have not developed their game in this country - anyone who thinks otherwise is kidding themselves. I have no problem with Strauss and Prior as they are definitely 'English' despite being born on other shores, but someone that has played for SA u19 should not play for England or anyone besides SA. It represents a serious failure on the ECB's part that so few local cricketers are challenging for places.

  • Comment number 46.

    Player ratings always seem like splitting hairs to me, but these seem reasonable enough I guess.

    Aggers blog (I had to go read it after all your comments!) I agree is a little sour grapes. He claims to have faced the same problems when he was pushing for an England place, yet I seem to remember mainly batsmen being perhaps less English than others. And he did get a chance to represent England, but his performances only persuaded the selectors to pick him three times each for the Test and one day sides - I know what that stat tells me...

    Lumb has a rich English cricketing heritage, significantly more than Agnew has, or indeed more than any son of Agnew's ;) He has lived in the UK for over 10 years.

    Kieswetter has a dual passport and was able to choose between two countries. He chose England. This wasn't to further his cricket career, it was because of his time spent in the UK on holiday with visiting because of his mother and the time spent at school in Somerset. He feels comfortable here and has chosen to live here as a citizen of the UK.

    Anyway Agnew's comments on all these South Africans keeping English players out of the team, as he puts it, is a bit daft in the case of Kieswetter. He could very well open / keep wicket for England in the future - thus keeping Trott (or Strauss?) and Prior (all born in South Africa) out of the team and freeing up an extra place for Agger's son :D

    Finally, on a personal note, my fiancée is Japanese and I would very much like our future children, once they are old enough, to be able to choose which country to live in and perhaps to represent. To think anything different seems ludicrous to me! They will be raised with knowledge of both Japanese and UK languages, customs, history and everything else - in whichever country we decide to raise them.

    Just to stop Aggers having a heart attack though, I have little cricket ability so would not expect any offspring of mine to be pushing for an England place in the future!

  • Comment number 47.

    Aside from the not very controvesial controversy of who comes from what country, surely the thing to shout from the rooftops is that England's legendary, fragile batting line up has at last firmed up.
    Agreed, all our bowlers answered the call as bowlers but also as batsmen.
    Having a side now that genuinely bats down to number 10 must go a huge way to removing the pressure many England batting line-ups have been under in the past. I've watched Bresnan, Swann and Yardy with a big soppy smile on my face throughout the competition.
    That's been the revalation for me. Any batsman can have a bad result - Didn't Mr Gooch suffer a pair on his debut? - but knowing there are batsmen of that calibre to follow must allow any batsman to play his natural game.

  • Comment number 48.

    Well done South Africa! The performances in the semi-final and final were excellent.

    One thing I don't understand however. Although nearly all the runs in both matches were scored by good native South Africans, there was - inexplicably - one English-born player who appeared on the scorecard?

    I realise this didn't make much difference to the overall outcome, as he only contributed 22 over his two innings - but still, I think questions should be asked about this "Paul Collingwood". Who is he, and what is his eligibility to play for the Proteas?

  • Comment number 49.

    35.

    I watch and support football enough and I do at least watch it enough to know and see that Rooney NEVER sings the National Anthem.
    Rather than make judgement on me, try watching it for yourself first when the anthems are played.
    I do not dispute the fact that he is a hard working, brilliant footballer either and hope that he is fit enough to carry the England team through to glory.

  • Comment number 50.

    At the end of the day quick ladder to fame and the might of sterling pound has won in attracting the foreign talents by betraying their home nation. England is not to blame for this but the concerned individual players are. (This is called as Poaching by the way!)

    Having said that, I dont deny England's victory, they are very well deserved T20 champions, they played like champions right from the begining. Absolutely no doubt about that. Well Done England.

  • Comment number 51.

    I completely agree with the ratings for each of the england players. England fully deserve to win the ICC World Twenty20. Every individual has played at their best and lets hope this England team can continue this success in the future. England had luck on their side.
    Its good to see this time the England Men are better than the England Women

  • Comment number 52.

    This is my opinion on the whole South African (and Ireland) debate:

    Lumb's father played for Yorkshire, Lumb has played most of his senior cricket in England. If you play all of your crcket in England, you should be classed as English.

    KP: Told by South Africans that he wouldn't get in the side due to his comments about the racial quota system. He has an English mother and England wanted him so there is nothing wrong with him.

    Kieswetter: Leaves you feeling that you want an Englishman but he did choose England over SA.

    Morgan: He felt that he needed to play for England to improve his career prospects. England chose him so we should accept him.

    In terms of ratings, KP should have got a 10 for his inspirational batting displays and Colly should have got a 6 as for a number four batsman, his batting wasn't good enough.

  • Comment number 53.

    jonny-h:
    "KP: Told by South Africans that he wouldn't get in the side due to his comments about the racial quota system. He has an English mother and England wanted him so there is nothing wrong with him."

    I wouldn't say England "wanted him". In South Africa, he was an average off-spinner who batted down the order. He wanted to move to England, found an opportunity at Notts. At Notts, he flourished and the rest is history.

  • Comment number 54.

    I really do find all this 'are they English?' debate really nauseating that once again English/British success is side tracked by another issue.

    I live in the USA, I was born in Germany to English parents-whilst my father was serving in the British military. I could represent either the USA or England or Germany in any sporting event.
    I do not believe it would even be an issue if I represented the US. Martina Navaratilova is accepted as a great US tennis champion, no-one would ever mention she was not born in the US. Over 30 members of the last US summer Olympics team were not born in the US.
    Similarly, the French World Cup winning side of 1998, was made up of several key players who were not born in France (Desailly, Thuram, Vieira). Did this negate the French success?

    I think England should be proud that people of talent and success wanting to represent England. But for the record, Derek Pringle, Ted Dexter, Dermot Reeve, Geraint Jones, Phil Edmonds, Owais Shah, Allan Lamb, Robin Smith, Devon Malcolm, Andy Caddick were all English players not born in England. In fact it was 1992, when 7 English players were born outside England. Why is it only an issue when England are successful?

  • Comment number 55.

    I have to wonder if Mr Brett follows the county game. Sussex won two limited overs competitions and were finalists in the other with Yardy playing a very full part with the ball. That is how he reminded the selectors of his value.

    FPT 10 matches 56.4 overs @ 5.17 econ
    P40 8 matches 36 overs @ 6 econ
    T20 13 matches 47.1 overs @ 5.38 econ

  • Comment number 56.

    First and foremost congratulations to England on a well merited victory, and may I hasten to add done in some style. I cant remember any tournament where England have looked so solid in every department.

    Now for Agnews and Athertons comments about, well lets put in politely the ethnicity of the team.

    If we were to put a solely English team out there, i'm sure they would have been on the plane home before the super 8s, probably still stuck somewhere in an ash cloud. It's complete nonsense to think this would undermine the victory in any way. Were these commentators saying the same thing when England won the ashes in 2005 with the help of a certain KP, I don't think so. Oh yes another S.A helped us win the final 2009 ashes test so whats the point of demeriting this victory

    And hold on, every English cricket fan has been celebrating the 20:20 victory, do people really care what the make up of the team. As long as the team is successful and has a nucleus for success then thats all that matters.

    Maybe Agnew and Athers would have preferred to see Cook open instead of Kieswetter, prior instead of KP, shah instead of Morgan, and make England look like a laughing stock. At least Agnew and Athers would have been happy, heehee.

    Congrats to Andy Flower and Colly, who I hope can sort his batting out and make this ENGLISH team even stronger.

  • Comment number 57.

    To those Australians complaining about the inter-racial nature of the England side, the bowlers who skittled out your best batsmen are all English. Then, almost a quarter of the inhabitants of Australia, that's well over five million, were born somewhere else. Are you telling these people, including lots of kids, that they are not "proper" Australians and can't represent their adopted country at sport? If so, that's more than a little bit racist.

    Now, to Oliver's list. Not a lot to argue with; to call people scoring 7 the "worst performers", as someone did, is splitting hairs - 7 is a very good rating over a series. However, I think your score and comments about Colly are a little grudging. It's impossible to quantify the influence of captaincy. So, I think a successful captain deserves an extra point or two for the intangibles. After all, he's the one who has to pick up the pieces if things start to wobble. And, if England had flopped in the Super Eights, Colly would have lost his job. His relative failure with the bat is irrelevant since he was never called upon to save the day - something he excels at. So, for me, Colly is an 8 or possibly even a 9. Why do we not include the coach in these ratings? The strategic thinking behind this success deserves tons of credit; I'm giving Flowers 9.

  • Comment number 58.

    They're british and I'm british. They're proud and I'm proud. If people have such problems then, why do Spanish players play in the Football Premier League? Why do Dutch players play in the Spanish Football League?

    At the end of the day, they are BRITISH, that is all that matters. You can have a moan and groan but at the end of the day it won't get you anywhere, so please carry on.... These players represent England because it is in their blood, you lot can brag all you want because what I say is true.

  • Comment number 59.

    Fair enough about Pietersen, Lumb...etc but i do think that it is rather unfair that England were allowed to take Morgan. I don't think its right for a player from the country they chose to play for to decide that they don't want to play for them anymore because another more successful country wants them. Nannes and Morgan should be ashamed of themselves, it is truly embarrassing to abandon a country who was willing to take you and develop you into the cricketer you are.

  • Comment number 60.

    msteele, Ireland do not play test cricket and won't in Morgan's lifetime. He has an opportunity to play at the highest level, competing with the best players in the world. Cricket is not a sport in Ireland, surely you can understand why someone with as much talent and appreciation of the game would want to play at the highest level, if their nation doesn't hold it close to their heart other than when there's a world cup on?

    Nannes was born in Australia, he has dutch ancestry

  • Comment number 61.

    All this talk of players born overseas has been raised every time a non England born player does well in the England side. Am I correct in remebering that the great Bob Woolmer was born in Rhodesia (or SA)? Robin Cook was born in SA, there are countless others - just look in any wisden year book.
    So what where they were born. If they swear alligence to the flag let them play (thats all you need to do to get British nationality these days isn't it?).

    If you are eligable to play and are good enough to play that should be the be all and end all. Did the players have any choice in where they were born? They did have a choice in what nationality they wanted to be, so let us respect them for it. (end of rant).

  • Comment number 62.

    Swann was Englands best player in the T20. You either have international class or you don't. This man has it in spades. I would describe his bowling abilty as ordinary but his application and determination as extraordinary. well done that man and Team England bring on the ashes.

  • Comment number 63.

    Douglas Jardine - the most 'English' of Englishmen, was born in Bombay to a Scottish mother.

    Gubby Allen was born in Australia.

    The Nawab of Pataudi played for England, and then went on to captain India.

    Kepler Wessels captained both Australia and South Africa.

    I didn't have to search very hard for these, there will be plenty of others. The reality is that Cricket is played almost exclusively by countries with strong post-Colonial links, and it should be no surprise that many players will have links with multiple nations - and more with England, as we were the colonizer.

    Agnew's reactionary stance on this is arguably racist. What he wants in the side, it seems, are people who *sound* English, and have English-sounding names - as per his definition of English.

    Welcome to the 21st Century.

  • Comment number 64.

    If there were enough English batsmen knocking on the door and proving themselves as being up to delivering the kind of performance that Kieswetter can then there wouldn't even be an issue here. Simple fact is we need more English batsmen with that "do or die" attitude who can hit the ball cleanly and powerfully. There have been very few standing up to be counted in that way, Luke Wright and Dimitri Mascarenhas being good examples but not for the opener role as Flower sees it.

  • Comment number 65.

    I think Aggers is right in expressing his views. Home grown talents he mentioned in his article are waiting to find a place in NATIONAL TEAM after playing so much in the county but suddenly all these players are coming to take their place.

  • Comment number 66.

    i agree with the rankings.

    yardy is the sussex captain so i guess it is up to him how much, or how little, he bowls his darts!

    luke wright (another sussex player) has matured, and may well force his way into the test team very soon.

    bedwetter is awesome with the bat at the top of the order!

  • Comment number 67.

    @ 58

    Slight correction, they are English first (British second) - as am I.

    The only people who refer to themselves as British are those that have no true allegiance to either England, Wales, Scotland or N.I.

    To quote Churchill - 'British by birth, English by the grace of god"

  • Comment number 68.

    all you english being afronted bout being accused of playing a whole team of south africans and Irish,, I remember the stick Jack Charlton got for playing 'Irish' qualified players in teh republic team. everywhere you turned there was a joke about someones granny having spend two weeks in Ireland so jack wanted to see him kick a football.
    the worm has tiurned and you lot cant take it .
    so time to bend over and take it and shut up stop whining ,. pick your own players!!

  • Comment number 69.

    Hmmmm, being troubled by the fact that several representatives of your national side developed in other systems and came to England for career purposes is hardly something akin to any type of racism. I would suggest that, if someone feels it takes a little sheen, just a little, off the feeling of joy that comes with victory it is not racism but idealism. I would prefer our next bowling or batting hero to be brit, or at least to have been educated and brought up in the UK

  • Comment number 70.

    re: 13
    Andy Flower was born in South Africa

  • Comment number 71.

    @69. Precisely my point. These guys *didn't* develop their cricket outside England. They developed it playing for English counties. The only difference between them and Chris Read or James Foster is they have foreign-sounding names. For the record:

    Morgan (24) - 6 Years at Middlesex
    Lumb (30) - 10 years at Yorkshire
    Pieteresen (29 just)- 10 Years with Notts and Hampshire
    Kieswetter (22) - Somerset 5 years

    In other words, for all of the 4, pretty much all their senior cricket has been with English Counties.

  • Comment number 72.

    66. Your post, and another, has made me re-assess Yardy's bowling contributions for Sussex. I had been under the impression that at Sussex he was more a batter who bowled than the other way round (as he is with England). Incidentally, when I suggested here or elsewhere a few months ago that Yardy was a viable candidate for England I was castigated by a couple of people!

    Luke Wright may well be the first person called Luke to play Test cricket, in fact it will be interesting to see if he forces his way in in time for the Ashes.

    Finally, if you are so keen on our new opening batsman so much, perhaps you can refrain from that unfortunate monicker you have for him!

  • Comment number 73.

    Afraid I now feel I need to wade into the debate.

    The bottom line is you either accept ICC rules or you do not. If a player is eligible to play for two (or more) nations then that player must be allowed to make the choice. Steve Smith was eligible to play for England by dint of having an English mother (he was also born here), but opted to play for Australia instead. The majority of his cricket has been played in this country but he is perfectly entitled to make his choice. Andrew Symonds' also chose Australia and, again, that's fine.

    Kieswetter and Lumb had a choice of who they played for. Both have played a significant amount of cricket in this country, with Lumb having a strong heritage of English cricket. Both are settled here with family. Why on earth should they not choose England, and why on earth should England not choose them?

    KP also had a choice of two countries by virtue of his parents. He chose England, based largely on the fact that he agreed with our selection policies and not theirs. It would be nice if it was a more romantic tale but its not, and there can be no doubting his commitment to the country's cause since 2005. Surprised that Aggers highlights KP's case as being OK.

    Also disappointed at Atherton's comments, as he is an excellent journalist and a great ambassador for the game. However, I don't recall him ever having any ethical concerns when selecting Allan Lamb to bolster the England batting order.

    Rules is rules. All cricketers push the limits of the rules to their own ends on the pitch. England are working well within the rules off the pitch. Probably time to get over it.

  • Comment number 74.

    well done England finally the cup comes home from where the game of cricket originated.It was an excellent contribution from all the players of the team. What a player you are Pieterson I have got no words to appreciate your skills. Brilliant, excellent and superb performance through out the tournament.
    Well done boys and keep England`s flag up and high.

  • Comment number 75.

    I seem to recall that Michael Colin Cowdrey's Indian birthplace wasn't felt to compromise his right to captain England; also that such famous Englishmen as His Highness Prince Kumar Shri Sir Ranjitsinghi, his nephew Duleepsinghi, The Nawab of Pataudi and Raman Subba Row were all acceptable in 'the good old days'. The negative posters really need to grow up, and recognise that nationality and eligibility are not necessarily the same thing.

  • Comment number 76.

    All these people (mainly Australians) complaining about our batsmen, but do remind me where did the Aussies pluck Nannes from... oh yeah, that would be the Netherlands.

    Ummm he was born in australia

  • Comment number 77.

    72. At 06:58am on 19 May 2010, Oliver Brett - BBC Sport wrote:
    66. Your post, and another, has made me re-assess Yardy's bowling contributions for Sussex. I had been under the impression that at Sussex he was more a batter who bowled than the other way round (as he is with England).

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

    In first class cricket you would be right as Sussex use him almost exclusively as a batsman, and he is a very fine one too. Rarely bowls at all, especially with a spin option like Nash (our other opening batsman) available.

    However, in the short stuff be is used primarily as a bowler and will bowl most (often all) of his allocation. He has even been known to bat as low as No9.

    It is all to do with the difference in the formats.

  • Comment number 78.

    Are the Royal Family English???

  • Comment number 79.

    There certainly is a great debate on whether these players should be playing for England, but I would like to throw an obvious point into this. Who can truely say they are purely descended from one country. I am pretty sure the number that can would be minute in comparison to the total population.
    Thus ends the case, let these guys continue to rpove they have the skills to play international cricket whether its T20 or test matches.

  • Comment number 80.

    I never understood the Bresnan selection. I just do not think he is international quality. He is a above average county player at best. Very disappointed with the selection when we have Anderson and probably our best fast bowler Steve Harmison waiting in the wings. Still - horses for courses? I'm not convinced though, Anderson would of brought wickets and could have been used selectively depending on the situation. He might leak some runs but when the opposition are down and Anderson runs in at 88mph with late swing it can seriously finish a game and he should have been used as our partnership breaker which I think we were seriously lucky not to need at many times in the tournament. If you wanted to keep it tight then we had Colly who has bowled really well in the past to come up with 2 overs. Can't see Collingwood being smacked out of the ground with just 2 overs of bowling.

  • Comment number 81.

    The English team played attacking confident cricket apart from against WI. Worthy winners with a very smart coach who I suspect will outwit Nielsen come the Ashes in Aus.

    There is some weird comments on here about Nannes. He was born in Australia, skied for Australia, played all his cricket in Australia for clubs then Victoria, then decided to try international cricket on his Dutch passport that was given him through his parents.

    Netherlands stole him from the Aussies, it was hardly the other way round.

  • Comment number 82.

    I must admit Miles, I thought it was rude that Anderson wasn't even given one game. How far down does a team need to bat after all?

 

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.