BBC HomeExplore the BBC
This page was last updated in October 2007We've left it here for reference.More information
Listen to Radio Five Live Sports Extra - BBC Radio Player

Test Match Special

The blog from the boundary

England Test ratings

  • Blog Editor
  • 31 Jul 07, 12:38 PM

By Ashley Giles, Warwickshire and England spin bowler
Ashley GilesThese are my ratings for the England players who went down to a seven-wicket defeat by India at Trent Bridge to go 1-0 down in the series.

Please let me know whether you think I have been too generous - or a bit too harsh - on anyone.

Andrew Strauss - 6. Produced a battling knock in the second innings and started to look more like his old self.

Alastair Cook - 5. Two starts from the Essex youngster but neither was converted into the big score England desperately needed.

Michael Vaughan - 9. The skipper showed his usual good leadership and responded in difficult circumstances with his 17th Test hundred - one of his best.

Kevin Pietersen - 5. His two failures here emphasised how important he is to the team. He was shaken up by the beamer from Sree Santh in the second innings.

Paul Collingwood - 7. Played well both times but undid all his good work by getting himself out twice.

Ian Bell - 5. We have yet to see the best of my county colleague in this series. He was stuck with the tail in the first innings and struggled.

Matt Prior - 5. He may have taken five catches in India's first innings but he didn't come up with the runs his team were looking for.

Chris Tremlett - 8. Impressive with the ball but he needs to work out a method for batting at number eight.

Ryan Sidebottom - 8. One wicket in the first innings did not do his excellent bowling justice. Batted well and could be promoted up the order ahead of Tremlett

Monty Panesar - 6. Flattered by the tail-end wickets he picked up, although he bowled steadily.

James Anderson - 6. Tried hard, and was full of energy and passion, but not as impressive as he was at Lord's.

Post a comment

Please note Name and E-mail are required.

Comments are moderated, and will not appear on this weblog until the author has approved them.

Contact details

Comments

  1. At 12:42 PM on 31 Jul 2007, mat wrote:

    Prior- five straightforward catches but 20 byes conceded, only 11 runs scored in two innings and struggles against spin and swing.
    That's as well as an embarrassing load of witless banter and a lot of posturing in the press - 'I'm a winner etc'.
    But jellybeans surely never did anyone any harm though. Why the fuss?

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  2. At 12:46 PM on 31 Jul 2007, joshua leppard wrote:

    i think these ratings are fine - maybe sidebottom a little generous. What i cant understand is there has been so little mention of the declaration at Lords. The 'apparent' over rate was brought up - red herring in my view - but what were england up to after prior was out? lots of wasted time and runs with Pieterson patting it around and not taking runs or attacking. if he had got stuck in along with the rest of the tail, england would have scored more runs, quicker - and then had time to bowl India out.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  3. At 12:46 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Jamie wrote:

    Good effort from the lads, but ultimately we were let down by the batting in the first innings. I honestly think that the England team is the better team, even with this bowling attack. Tremlett should have been bowling for England quite some time ago, Sidebottom is still justifying his inclusion and Anderson just needs to be persisted with, because he definitely is good enough. If and when Freddie and Hoggard get back to full fitness then maybe they should be brought back in, but unless they are completely back to full fitness then I say stick with this bowling attack.

    Bell should not be batting down the order where he is. He has had success for England batting 3 and 4 so get him back up there. Collingwood would be a good option to bat with the tail so push him down, get Prior up and get him playing his natural game. When the pressure is off we know he can score runs and having him protecting our rather long tail is just denying him this.

    We will win the 3rd test and level the series, I am sure of it.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  4. At 12:49 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Baba devani wrote:

    Gilo - are you being harsh on Monty - I thought he was steady on a wicket that didn't do much for him (kumble same) and he had little rough to bowl at. His line and length were pretty good even against two of the finest batsmen against spin. On the other hand, Strauss may have got runs, but he still looks out of sorts. I thought you could have been a bit o more generous with Sidebottom - he bowled beautifully at India, and Pietersen deserves less than a 5. C'mon - get off the fence!

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  5. At 01:06 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Rob wrote:

    England was always up against it in this Test after they lost the toss. I think the two sides are quite well matched and England's new bowling attack has played pretty well. There's only 4 of them really.

    Think Gilo's comments are fair enough, although 6 is a bit low for Monty, despite the odd full toss he bowled.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  6. At 01:07 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Saurabh wrote:

    It was a great test display by both the teams, but to make the series more classic, the host will be requiring to include some big guns like "Tresco"/"Freddie". I am an admirer of Kevin, and looking forward for a great innings from him.

    Let's hope that there is no intervention of rain/showers in the next match and both the teams grill themselves in the ground.

    The class of Zaheer Khan has been displayed by a fantastic piece of bowling, but the same is still awaited from the hosts. They have to come up with the same standards as they played against Ozs.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  7. At 01:11 PM on 31 Jul 2007, tom wrote:

    We need Gilo at number 8, as i read a article that you writ the other day about the importance of been able to bat at number 8 and you said that if you would of got a score of or 30, you thought that who had done a good job for the time, now that your not there England are missing on the extra runs that could possible win games

    ps i met you droitwich high street

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  8. At 01:12 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Andy D wrote:

    Surely on figures alone Tremlett was our best bowler - whe all around were getting knocked about he took six wickets at less than 2 an over...pretty impressive stuff!

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  9. At 01:25 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Tailender wrote:

    Pretty fair ratings all round, though I'd rate Cook higher than Bell or Pietersen (perhaps a 6)

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  10. At 01:28 PM on 31 Jul 2007, paul davies wrote:

    Gilo must have filed his copy early ..... he talks about "the England players who went down to a NINE-wicket defeat by India at Trent Bridge to go 1-0 down in the series.

    It was bad, Ash, but not that bad!!

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  11. At 01:33 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Kris Witherington wrote:

    Great innings from Vaughan but got no luck in the end. The long tail is still a problem and none of the top order seem to know how to look after them. Colly gave it a go second innings but the game was up by then.

    If Hoggard is fit then he has to come in for Jimmy. This will at least give us a bit more controll and make better use of the new ball if it is swinging.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  12. At 01:34 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Raihan wrote:

    Bell never delivers when required, time for the chop. The match was lost on day 1 but overall it was a great test match. Well played India - Zaheer Khan was outstanding.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  13. At 01:37 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Mohammed Azharuddin wrote:

    The Indian ratings

    Jaffer 7
    Karthik 7
    Dravid 5
    Tendulkar 7
    Ganguly 8
    Laxman 7
    Dhoni 4
    Kumble 6
    Singh 8
    Khan 9
    Sreesanth 4

    Feel free to comment

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  14. At 01:47 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Laurence Allen wrote:

    Gilo, I thought Monty bowled very well under the circumstances of a) flat pitch b)no rough. Every batsman whether it be 1 to 11 is a crucial wicket. I can think of a view times when you havent bagged any tail enders! so 6 is harsh!

    As for Sreesanth, again, to say he didnt mean to bowl a beamer isnt true. If you remember he bowled one at Vaughan a bit later on which was marginal, plus the shoulder barging and the no ball bouncer means this guy is a hot head who was justifiably fined. Even the apology to Pietersen after the beamer was half hearted.

    If England had won the toss, im sure it would have been totally a different game and I am confident they will do the business at the Oval, especially as Tremlett seems to be finding his groove. The bounce should suit him down to the ground and I back Monty to take a few wickets as well

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  15. At 01:52 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Peter wrote:

    Gilo,

    I know you have a lot of experience and nous but is that the best you can do? I'm afraid I find your analysis a bit lightweight and stating the obvious. Lets have a bit of an insight that can only come from the experience you have. Thanks - Pete.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  16. At 01:55 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Andy Cook wrote:

    Hang on a minute Gilo, On the whole pretty fair summary BUT and it's a big BUT you say that Monty was...."Flattered by the tail-end wickets he picked up..." He got ANOTHER 4 wicket haul in the first innings, two of which were Karthik and Dravid numbers 1 & 3 respectively - Kumble didn't get any of our top 6 out in either innnings! I've noticed your comments on Monty previously and I don't think on the whole you give him the credit he deserves with the ball.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  17. At 01:56 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Murali wrote:

    Hey Giles,

    I think you wrote too soon. It was 'seven' wicket defeat!! :)

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  18. At 01:58 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Robin smith wrote:

    Flattered by tail-end wickets? Come on Gilo, in unhelpful conditions Monty kept a lid (went for under 3 an over) on some of the best players of spin in the world - I would have given him at least an 8.

    This test was lost by the batsmen. Collingwood probably deserves a 4 for getting out when set at times when his team really needed him.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  19. At 02:05 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Alex wrote:

    I think that if Cook is a 5 then I think that 7 is a little generous to Collingwood.

    Cook was unlucky to be out in the first innings but MUST work out how to avoid being an lbw candidate.

    I am afraid that the England batting line up with the exception of Vaughan failed to realise that even from the first innings this was a test for batting for long periods and not giving it away.

    Bell got a jaffa early in the 2nd and can't really blame him for that. However, needs to get some runs soon or will be under threat.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  20. At 02:06 PM on 31 Jul 2007, abdullah wrote:

    I believe few players are again over rated

    bell should get 0 this time around another failure

    Prior again 3 only ...batted poorly and irresponsible wicket keeping

    India did outclassed

    GOOD luck

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  21. At 02:08 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Pete wrote:

    Gilo, a tad harsh on Monty I feel... surely if you are a bowler, you want to take wickets regardless of who they are, and the four he took helped keep India under 500 when it seemed inevitable they'd soar above it. Agreed though, he wasn't as good as Sidebottom or Tremlett, but I feel he warrants a bump up to a 7.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  22. At 02:10 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Andrew wrote:

    I take it this scale runs from 5-10? Honestly what does a player have to do to get a score lower then 5?

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  23. At 02:14 PM on 31 Jul 2007, simon wrote:

    5 for Bell and Prior.... Very generous

    Bell scoring 30 odd runs in two outings, 4 maybe even 3.

    and prior, in the team for his batting. he is a mug with a big mouth. he will soon be found out to be just a bully. bring back a wicketkepper who can keep wicket. 11 runs in two innings. 3 maybe, 4 if he is lucky.

    he scored a century against west indies. their bowling attack is as good as a sunday club side.

    bell for Bopara at the oval

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  24. At 02:16 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Paul Bennett wrote:

    Overall ratings in line with my opinion.

    Shame to lose the test but all credit to India who did what they had to do and did it well.

    Both teams are evenly matched with luck playing the major role in both this and the last match.

    LBW not given against Sreesanth in the last knockings of the first test whereas plenty of LBW decisions given against us in the first innings of this one. Similarly LBWs not given early in the India first innings that would have been given on another day.

    Rain called a halt to our winning drive in the first test whereas rain helped the Indians in the first innings of this test.

    Finally Michael Vaughan's dismissal yesterday was the only thing that would have ended his otherwise chanceless innings. More bad luck.

    Having said that, if you believe in Karma then I reckon England got a good dose of instant karma for their mindless sledging antics and so deserve to be 1 down.

    Let's hope that England pull their collective fingers out for the Oval test and draw the series with a relatively sledge-free quality match.

    Well done India, and I hope you learn from this England.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  25. At 02:16 PM on 31 Jul 2007, james wrote:

    In contrast to the series against the West Indies, the series against India has been high quality stuff - and, at times, exciting. So both teams deserve credit in this respect.

    I also reckon England's seamers will have learned a lot from their hard graft on Saturday & Sunday.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  26. At 02:18 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Mendel Claxton wrote:

    I believe England are the better side. I am a West Indian who has always followed English cricket and this time I felt that key umpiring mistakes favored India and made a difference in the outcome.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  27. At 02:18 PM on 31 Jul 2007, wip wrote:

    Correction: 7 wicket defeat????

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  28. At 02:22 PM on 31 Jul 2007, chris briggs wrote:

    Ashley,

    I felt your ratings were reasonable, but perhaps slightly influenced by your envy of Monty. He is by far the best spin talent we have had for years and this pitch gave him no help. I thought he battled well against the little master in the first innings.

    Strauss is still struggling, but will come back strong. Petierson is a legend, but was distracted by sledging and didn't apply himself.

    Of course Vaughan deserves 9/10. He proved yesterday that it is not only his captaincy that keeps him in the side. When he plays well he is the most wonderful of our batsmen to watch. Let's hope the knees keep going!

    Prior shows talent and we should give him a run in the side (patience is called for, after all Jones had his go)

    Tremlett looks promising, and we now have a real selection problem with the bowling attack, although I still think Freddie is a must when fit and Harmison and Hoggard will get the nod.

    roll on the Oval

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  29. At 02:24 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Mahesh S. Panicker wrote:

    Gilo, I think You have underrated Monty!. 2 of his 4 wickets has been that of Rahul Dravid, and Dinesh Karthik!. and he would have more top order wickets, had Simon Tauffel would have been somewhere nere his usual self!!.
    Bell has been poor throughout, and I would have given him 3/4. remember he had put down a chance as well!.
    Michael Vaughan finally would have got a 9, though after some thoughts!. his removing the closing fielder on the 2nd bowl of the test match really did not help matters, and was something unexpected from one of the best captains in the world!.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  30. At 02:26 PM on 31 Jul 2007, AB wrote:

    A "seven-wicket defeat"...

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  31. At 02:34 PM on 31 Jul 2007, awhiz wrote:

    "Kevin Pietersen - 5. His two failures here emphasised how important he is to the team. He was shaken up by the beamer from Sree Santh in the second innings."

    The second sentence. I dunno why every now and then this is being mentioned. Is KP a kid? how long he has been playing crciket? Man, Giles, i know you are a tricky bowler, but writing, that too about cricket is trickier than you actually think. Just coz a beamer, his rating has come down or what? I thought he got enough time before the next ball or even the before tha ball for which he got out.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  32. At 02:36 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Anonymous wrote:

    i think they are fair ratings, monty bowled well without any luck so did sidebottom, i think bell bats too low down myslef, in the first innings epecially he looked frustrated

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  33. At 02:40 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Atul wrote:

    I'm not sure I agree with Ian Bell being rated as highly as Alastair Cook for this match. He has a limited range of shots and was a worse batsman than Matt Prior. Also, he lacks the ability to play longer that's required at number six at least in Tests. I guess he could be rated better as a close in fielder. At least Cook gave some kind of stability needed at the top as an opener should.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  34. At 02:46 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Kevin wrote:

    Sour grapes Mr Giles; 6 for Monty? I thought he again bowled well on a pretty flat wicket and broke key partnerships as well as cleaning up the tail?

    Your comment "flattered by the tail-end wickets..." is from the same family of b*tchyness that I expect to hear when my girlfriend (reasonably attractive) is commenting on an absolute stunner on the other side of the road!

    Jealousy is ugly...very ugly!

    Vaughan's century was pure class; it's absurd that he's not in the 1-day team.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  35. At 02:50 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Guy wrote:

    Bell gets a 5?!!
    That's 4 more than he deserves and shows that we will never get it right whilst we carry passengers like Bell and actually believe he makes a meaningful contribution.
    Our tail now begins at 6 and Giles is wearing rose coloured glasses if he thinks Bell is anything but a good county player. Of course they are colleagues so that says it all!

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  36. At 02:51 PM on 31 Jul 2007, paul wrote:

    Great column Gilo - hope your hip is recovering be great to see you playing again soon.

    My comment would be - How many chances are we going to give to Ian Bell? To many times when we need him most he goes missing.

    Trapped on his crease yesterday - just not good enough! It is ok thrashing the attacks of west indies and Bangladesh around, we should look for new blood on the S Lanka and N zealand tours. J Denly of Kent is a great prospect.

    Paul

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  37. At 02:52 PM on 31 Jul 2007, John wrote:

    Aggression and banter are all part and parcel of the game but I wish the boys would concentrate harder on thier game than trying to get some sort of psychological advantage. Surely picking up one or two wickets would have had a better influence on their game than silly school boy tactics

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  38. At 02:56 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Craig wrote:

    5 for Pietersen, Bell and Prior? come on ashley, none of them performed with the bat, only belly got a start in the 1st innings. 2 for pietersen the big-head, 3 for bell for his 1st inning work and 3 for prior for his work behind the stumps.

    Englands batting has once again been exposed, with only 2 or 3 making decent scores in each innings against india (referring to the 1st test also).

    And Pietersen? a joke's been made of the jelly bean incident but he showed total disrespect to the indian players and even though i'm an england fan, i'm not so gutted they got beat, just to spite him. he really does think he's all that!

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  39. At 03:07 PM on 31 Jul 2007, g wrote:

    Gilo - a classic example why an ex-team member who is close to the setup should not bother commenting on this. They were thumped and not one England player gets less than 5? KP 5? One wicket for Sidey and he rates 8?

    If turning up to play gives you an automatic 5 points then it should be rated 1-5 with 0 for turning up.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  40. At 03:09 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Ajay Shah wrote:

    By the way what is the point in having Ashley at no. 8 at last england have a wicket taking spinner rather than a non speaking negative bowler with a lack of talent.

    In England's team tresco and maybe Freddie would make a difference.

    Also remember India are without Munaf Patel who is a quality bowler and the loss of form of Sehwag (who still averages above 50 in tests) and Harbhajan (who took 9 wickets this week at the Oval).

    So England aren't the only team missing players.

    Usual England scenario where the press one week build them up to be world beaters and then bring them down just as quickly !

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  41. At 03:10 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Kevin wrote:

    Paul Bennett;

    Vaughan's innings was brilliant but not chance-less; he top-edged a pull that vounced off his helmet and over Dhoni after being hit in the ribs by Zaheer Khan. But still an awesome knock.

    But India have had no more luck than England in either test; it is sour grapes to say so. England (luckily) won the toss at lords and gained the upper-hand in the match but were overly-cautious on days 1 & 4. They were actually lucky to have had so much play on day 5, given the forecast. And they were lucky that the umpires spoke to Vaughan and let him bring on the spinners instead of offering the light to the Indian batsman straight away.

    The 2nd test, India (luckily) won the toss and made the most of it. But England were very lucky to dismiss their middle-order with shocking decisions which gave England a chance to save the game. Great bowling from Indian seamers yesterday won them the game.

    So credit (not begrudging credit) where it's due please. The series is very well set-up now and it's a shame that the 3rd test will be the final 1 (when there were 4 against the Windies). Though the money from the 1-day matches makes the itinery understandable (though not justifyable!)

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  42. At 03:10 PM on 31 Jul 2007, KBS wrote:

    by and large fair.
    But cook batted better than Bell. yet both get 5 each.
    Panesar bowled better than anderson. yet both get 6.
    Tremlett , I thought deserves a 9
    Bell 4
    Anderson 5

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  43. At 03:11 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Ian Edney wrote:

    1st innings batting display apart it was a good effort, and i am confident England will level the contest at the Oval, One area of concern is the length of the tail, Tremlett with his physical prowess could easily become a fixture in the side, especially when you consider Harmisons waywardness

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  44. At 03:24 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Bob Preston wrote:

    I think Ashley is being a liitle hard on Monty. Compare his performance with Kumble's. He took 6 in the match - 3 in each innings - ALL tailenders apart from Prior. Monty took four in his one effort - 2 high order batsmen and 2 tailenders. Average per wicket is pretty much the same too. Kumble is a vastly experienced spinner and he looked as if he could have bowled for a month before he got out any of England's upper order. Monty is the best spin bowler this country has produced in two generations.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  45. At 03:32 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Arthur Shearer wrote:

    Dear Ashley Giles,
    Surely the ratings should be higher than that - as they appear to be playing with/by themselves or do you not feel qualified to make an assessment of the Indian Test players?Perhaps not your remit? Not allowed to leave the parish pump or the village green!
    General point on English commentators in all sports - anal-obsessed with one team and all individual performances of English players appear to be dependent upon the internal workings of the individual and not influenced by the performance of their opponents.Serious competition for the Americans and their antediluvian ways! Need to do better BBC. 4/10

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  46. At 03:40 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Surcha wrote:

    hey Mendel Claxton, what about the decision to Sachin & Ganguly. Everyone knows Ganguly plays like a devil once he gets his century. England would have lost by an innings if Taufel got his decision right.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  47. At 03:49 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Dom wrote:

    Can I also join the chorus of 'Bit hard on Monty'? If it hadn't been for a couple of terrible umpiring decisions he would have had at least two more wickets (the openers), on a pitch not particularly conducive to spin. As others have already stated, this game was lost by the batsmen (notably the middle order).

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  48. At 03:50 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Hywel Davies wrote:

    The Indian tean would give Pietersen a 10 for inspiring Zaheer Khan's performance - and Prior's infantile antics are an embarrassment.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  49. At 03:52 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Paul wrote:

    Aside from Vaughan, Tremlett and Sidebottom I think you have been a bit generous.

    Cook, Bell and Prior all failed. What did they do to earn 5? At least Anderson put in a lot of effort.

    Should Tremlett be expected to get runs from no.8? His job is to bowl. If the previous 7 batsmen haven't scored runs you can't really expect the following 4 to.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  50. At 03:57 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Gary Clough wrote:

    Well done Tremlett and Vaughnie, 2 big positives to come out of this Test. I still believe young "ding dong" Bell can make a big influence in years to come, so be patient, he will come good.
    Cookie, I think you might have to look over your shoulder for the revitalised Tres, a break will probably do you good. Big talent without a doubt though.
    GC

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  51. At 04:04 PM on 31 Jul 2007, arran wrote:

    as an india fan obviously im delighted with the result i think sreesanth is seeing the red mist a bit 2 often and needs 2 be taken 2 one side and calmed down i also think that it was a very firey test match and i belived it was a vital toss 2 win and zaheer khan played excellently and was in my opinion man of the match. england had a few good performances from vaughn hu played excellently but it wasnt enough for them well done india!!!

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  52. At 04:12 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Steve M wrote:

    Monty underated a least an 8 for his 4 wicket haul again - in unsuitable conditions for him

    Colly, Prior and Bell well overated @ 7 & 5's - to say the last 2 where poor is an understatement

    James Anderson is too unreliable - Hoggy to replace him, if fit and i'd say bring back Nixon for Prior - he is the only wickie at the moment who can hang around with the middle/lower order

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  53. At 04:14 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Sri Baddam wrote:

    The rating for monty panesar is too low as he picked up the wickets of Karthik and Dravid on a non turning seamer friendly wicket.
    Also Ian bell has been one of the reasons for the second innings collapse so he deserves a smaller score like a 3.
    I totally agrre that Vaughan played as determined an innings as one could in the circumstances and also scored at a good pace to keep the indian team on the back foot.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  54. At 04:23 PM on 31 Jul 2007, AndrewC wrote:

    Before the "bell bashing" gets out of hand, perhaps we should compare his performance to date with, say, Graham Thorpe as a benchmark for a great middle order player? After 29 matches each:

    Bell = 1905 runs at 41 with 6 tons.
    Thorpe = 2035 runs at 42 with 2 tons.

    Looks OK to me....

    Bell will score lots of runs for England, especially if he doesn't always bat with the tail.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  55. At 04:26 PM on 31 Jul 2007, ciderguzzler wrote:

    My comment, in essence, is the same as after Lord's - what basis do you use to assess the value of each contribution? Or is this not what you are attempting to do?

    Two other questions for you.

    1. Is enthusiasm for neuro-linguistic programming effectively a pre-requisite of becoming a member of the England camp?

    2. Is the reason Chris Read has been ostracised that he refused to accept this?

    Thanks.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  56. At 04:37 PM on 31 Jul 2007, ryan wrote:

    For understanding Monty's contribution, you should compare him with Kumble in this test, the most experienced indian bowler and one of the most experienced spinner in world cricket today. He struggled to get any of the top order wicket on this pitch while Monty scalped dravid and karthik, who are among technically the most capable batsmen. And Monty was playing his 19th test match !!! So give up being jealous and and admit that Monty is better bowler than you are...

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  57. At 04:37 PM on 31 Jul 2007, nihal wrote:

    Think KP deserved less. Came into bat at a crucial moments in both the first and second innings and though we can't always expect him to fire he should have done better. A half century from him in the second innings or even if he had stayed at the wicket for one hour, it would have made a difference. Agreed RP's delivery was a good one, but KP padding up, what was that?

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  58. At 04:41 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Steve E wrote:

    Can I just make a comment. I bet all you guys who are shouting your mouth off about Prior were not so long ago praising him for a what a brilliant century he got and further steady knocks. I think this just about sums up how fickle certain members of the British public are when supporting our nation....in any sport to be fair.

    Before you start raving about saying he scored those runs against the West Indies of all nations...you are only as good as the opposition you are in front of. Otherwise why didnt ALL the other batsmen score runs a plenty.

    'Twas not good enough all round in this test but I am sure the lads will bounce back.

    I am a big admirer of Prior and I think its about time that we have someone with a bit of personality similar to the likes of Stewart and Russell (all be it for his limited time there).

    Keep up the good work King of Spain!!

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  59. At 04:42 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Ajay Shah wrote:

    Ashley Giles is jealous as even if he was fit he wouldn't have a hope of playing for England. He is a poor bowler and hates to see Monty's continued success.

    Also I know Ashley and Vaughan are thick as thieves but how can he get a 9 with all those poor captaincy decisions ?

    Ali Cook has the best prospects in the England team and is one of the most technically correct batsman around. Pieterson is no legend, he is a good player but to be classified as a legend do it for 10-15 years like Lara, inzi, ponting, dravid and tendulkar.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  60. At 04:48 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Rich wrote:

    'Flattered by tail end wickets! How about flattered by inclusion before monty came along.

    Their is enough quality within this England team to turn things around in the final test.

    However, I remain to be convinced by Matt Prior. Yes he can bat in favourable conditions against a very weak bowling side but when the pressure has been on he has not delivered. Additionally he is not a world class wicket keeper and showed that again today. England seem to have an obsession with a wicket keeper than can score big runs. How about the first six 'batsmen' get some and then any addition beyond that is a bonus. It is almost assumed that they will fail!

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  61. At 04:58 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Jon wrote:

    Very BBC - 5 being the rating awarded to someone who does nothing, least of all something right. It's OK to give someone a brutally honest rating, you know...

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  62. At 05:02 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Markymark wrote:

    I find Colly quite a frustrating figure in the England team. I just have half a feeling he is not consistently up to being a test class player, who occasionally flatters to deceive. I think a Thorpe or Hussain would have converted his 50 in the second innings to a hundred and given England a target to bowl at. Bell is even more frustrating, more talent I think than Colly, but somehow less fight. If KP is going to develop as a real top drawer number 4 I feel England need more solidity behind him at 5 and 6. The tail is too long as well, which further increases the pressure on the top 4.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  63. At 05:16 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Ben Fawcett wrote:

    Spot on with the exception of your ratings for Tremlett, Panesar and Anderson.

    Tremlett should be a 6. Good bowling in the final session but needs to improve by a country mile.

    Panesar and Anderson's ratings suggest they were in the winning side. 5 for Monty and 6 for Anderson.

    Jimmy is coming back to something like his old self whilst Panesar was average. Not a critisism, he is still a world class bowler who just had an off day.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  64. At 05:16 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Ed Daggett wrote:

    Gilo, don't be bitter about Monty. He took the wickets of Dravid and Karthik. I'm pretty sure they're not tail enders. Just because he made the cut and you didn't.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  65. At 05:28 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Sarma wrote:

    Anderson's 1 wicket for 157 runs can not merit 60% marks. My ratings on a 0-1,000 scale are:

    Vaughn - 1,000
    Ganguly - 810
    Karthik - 807
    Tendulkar - 754
    Collingwood - 746
    Zaheer Khan – 641
    Jaffer – 632
    Kumble – 628
    Tremlett - 587
    Cook – 527
    Laxman - 524
    Sidebottom – 493
    Strauss - 444
    Dravid - 392
    Prior - 323
    Panesar - 288
    Pietersen - 272
    Bell - 264
    RP Singh – 208
    Sreesanth – 109
    Anderson - 83
    Dhoni - 77

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  66. At 05:34 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Tom Desmond wrote:

    I believe that unfortunately Bell may be on his way out, maybe giving an in-form country player such as Darren Maddy a chance, Collingwood may have batted alright, but he has a tendency to close the face of the bat, rather than holding his front elbow up, nearly edging onto his own stumps on numerous occasions, mistakes i would be annoyed at at my age of 15, let alone a test player!

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  67. At 05:35 PM on 31 Jul 2007, kiran wrote:

    KP: 4
    MV: 8 (First innings he did not do well)

    G8 win for india...although the toss was crucial.
    But eng also won the toss at Lords and put the Indian's in trouble.
    But we Indian's are closer to God....so he favored us more than the umpires who favored the Englishmen.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  68. At 05:41 PM on 31 Jul 2007, jim winkley wrote:

    I agree with many of the scores allocated.However Bell has rarely if ever performed when most needed.An exceedingly good county player he is far from test class.Anderson is excellent when conditions help him but his form is so in and out that he is a risk to play.Sometimes brilliant other times mediocre,more often the latter.Surely the time has come to give Read a run as wicket keeper,his batting has certainly improved at county level ,give him a chance,an extended one.Even Foster would be better than Prior,and both Read and Foster have double hundreds to their name.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  69. At 06:02 PM on 31 Jul 2007, John wrote:

    Strauss Sould have got 5 Cook 6 in Ashleys ratings. Cook scored more runs and too 2 catches. Twice Strauss gave it away and never really looked settled. A fine line I know but I think these two scores for the opening batsmans should be reversed. The rest looks ok to me.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  70. At 06:09 PM on 31 Jul 2007, shaks wrote:

    we need sajid mahmood in the team. Ian Bell needs to come in at 4th. I think the side should be this:
    A Strauss
    A Cook
    M Vaughan
    I Bell
    K Pieterson
    P Collingwood
    M Pior
    S Mahmood
    R Sidebottom
    M Panesar
    J Anderson

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  71. At 06:13 PM on 31 Jul 2007, shaks wrote:

    we need sajid mahmood in the team. Ian Bell needs to come in at 4th. I think the side should be this:
    A Strauss
    A Cook
    M Vaughan
    I Bell
    K Pieterson
    P Collingwood
    M Pior
    S Mahmood
    R Sidebottom
    M Panesar
    J Anderson

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  72. At 06:27 PM on 31 Jul 2007, shabani wrote:

    where the hell is Geriant Jones better keeper and batsman than prior and wot about getting one of the old bowlers in just to add some experience e.g andy caddick

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  73. At 06:29 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Pawan Sharma wrote:

    With reference to Gilo's ratings from the first test... I get the distinct impression that you are being unecessarily harsh to Monty. You repeatedly laud praise onto the England seam attack however your ratings for Monty seem to suggest he has under-performed or is being out-performed and this is completely untrue. He has done what was asked of him. He has picked up vital wickets. And he has been able to tie up an end and put pressure on the Indian batsmen... all this on seamer friendly pitches. Therefore in conclusion Gilo I think you are rather underating Monty and you are not doing his hard work any justice.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  74. At 06:35 PM on 31 Jul 2007, ciderguzzler wrote:

    AndrewC 4.23 pm

    I'm sure you wouldn't want to slant your comparison by including out of context innings against the minor county standard Bangladeshis. Fortunately, Thorpe's performance doesn't need to be recalculated as he played all his first 29 Tests against Australia, West Indies, South Africa or India. Bell, however, scored 62* and 165* against Bangladesh in 2005. Eliminating these from his record, to make it a fairer comparison with Thorpe's, gives Bell an average of 36.47 for his first 27 "real" Tests, compared with Thorpe's 40.87 for his first 27.

    The real stat that stands out for Bell is nothing to do with batting with the tail. It's the fact that exactly half (23) of his 46 completed innings have been for a score of less than 10. Not the sort of record you'ld hope for from a specialist batsman, I'd have thought. We may still believe that he is worth persevering with, but this must be because we expect him to improve, not because we are satisfied with what he's done so far.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  75. At 06:43 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Matt Hammond wrote:

    Vaughan should be an eight as he didn't do much in the first innings and should have done more to control a few england players' behaviour. Panesar deserves a 7 as he still took wickets and did well by his standards in the field.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  76. At 06:47 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Joby wrote:

    Think you've been a tad harsh on Cook with a 5. Disappointing he didn't build a big score, but without his first innings knock things could have been a whole lot worse. Pietersen worth a 5?

    Agree with Jamie's suggestion about moving Bell up. We saw in the first innings that he's not the man to have stuck with the tail. Switch him with Collingwood, or maybe even use him at 4 with Pietersen 5 - then Colly can nudge and nurdle to get the most out of the tail.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  77. At 06:49 PM on 31 Jul 2007, karen wrote:

    I would drop cook and Bell down to 4. KP although two good deliveries I would give him 3. This is because he needs to quit sledging I would give Prior a 3 as well for the reason. Collingwood would omnly get 4 and that is also because of his behaviour espicially at the press confrence.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  78. At 07:30 PM on 31 Jul 2007, ciderguzzler wrote:

    AndrewC 4.23 pm

    I'm sure you wouldn't want to slant your comparison by including out of context innings against the minor county standard Bangladeshis. Fortunately, Thorpe's performance doesn't need to be recalculated as he played all his first 29 Tests against Australia, West Indies, South Africa or India. Bell, however, scored 62* and 165* against Bangladesh in 2005. Eliminating these from his record, to make it a fairer comparison with Thorpe's, gives Bell an average of 36.47 for his first 27 "real" Tests, compared with Thorpe's 40.87 for his first 27.

    The real stat that stands out for Bell is nothing to do with batting with the tail. It's the fact that exactly half (23) of his 46 completed innings have been for a score of less than 10. Not the sort of record you'ld hope for from a specialist batsman, I'd have thought. We may still believe that he is worth persevering with, but this must be because we expect him to improve, not because we are satisfied with what he's done so far.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  79. At 07:48 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Andy wrote:

    I think some of those ratings for England are on the generous side. We know that Vaughan and Colly will fight for the cause. Equally, KP and Bell never seem to deliver when our backs are up against it. As for the rest, well, history will say 0-1 down after two tests, with one to play. Nobody will remember we were within a wicket of winning at Lords.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  80. At 07:50 PM on 31 Jul 2007, John wrote:

    I honestly find it difficult to see how anyone can say that they think England are 'the better team'.

    OK. First test India ''got out of jail'

    But second test, leaving aside all the fuore about jelly beans and the like, India played better and justifyably won the Test. I enjoyed the cricket.

    For my part, what I want to see is an England side that will expunge the 5-0 drubbing that we suffered in Australia.

    As a punishment for a very narrow Ashes victory that resulted in the team being featured in the 'Honours list'!.

    We are not even half way there and India have showed us why.

    john

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  81. At 08:02 PM on 31 Jul 2007, adrian smith wrote:

    Ratings are fair but Monty Getting a six is a ltttle Harsh. He bowled well and tied up an end, taking 4 good wickets. The pitch didn't offer much as shown by Kumble's figures

    are you being a bit harsh on the man who has taken your spot?

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  82. At 08:28 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Mark wrote:

    All in all everyone has room to improve!

    You rarely seen players get rated less than 4 or 5 in most sports really but I am sure Ashley knows they played badly.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  83. At 08:36 PM on 31 Jul 2007, M Bhandari wrote:

    I think you have been too generous for Petersen and Bell. Both Have failed quite badly.

    Your rating for Anderson is also too generous. Anderson has always been too expensive from his early days. Lords was an exception.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  84. At 08:44 PM on 31 Jul 2007, jack wrote:

    Nice one Gilo, about right I think.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  85. At 08:58 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Frayne wrote:

    Unfair to give Monty and Anderson the same rating.

    Anderson was all over the shop whilst at least Monty provded some control. Was unlucky that two certain lbw's were turned down in India's 1st innings and got Dravid - their best batsman - out too.

    By all means give Monty a six but Anderson deserves less.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  86. At 09:01 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Luke wrote:

    Monty Panesar didn't have any luck, and he didn't have a helpful wicket, therefore, he get's 5, it's not jealousy from Ashley.

    The arguement in the press box however..

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  87. At 09:28 PM on 31 Jul 2007, david spurdens wrote:

    Why do you care what we think- hardern the up and make your own decisions.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  88. At 09:31 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Sunny wrote:

    Here's my ratings for the second Test for both teams:

    Alistair Cook - 6
    Andrew Strauss - 6
    Michael Vaughan - 9
    Kevin Pietersen - 5
    Paul Collingwood - 7
    Ian Bell - 4
    Matt Prior - 3
    Chris Tremlett - 8
    Ryan Sidebottom - 7
    Monty Panesar - 7
    James Andersen - 6

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

    Wasim Jaffer - 7
    Dinesh Karthik - 7
    Rahul Dravid - 6
    Sachin Tendulkar - 7
    Sourav Ganguly - 8
    VVS Laxman - 7
    MS Dhoni - 5
    Anil Kumble - 7
    Zaheer Khan - 9
    RP Singh - 8
    Sree Santh - 4

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  89. At 09:36 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Joe wrote:

    I agree with most of the ratings but i felt you rated anderson, monty and strauss harshly. Anderson i think did a great job of keeping the batsmen on their toes and not letting them get to settled whereas monty bowled well throughout especially as the pitch wasnt turning much (same with kumble) and every wicket counts at the end of the day, be it 1 or 11, bearing in mind that the other bowlers were unable to clean up. Strauss i felt was on great form with the bat, although he did seem a bit tentative at times, i think he deserved at least 8. Sidebottom bowled beautifully all through the test and his figures do not reflect this unfortunately, he deserves a 9 at least after his contribution with both bat and ball.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  90. At 09:38 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Anonymous wrote:

    Ash - why not fine them all three point for yobbism and boorish puerile antics? That would give a more realistic appraisal.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  91. At 09:42 PM on 31 Jul 2007, 1snowman1 wrote:

    for godness sake give the india ratings, they're the ones who won the damn test

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  92. At 09:42 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Chris Marshall wrote:

    Ashley, don't disagree with your ratings particularly, but I did think that James Anderson bowled well without luck, particularly in India's first innings. Personally, `i don't see sideshow ryan being a factor away from home, nor is he a long term bet at 29 +.......however I have been seriously impressed withTremlett - an option if Steve H doesn't get back the '04 / '05 aggression. I do feel that Jimmy A has bowled well for England, mainly without luck since hince debut season, and in the absence of Jones the Steam he could well be our best option (assuming that Hoggy plus a bouncy quick is the rest of the formula) to complete what is going to have to be a three pronged pace attack. Freddie coming back makes life easier for the fans and the selectors, but which batsman do you drop?

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  93. At 09:47 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Ram wrote:

    Did the author know that he was rating these guys for a 10 and not a 20???

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  94. At 09:50 PM on 31 Jul 2007, jacob wrote:

    i think thre where a lot of good points in englands innings tough conditions in the first innings didnt help them at all and zaheer khans magic with the ball around the wicket was something special

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  95. At 09:57 PM on 31 Jul 2007, jacob wrote:

    i think thre where a lot of good points in englands innings tough conditions in the first innings didnt help them at all and zaheer khans magic with the ball around the wicket was something special

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  96. At 09:58 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Chaitanya Nabar wrote:

    I cannot understand the comment no. 26 written by Mendel Claxton.

    >> I believe England are the better side.

    On what basis is this to be decided?

    >> this time I felt that key umpiring mistakes favored India and made a difference in the outcome.

    Oh really? This is incredulous! I suppose the decisions giving Sachin Tendulkar & Saruav Ganguly out went in favour of India? If those decisions were given correctly, who knows, India might have scored 650.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  97. At 10:10 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Alan Baylis wrote:

    I would also say I thought Monty's 6 is on the generous side. He bowled OK but for little result against key players and his batting/fielding was up to its usual low standard. The pitch didn't suit spinners but that doesn't mean you should get an extra mark for just turning up! That means lower marks for Bell and Prior as well, we lost after all and they contributed little!

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  98. At 10:10 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Mark wrote:

    England can't take 20 wickets with this poor bowling attack. i have never seen this kind of poor english bowling attack in last 30 years.

    all these bowlers are less than 85 miles bowlers mostly bowl at 79 to 83.. with this speed u can't take 20 wickets. at least there should a fast bowler int he team. even indian bowling attack is a lot faster than this.

    if england wants to win next match they should add one real fast bowler in their attack and make must bouncy pitch. on the batting friendly or seaming track england can't beat india.

    Only bouncy track can create so much problem for indian batting lineup. and indian bowling will also strugle on the bouncy track. they will not get so many lbws.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  99. At 10:12 PM on 31 Jul 2007, TheYips wrote:

    Monty's tail-end wickets? Do you mean Dravid and Karthik... what happened to the left-arm spin-bowling fraternity? Or perhaps there is something else lurking behind that begrudging comment.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  100. At 10:15 PM on 31 Jul 2007, shahid shah wrote:

    everybody should watch Last man standing on BBC3. which will be repeatedly shown over the next few days. The program would show the strange version of cricket but very exciting. The spirit between the players was good.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  101. At 10:21 PM on 31 Jul 2007, AG StJ Musgrove wrote:

    Mr Giles,

    You observe that Panesar was "flattered by the tail end wickets he picked up"

    He got 4 wickets.

    One was opener Karthik and the other Raul Dravid.

    Am I missing something?

    These guys are just not tailenders in anyones book.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  102. At 10:26 PM on 31 Jul 2007, AG StJ Musgrove wrote:

    Woopps sorry Andy Cook, you'd already highlighted the above point.

    Objective balance and judgement is always difficult if judgement is being exercised by an ex team-'mate"

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  103. At 11:12 PM on 31 Jul 2007, AG StJ Musgrove wrote:

    Sree Santh shouldn't get 4- he should get his marching orders.

    The little thug should be on his way home.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  104. At 11:38 PM on 31 Jul 2007, John Cuthbert wrote:

    India fully deserved their victory by outbowling & outbatting us literally in 4 days ! In their 1st innings they outscored both our innings & their 1st 6 batsmen scored 400 averaging 66 each, whilst in our 1st innings our 1st 6 made 128 averaging 21 & in our second innings our 1st 6 made 284 averaging 47 ! Enough said but we should have walloped them at Lords but on the 1st day we batted too slowly & on the last day we did not bowl well enough. They knew that they had got out of jail & we let them off the hook. Mind you they are a good side, much better than the West Indies but we have really got to pull our socks up at The Oval & get our batsmen to concentrate on making the right strokes, otherwise what are the coaches doing about it ? Come on England you can do it !

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  105. At 11:44 PM on 31 Jul 2007, Sweeney Saluja wrote:

    I thought this was a great test match and one that kept eveyone captivated. There were a few incidents that could have been avoided - i.e a hot tempered santh beaming and no balling. However I thought the jelly bean incident really took the cake - this isnt some county cricket game where you can throw what you're chewing onto the pitch. On top of that collingwood has the gaul to make it sound like a joke. I actually have a lot of respect for collingwood as a player but he and prior made a mockery of a class game - its a good thing they were served by India as it was much deserved. I think prior should return to county cricket - hes just a thug with gloves.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  106. At 11:45 PM on 31 Jul 2007, John Cuthbert wrote:

    India fully deserved their victory by outbowling & outbatting us literally in 4 days ! In their 1st innings they outscored both our innings & their 1st 6 batsmen scored 400 averaging 66 each, whilst in our 1st innings our 1st 6 made 128 averaging 21 & in our second innings our 1st 6 made 284 averaging 47 ! Enough said but we should have walloped them at Lords but on the 1st day we batted too slowly & on the last day we did not bowl well enough. They knew that they had got out of jail & we let them off the hook. Mind you they are a good side, much better than the West Indies but we have really got to pull our socks up at The Oval & get our batsmen to concentrate on making the right strokes, otherwise what are the coaches doing about it ? Come on England you can do it !

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  107. At 11:52 PM on 31 Jul 2007, John Cuthbert wrote:

    India fully deserved their victory by outbowling & outbatting us literally in 4 days ! In their 1st innings they outscored both our innings & their 1st 6 batsmen scored 400 averaging 66 each, whilst in our 1st innings our 1st 6 made 128 averaging 21 & in our second innings our 1st 6 made 284 averaging 47 ! Enough said but we should have walloped them at Lords but on the 1st day we batted too slowly & on the last day we did not bowl well enough. They knew that they had got out of jail & we let them off the hook. Mind you they are a good side, much better than the West Indies but we have really got to pull our socks up at The Oval & get our batsmen to concentrate on making the right strokes, otherwise what are the coaches doing about it ? Come on England you can do it !

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  108. At 12:38 AM on 01 Aug 2007, Zain-ul-Abidin wrote:

    Seeing Giles ratings on Monty was always going to be interesting... I hope it's got nothing to do with the fact that they might be competing for a position in the team in the future...

    As far as I am concerned, Monty's position in the team should have been further consolidated by his performance in this match. I hope the English team do not ignore the quality he brings to their setup (never mind if he's not as prolific with the bat as Giles or any other spinners)... Giles, I'm afraid your best days are past you... would be healthier you accepted it gracefully.

    Besides this, I feel Cook deserved a better rating, and that Bell, Prior, and Pietersen played quite poorly in this match.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  109. At 02:30 AM on 01 Aug 2007, Sajal Choudhury wrote:

    Ashley,
    You are too generous in grading these English players.I wish you you were my teacher in my grade school.You must admit this English team is very second class,compared to the teams of the past.With that in my mind,I grade all of them poor,with the exception of the captain,Vaughn,who deserves 8,as you did! But all alone,how can he pull the Englisg side out of this miserable and pathetic defeat?I think,they will lose again,unless once again,they adapt to ungentlemanly behavior in a gentlemen's game.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  110. At 02:41 AM on 01 Aug 2007, Sunny wrote:

    I guess this team needs to concentrate on their cricket rather then other stuff eg trying to be like Australians. I am sure they can do a lot better if they just play their normal cricket and focus their energies there.
    I don't think Pietersen was shaken by Sreesanth's beamer because he got out to a very good ball which came in long way. This is just an excuse to put the blame somewhere else. If hitting was to shake someone then why Sachin did not get out right after he was hit on the helmet. I think KP is the real Jelly Bean.
    I hope the lessons are learnt well this time.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  111. At 03:32 AM on 01 Aug 2007, Faisal wrote:

    Fair ratings!
    ENG tried hard but just couldn't get the job done.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  112. At 03:59 AM on 01 Aug 2007, Imran wrote:

    Re: but he needs to work out a method for batting at number eight

    Yo!

    Tremlett was taken as a strike bowler in the absence of Harmison, Hoggard, and Flintoff even if all three are slowly becoming has beens and the 2005 Ashes was an aberration in terms of England as a strong test team.

    Murali and Sri Lanka exposed them as pretenders, Australia wiped the floor with them in Australia 5-0, and now a third rate Indian team with over the hill players and a seam bowler not expected to be in the first XI had Patel and Pathan to be available, has whipped England at home.

    I'm still waiting for the excuses to start, except England cannot blame the Umpires, can they?

    BTW Pietersen really talks the talk, but when the going got rough, he looked scared!

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  113. At 04:02 AM on 01 Aug 2007, Jaswant Singh wrote:

    Any thoughts ,any comments on the disgraceful,sickening and contemptible behavior of the Anglo-Boer players? First incessant verbal abuse, then throwing jelly beans followed by some obscene, revolting comments by a third rate cricketer. And who gets fined, poor Sree Santh who merely retaliated. Just like the umpiring in this match. Totally pervert.

    Mercifully the bullies disintegrated into the cowards they are.

    Funny, even Vaughan admits the Anglo-Boer team might have gone overboard.

    Wonder how poor Panesar must have felt when this sikening show was going on.

    I wonder how this team maintain its status as sorry losers. Should not be difficult, as they are real LOSERS.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  114. At 05:27 AM on 01 Aug 2007, T P Rajmanohar wrote:

    the ratings are too high if the ratings werre corerct england should have won and not lost

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  115. At 05:58 AM on 01 Aug 2007, Purnendu Dam wrote:

    Zaheer Khan, Saurav Ganguly, Tendulkar, Michael Vaughan, Sidebottom, all played a great match. The Man of the Match Simon Taufel of Ausralia, played a great match. He had excellent control over this match. I wish him all the best.....

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  116. At 06:21 AM on 01 Aug 2007, Anonymous wrote:

    On Monty is the low score a reflection of the fact that he replaced you in the team and made u redundant. I guess so.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  117. At 07:35 AM on 01 Aug 2007, jose john wrote:

    hmm! interesting.Wonder what would the ratings have been like had england won this match!!

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  118. At 07:42 AM on 01 Aug 2007, ezatullah wrote:

    at the place of Bell why England not playing O Shah. i am sure that Shah is one the telented player of in England Middler order batting line up.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  119. At 07:44 AM on 01 Aug 2007, E Bentley wrote:

    Hi.
    I think the rating for Matt Prior is a bit harsh, his agility and ability to catch around the wicket is impressive. On the whole the other ratings are correct.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  120. At 07:53 AM on 01 Aug 2007, afryatt wrote:

    6 for strauss? I like strauss but that shot he played( a "gower" ) to get out at 55 should be enough to send him back to county cricket for a while.Plus the tail-oh sorry-lower order - is just too long-again

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  121. At 08:09 AM on 01 Aug 2007, Jellybean wrote:

    I think you've wheelie bin generous to too many up there Ashley, some had a fair game all-round and others fared well in one or other innings but as a whole most were par at best. You've given an average score of 7 to a team that lost comfortably and were comfortably second best in the first half of the match. It can be too easy to be generous, look at match ratings in football and you'll see a lot of 5s, 6s and 7s with the odd 8 or 9. Might as well rate on a scale of 1-5 or 0 and 1

    I assume the lips were puckered when doing Vaughan

    The batsmen let the side down 1st innings, the bowlers needed to restrict India for a lot less than they did. Thereafter it was an even contest, but India won it on the 1st innings

    Strauss 5/10 - the 4 was more crucial to the result than the 55, he nearly salvaged it second time around but the middle order collapsed

    Cook 6/10 - needs to go on and not just keep getting starts, you could say it was especially important he went on when he fell 1st innings with England then 109/5

    Vaughan 7/10 - mostly for his hundred, captaincy gets an ever growing question mark

    Pietersen 3/10 - didn't stay long enough in either innings

    Collingwood 7/10 - didn't do much wrong other than fail to convert good starts to big scores

    Bell 3/10 - another that got in and got out, 2nd innings he just got out

    Prior 3/10 - the minute the runs dried up his keeping was bound to be scrutinised.

    Tremlett 8/10 - pick of the bowlers and battled away with the bat in the 1st innings - he didn't ask to be number eight

    Sidebottom 5/10 - mostly for his efforts with the bat, now the easy picking Windies have gone he needs to show he isn't Mullally in disguise

    Panesar 8/10 - it is harsh to criticise his efforts or returns, I bet Ashley would take any tailenders wickets and count them the same as a batsman.

    Anderson 2/10 - England's most experienced seam bowler in the side didn't exactly lead from the front

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  122. At 08:17 AM on 01 Aug 2007, dee wrote:

    looking at some of these posts it would seem that whatever ashley giles says about monty, he's going to get all sorts of accusations thrown at him, especially of envy, which seems hardly fair! People should comment on what he says about monty as a spinner and he's contribution to any one match, but why make it personal? Though ashley may feel hard done by, what with his injuries etc, i hope that his own disapointments don't affect how he judges monty, and i don't think it does!!

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  123. At 08:20 AM on 01 Aug 2007, Ian wrote:

    I would like to know why Broad was left out after getting 5 wickets and scoring 50 in the friendly leading up to the test.
    I am not being critical of the current bowlers, they have bowled remarkably well.
    But there seems to be no explanation, especially when there is so much worry about the tails batting ability.
    Although Andersen seems to be bowling better than I seen before, he is the most likely to make way, if any change to the attack is made.
    I suspect that the team will be unchanged, though.
    It would have been right to include Broad in the first test but a little harsh to drop any of the bowlers afte their great efforts.
    Broad will have to wait, I guess.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  124. At 09:13 AM on 01 Aug 2007, LUCKY DE CHICKERA wrote:

    Vaughan,Tremlett,and Sidebottam,fully deserve their ratings as they were committed and performed exceptionally well. The other 8gave the impression that"they felt they would in any way win"and appeared over confident.Probably after the effects of the first test. I would rate all of them below 5 including Monty AND Pieterson.They lacked the Killer Instinct which we see in the Australian sides of late.India showed it to a large extent right down to no11. They obviously learnt their lessons from the first game.Well done India---and to England, take every match as a seperate encounter otherwise you might repeat your poor showing let aside losing the Match and the Series.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  125. At 10:03 AM on 01 Aug 2007, sunil wrote:

    India will surely win the test series by 2-0
    sunil

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  126. At 10:06 AM on 01 Aug 2007, Graham Howat wrote:

    Well said Alison Mitchell.In an age where UK society in particular is trying to find a solution to counter the trend in yobbish behaviour,our international sportsmen and apparant roll models are behaving like purile school children.The whole England set up from the chairman of selectors downwards would do a great deal better to concentrate on setting and maintaining proper professional adult standards which might just give them a chance in challenging, in particular Australia and other test playing nations, who do concentrate on defeating their opposition,rather than side show antics

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  127. At 10:12 AM on 01 Aug 2007, JS wrote:

    what scoring ?????
    avg score 6.3 and the team lost convicingly - did not dominate on even one day

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  128. At 10:58 AM on 01 Aug 2007, Rupert Stutchbury wrote:

    I think Ashley has fallen into the politically correct wicketkeeping trap. Prior has batted exceptionally well since he became an England regular. Just because he failed twice in this match (relatively) he is now suddenly being tarred with the brush of failing to live up to his reputation as a batsman. Under that criterian Ian Bell and Strauss would have been sacked months ago. Come on Ash give him a chance. His glove work is better than Jones' and if the selectors have consistently thought Chris Read inadequate with the bat despite his scores at county level then they had best count their lucky stars to have Prior available to to them. He is exactly what he appears to be, a very good batsman and most adeqate wicketkeeper. If we persevere with him he will develop into a Jim Parks or better still a Stewart.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  129. At 11:16 AM on 01 Aug 2007, onkar barwick wrote:

    I second the posts of the Middlesex fan and Monsieur Jellybean except that Collingwood deserves to be dropped from +7 to -7 for his unbelievably lame mickey-taking of Zaheer Khan . And the world apart from the odd blissfully ignorant idiot seems to agree that Monty was deserving of a somewhat higher rating -certainly your rating unlike those tail-end wickets which obviously don't count does not flatter him! Personally seeing as he took four times as many wickets as Sb he should get four times his rating i.e. a nice big 32! Plus I think we will only see the best of Bell when we play someone insignificant like Zimbabwe or Iceland when it really doesn't matter if he gets a 'score' . As for him getting 'stuck with the tail'?!.. he did not stick around long enough (and never does) for anyone to stick with him. In fact I believe any opposition with a half-decent attack counts Bell (along with Collingwood I might add) as part 'of' the tail! And as for Tremmers batting travails maybe the solution is for you to become England's permanent N0. 8 batting coach -nobody but nobody knows that part of the game like you do! Keep up the good work Gilo in the meantime - we await your new appointment impatiently.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  130. At 11:16 AM on 01 Aug 2007, Rob Jacques wrote:

    There have been a lot of criticism of Prior in these posts which I think is a tad unfair yes he didn't have a great game but lets not forget here is a guy who is averaging nearly 50 and scored crucial runs in the last test.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  131. At 11:18 AM on 01 Aug 2007, Bob cluley wrote:

    The rating seems bang on to me. If we could get Flintoff back in the test side I think we have to sacrifice either Anderson or Sidebottom (assuming Tremmers continues how he has been bowling). Probably Sidebottom and Anderson are equally justified bowling but I think Sidders should get the nod cause he can swing a bat. Then we bang Freddie in at 8... And wait for the Aussies.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  132. At 11:31 AM on 01 Aug 2007, Jane Holt wrote:

    Ashley I think you have overrated Prior and Peterson. I agree Sidebottom should be moved up at least two as he's batting much better than some of our alleged batters.

    Good comment Niall McClure as usual the BBC is making a mountain out of a mole hill.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  133. At 12:00 PM on 01 Aug 2007, P Dibbo wrote:

    Cannot agree with Collingwood's rating, 7 far too generous. Did not bat well in first innings, and manner of dismissal in 2nd was not at all what wsas required, 4 would be much more like it.

    Monty, 6 a bit harsh, 7 or even 8 nearer mark, was incredibly unlucky with refused lbw appeals in India 1st innings, this could well have cost us match. Also NO, he does NOT appeal too much, far from it, that's his bread & butter, after all.

    Vaughan, should be 8, well done 2nd innings, but oh dear the 1st, not good.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  134. At 12:32 PM on 01 Aug 2007, Matt wrote:

    Once again i think that we have all been to quick to jump the gun.
    Prior did well against the sometimes eratic bowling.
    Bell wasnt himself after taking that blow in the nets.
    And having a pop at Peitersen after his first bad performance as a test player is harsh.
    Gilo, the comments about Monty were uncalled for he bowled well and deserved more wickets. The same goes for Sidebottom and Anderson.
    We have to remember that this is still a gelling unit of players and we still have Trescothic and Flintoff to come back.
    At the moment we have a very capable squad and should try and better our results.

    My team for the next test In Batting Order:
    Strauss
    Cook
    Vaughn
    Bell
    Peitersen
    Collingwood
    Prior
    Sidebottom
    Tremlett
    Panesar
    Anderson

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  135. At 12:50 PM on 01 Aug 2007, montys brother wrote:

    i can understand you rating monty 6 but your comments about him about picking up tailend wickets are strictly not true. it appears that you may have been influenced by duncan fletcher when you left those remarks. is this true or are you duncan in disguise

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  136. At 12:52 PM on 01 Aug 2007, eric wrote:

    i wonder how many chances matt prior will get.
    he has had more than chris read already and is
    still not as good behind the stumps .but then again it seems they prefer silly games behind the wicket, rather than someone who can catch the ball and stop the wides .

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  137. At 12:53 PM on 01 Aug 2007, lysius wrote:

    England Can win the last one at the Oval but we need to rely with the top five Batsman not K. P only. Look what happened when he was out of sorts 198 all out and 355 where it could have been 300 and 469. So is it true that K. P's run of poor form will make England so ineffective? I think Owais Shar can Bat at any Number inplace of Ian Bell, he has been so poor hasnt he? Prior too needs to play explosively as he did against the Windies. The Bowling is Good. Your ratings are Excellent.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  138. At 12:55 PM on 01 Aug 2007, Saurabh Singh wrote:

    very justified.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  139. At 12:57 PM on 01 Aug 2007, Dave Winstanley wrote:

    When you see someone like Tremlett beginning to get established in Test cricket, you know that his country can look forward to some pretty exciting things in the future (provided he stays fit and committed). He has all the attributes of Joel Garner, and maybe is worth getting more excited about than faster men like Harmy, Jones, Freddie etc, for all their flashiness. If he can be half as good as Big Bird, I can see him winning quite a few matches for England over the years. Here's hoping. Sidebottom, too has proved he has what it takes; though Anderson still suggests he may be one of these 'once every three or four games' merchants like Harmy has turned out to be. Pity they were let down by the first innings batting.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  140. At 01:04 PM on 01 Aug 2007, jonathan smith wrote:

    Panesar flattered by tail end wickets thats a bit rich coming from Giles. All I can say is thank God he won't play for England again. Hopefully he will be fit soon so as I don't have to listen to his comments etc etc.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  141. At 01:21 PM on 01 Aug 2007, R.narayan wrote:

    Whoa, Mr. Giles! Where were you when they were valuing my exam papers?
    You seem to be evaluating the players on past performance and future potential, rather than what they did in this match. Bit like picking a side to go on tour.
    Assuming a 5 is average for an England cricketer in a given role, you must have extraordinarily low expectations of England's batsmen if you think Cook, Bell, KP and Prior performed to par!
    And Tremlett an 8? EIGHT???? I know Sidebottom was very unlucky but one for plenty in reasonable conditions rates the same? Would that make Zaheer Khan a 17? I respectfully suggest you have been eating too many jelly beans.

    If England's bowling attack at Trent Bridge rate a 7 on average and the opposition get nearly 500, God help them if the the bowlers have an average day!

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  142. At 01:26 PM on 01 Aug 2007, Sanjeev wrote:

    9/10 for the captain who batted no less than six times in this match and the man behind 'jelly gate'? Maybe it was a typo and u really meant that for Sidebottom??

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  143. At 01:31 PM on 01 Aug 2007, Jaswant Singh wrote:

    This how I would rank the Anglo-Boer team

    Cowardice 11 out of 10

    Sickening Behavior 11 out of 10

    Bad Losers 11 out of 10

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  144. At 01:38 PM on 01 Aug 2007, Adrian williams wrote:

    My Test Side for The Oval:

    Strauss
    Cook
    Vaughan
    Maddy
    Pieterson
    Collingwood
    Pothas
    Sidebottom
    Tremlett
    Panesar
    Anderson

    ...we need a W/K who can bat well Nic's the man!

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  145. At 01:51 PM on 01 Aug 2007, Raza Hussain wrote:

    I find it hard to comprehend that why Ashley Giles is the one rating other England Cricketers...... would he have done any better?

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  146. At 02:02 PM on 01 Aug 2007, Manu wrote:

    This from cricinfo:

    You know it's time somebody presented Ashley Giles with a dictionary when he stomps around the media centre demanding to know meanings of words like temerity and irony. The sequence of events were roughly in this order: Giles, in an interview during this Test, talks about Tendulkar's declining powers, Tendulkar compiles 91 before being wrongly adjudged lbw, David Hopps, a cricket writer with the Guardian newspaper, writes a piece on Tendulkar-mania, and slips in a line that reads, " … Ashley Giles, who had the temerity at the weekend to remark that Tendulkar's batting prowess had waned a little ...."

    Giles obviously didn't get the irony. In fact, when Hopps tried to explain the context, he shot back: "What is irony?” His main contention was the word "temerity", which he felt was too extreme a verb. A serious argument soon turned ugly: Giles demanded an explanation, Hopps told him to stop being "paranoid", delightful verbals bounced off the walls before Hopps thought it best to take a walk around the ground to cool off.

    Two bits of background information are vital, the first more so than the second. Hopps coined the term "wheelie bin"; he also ghosted Giles's column during the 2005 Ashes series. But Giles' inability to get the humour, his refusal to understand where Hopps was coming from, had several members of the press corps cracking up.

    Gilo, whatever got you to column at the Beeb?

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  147. At 02:09 PM on 01 Aug 2007, Boundary wrote:

    Very interesting, one member was forgotten, the jellybean ? Maybe a rating of 9 for the bean :)

    Hilarious, we should stop calling this a gentlemans game, funnily none of the English players or establishment seem to even feel sorry for their actions, the commentators are more happy in bashing opposition players like Gayle, SSanth and SL players.

    As somebody else said in one of the blogs, wait till the Aussies come :) I dont see any English guys able to utter a word to the Gilchrist or the Mcgraths nor score runs against them :)

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  148. At 02:20 PM on 01 Aug 2007, Ben wrote:

    Although Bell hasn't done much recently I think this is because he is batting too far down the order. He is an accumulator of runs and not someone who can knock off a quick 50 with the tail end.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  149. At 02:21 PM on 01 Aug 2007, joe taylor wrote:

    I feel the umpires made a couple of errors too many. there was at least 4 wrong decisions against England over the test. And not to make too much of it, the Indians had the best of the conditions.

    Take nothing away from khan & srisanth's effors. they bowled the best and the Indians batted generaly better.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  150. At 02:24 PM on 01 Aug 2007, Tim Maynard wrote:

    Giles needs to accept that he is never going to play for England so to put Monty down and keep whining on about people that can bat at 8 just makes him look like someone who is clinging on to the past and it’ll just serve to annoy the guys in the camp. Also, the way he always brown noses Vaughan is sickening as well.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  151. At 02:28 PM on 01 Aug 2007, Gary Niblock wrote:

    To post 129:

    Didnt Ian Bell score 27 off 72 against IRELAND?

    He should be dropped immediately and replaced by Owais Shah!

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  152. At 02:30 PM on 01 Aug 2007, Wes wrote:

    I was impressed by Chris Tremlett. The batting is not his problem because the specialist batsmen should put runs on the board and let him what he is best at.

    I cant wait to see how he will do in the next Test but the whole team needs to be at a rating of at least 7 and above I think to get a win against India.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  153. At 02:35 PM on 01 Aug 2007, Luke Ruston wrote:

    ANDREW STRAUSS:- 6 Steadly getting better but needs to start adding serious runs when the team is strugerling.

    ALISTER COOK:- 5 Solid batsman but it didn't really happen for him.

    Micheal Vaughn:- 8 Great captain great second innings bating needs to stop Englands batting colapses like in the first innings

    Kevin Pietersen:- 5 The team relies on him too much at times and the pressure begins to show was a little shocked by that beamer.

    Paul Collingwood-6 Contributed on all aspects of the game but didn't take command when England needed more than one leader.

    Ian Bell:- 4 Not seen the best of him consistantly his place could be under threat from Freddy after others showing signs of improvment.

    Matt Prior- 4 Great wicket keeper needs more runs other wise may fall into same trap as Jone and Reed.

    Chris Tremlett-7 Bowled well asked to do too much with the bat but overall a very good show!

    Ryan Sidebottom- 8 bowled well as usual unlucky not to take wickets and contributed with ther bat as well needs to be promoted to number 8

    Monty Pansear- 5 Needs more wickets a rare low for him

    James Andersen- 5 Needs more wickets again may not give away as much runs as plunket but needs to create more openings but still was solid unfortunatly england needed superb

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  154. At 02:39 PM on 01 Aug 2007, Linton Wood wrote:

    Ratings are spot on. KP blows infuriatingly hot & cold - genius or skittled out cheaply. The bowling unit performed well but need to contribute more runs - 6 down for England is virtually all out! Replace Anderson with Broad & Bell with a (hopefully) fit Flintoff and you have a formidable England test line up!

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  155. At 03:21 PM on 01 Aug 2007, IAN MCRAE SPENCER wrote:

    i FIND THE MAJORITY OF THE BATTING FOR ENGLAND TO BE NEGATIVE IN ITS PRESENTATION.THE FACING OF THE BOWLERS SEES THE BATSMEN TAKING NEGATIVE BODY POSTURES AND NEGATIVE FACIAL EXPRESSIONS. ESPECIALLY THOSE LIKE BELL. WHERE IS THE PRO-ACTIVE AGGRESSIVE STANCE? WHERE IS THE LET'S HAVE YOU APPROACH? NO ONE TAKES ON THE BOWLING - SAVE PIETERSON - AND HE IS NOW OUT OF FORTUNE. CONTRACTS HAVE STOPPED THE FLUIDITY OF NEW PEOPLE INTO THE TEST ARENA.
    WE DESPERATELY NEED NEW FACES!
    THEY CANNOT DO WORSE THAN AT PRESENT.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  156. At 05:11 PM on 01 Aug 2007, Mzpxp;p Mpina wrote:

    English Cricket is pathetic they are even grasping to south african player hw rediculous

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  157. At 06:25 PM on 01 Aug 2007, guesswhat1122 wrote:

    come on gilo...i just think u r still not able to digest the fact that monty has taken ur place for good....and i guess thats y this poor rating...he atleast bowled much better than anderson ...and u gave both of them same rating...not fair...and there were so many good lbw shouts turned down for monty...6 is just not fair

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  158. At 06:25 PM on 01 Aug 2007, Sam wrote:

    Why is it whenever england lose the blames put on Colly, he bat fairly well in the second innings got the wicket of Tendulker in there first innings, even if it wasn't out.

    But when KP does bad, everyone blames it on pressure, you ever thought, Colly hasn't had a proper rest since last year, and don't say KP hasn't, because he had a month of due to a broken rib.

    And to say KP was shacken up by that beamer, Colly took one in the ribs, Bell got hit in practice.

    And for those who are giving Colly a lower rating because of the press conference, thats ridiculous, that's got nothingto do with the way he played!

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  159. At 09:33 PM on 01 Aug 2007, AJ wrote:


    I think an interesting staistic in this match was that India scored 481 in the first innings without anyone scoring a century. This was clearly a team effort.

    what the individual ratings do not bring out is how effective England were as a team. If you add up all the ratings and work out an average England come out with a rating of 6.36.

    I would have thought for a team that lost not only by seven wickets but with more than half a day to spare (ignoring time lost to rain) this rating is a tad too high.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  160. At 10:45 PM on 01 Aug 2007, arun wrote:

    the two teams should look like this, (batting order):
    England: India:

    Vaughan Sehwag
    Strauss Karthik
    Denly Dravid
    Pietersen Tendulkar
    Ramprakash Ganguly
    Cook Y Singh
    G Jones Dhoni
    Tremlett Z khan
    S'bottom H'bhajan S
    Anderson Kumble
    Panesar RP singh

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  161. At 11:09 PM on 01 Aug 2007, arun wrote:

    this test match made me laugh. i pity the england team at times. this is simply down to a few things. One, they are living on an england australia series thats well well well in the past. "we can beat australia, we can beat australia!"..well you could beat australia but that has got to your head so much you got thumped 5-0 by them, beat a lacklustre windies side and now losing (and will go on to lose) against an under par india team. by under par, i simply mean the side isnt the first choice team if everyone is on form/fit. virender sehag would be in the team without a doubt, as would irfan pathan, harbhajan singh and the best india swing/reverse swing bowler, munaf patel. so thats 4 players short of a solid india bunch. i pity england and their close followers for the attitude they have. players and pundits all felt a walkover was on the cards ?!?! why?!?! because you beat australia 2(!!) years ago or was it because you beat west indies who are about as good as an under 9 school team. hmmm. you have been woken up - full stop. india are a better team, australia are a better team - full stop. australia will thump england again as will new zealand and certainly sri lanka. people like pietersen and prior need to be a bit less cocky and verbal. prior especially - he is rubbish in effect. when you moan about khan and sreesanth being loud on the pitch, you need to remember one thing - we won the test - convincingly as a matter of fact and therefore this attitude is certainly justified. so thats poor players, cockiness, living in the past and bad attitudes that make up the england test team. whats even more funny is the fact that not only are india going to go on and win this test series easily, but also the one day series probably 5-2, 6-1 or 7-0. so thats two easy series wins, against a "good" side ALL on their home soil. jeeez, i think india will be looking forward to a challenging series after this summer....

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  162. At 11:12 PM on 01 Aug 2007, rp2fresh wrote:

    I think that Matt Prior had a shocking test match and his constant talk made his performance all the more brilliant as an India fan. To come out with so many words when he has failed to score runs is hilarious. His place must come under scrutuny by the brilliant Tim Ambrose of Warwickshire. btw Ashley's comment about Monty is funny. (jealous)

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  163. At 01:10 AM on 02 Aug 2007, Jaswant Singh wrote:

    Michael Vaughan says Jelly Beans were not thrown on the pitch by members of the Anglo-Afrikaaner team.

    He also denied talking about Flintoff about the Fredalo incident which was exaustively quoted and tapes played back.

    I suppose this is to be expected with this team.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  164. At 01:36 AM on 02 Aug 2007, Taps Oreo wrote:

    Tempers were flared true, but that was nothing compared to Woodeskets match Monday night.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  165. At 02:16 AM on 02 Aug 2007, Jaswant Singh wrote:

    Now David Graveney is saying nothing much happened and proceeds to talk about Sreesanth.
    It is so pathetically predictable.

    This has happened for the first time that one has seen jelly beans on the pitch right at the critical area, absolutely the first time.

    and that revolting comment.

    " HE PREFERS BLUE ONES TO PINK ONES"

    This sterling example of English culture needs to be suspended from all forms of cricket for at least two years.

    English justice is : Forgive the provocation or rather repeated provocations and punish the retaliation.

    Wonderful people!

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  166. At 07:51 AM on 02 Aug 2007, Nicholas wrote:

    Gilo, How can you give no-one a rating under 5 when you lost a test by 7 wickets??? Ian Bell got 31 & a duck in a losing side. 2 failures from KP should only rate a 3 by his standards.

    Its no wonder we smashed you blokes 5-nil last summer. Oh by the way we bowled & caught in Adelaide last winter(summer), is that still waking you up at night???

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  167. At 09:21 AM on 02 Aug 2007, tony wrote:

    i think you over rate the captian @9 remember he should have been given out when he was about 20 (first ball from kumble)and his captiancy in the field was not that great.
    others are very moch spot on.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  168. At 09:57 AM on 02 Aug 2007, Simon Bridgewater wrote:

    Jaswant, I would be more concerned with a bowler delivering a beamer at 85mph or overstepping by a yard from around the wicket to bowl a bouncer, than a pile of confectionery. As petulant & pathetic as leaving/throwing sweets around on a cricket field, it is nothing compaired to a 'deliberate' attempt to hit/hurt a batsman. Would we all be happy if Collingwood or Pieterson had suffered a detached retina & had to retire from cricket due to these actions?

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  169. At 10:30 AM on 02 Aug 2007, ram chandralingam wrote:

    Everybody talks about jelly beans but no one consider about the umpires desicions.
    2 bad decisions deny both tendulkar and ganguly's test hundred. same 2 bad decisions make vaughan hundred and collingwood fifty. thats true and everybody has to accecpt it.
    prior comes to squard because he is a batsman wicket keeper. not a wicket keeper batsman. he has to score runs. we can forgive bell because earlier he stuck by ball on practice.
    baallers did their jobs good as they can.
    do we want to win the 3rd test and level the series.
    1. drop prior and pick nixon to squard.
    2. put bell no 4 pieterson no 5 and collingwood at 6
    3. bring monty early to ball and give more overs.(think where muraly took 9 wickets)
    you will achive

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  170. At 10:32 AM on 02 Aug 2007, Karun Dewan wrote:

    I feel your ratings are fairly justified. vaughan who made an excellent century still does not deserve 9 as he could have done a bit better in his captaincy as expected from him!! cheers

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  171. At 10:59 AM on 02 Aug 2007, cabinboy wrote:

    I'm sorry, those marks just don't add up.s.

    Vaughan does not deserve nine. He's an eight at best. He got a ton but once they reached the landmark of levelling with India, his wicket precipitated the collapse. His captaincy wasn't particularly impressive, some poor field placings and he chose not to bowl Monty more.

    Pietersen should be a 3, at best a 4. He did nothing in this match, yet you have his 32 runs are bracketed with Cooks 66.

    Monty deserves a seven minimum, four wickets for an average of 25 are flippin good stats. How are Dravid and Karthik tailenders?

    Five catches for Prior in his main discipline means he's worth a 6.

    With six wickets for 92 Tremlett does deserve an eight and I couldn't care less about his batting. Whereas Sidebottom took one wicket for over a 100 runs and you give him an 8!!!

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  172. At 11:08 AM on 02 Aug 2007, michael wrote:

    what a bunch of bile spewing armchair critics. just shut up and enjoy the cricket.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  173. At 12:30 PM on 02 Aug 2007, Benny wrote:

    Let me predict a couple of Ashley's ratings for the Oval:

    Vaughan - 9
    Monty - 6

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  174. At 06:58 PM on 02 Aug 2007, C. Christmas wrote:

    On the whole Monty issue I'm going to disagree with Gilo on this one, (even though, as a Bears fan, it pains me deeply). I reckon Monty did decently under the circumstances which weren't ideal, especially the lack of rough to bowl into. Kumble's relative lack of success shows that this wasn't purely an inability to take advantage of the conditions, so he was by no means alone. I think Sidebottom deserves his rating and his place in the test side. He's bowling consistently and beautifully and deserved more for his efforts. I'd go as far to say that much of the time, he bowled better than Tremlett. However Tremlett still did superbly and as someone who's wanted him to be included in the test team for years, I'm thrilled at how well he's doing.

    The big failures for me were Cook and Bell. Bell should definitely be put up the order, back to 3 or 4: he's best off there and it suits his gritty, obdurate style. He was definitely out-of-form though and needs to work a bit on his defensive technique in the lead-up to the Oval. Cook was just shoddy in my opinion; he needs to sustain his initial aggression better, but currently, as time wears on, he looks less and less composed at the crease.

    Finally, on the whole jelly-babies incident. First, it's been blown out of proportion in my opinion, compared to what both sides were doing at other times during the test. Secondly, umpires should crack down on sledging. It's not in the spirit of the game, nor legally defensible, so why are they so averse to intervening? Something needs to be done, even if it has to be as heavy-handed as an ICC ban on the practice.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  175. At 08:26 PM on 02 Aug 2007, Luke wrote:

    Did nayone commenting actually watch the game?

    Because Sidebottom was Englands best bowler alongside Tremlett, he didn't get the wickets, but if he had any luck he would of had 7.

    Vaughan deserves a 9, how can you blame him for starting a catch, he hardly intended the ball to hit his thigh pad and roll on to the stumps.
    Monty was in effective, on a pitch that didn't help, that's why he got 6.
    Same with Anderson.

    And, the Jellybeans were left on the pitch, the England players have jusut smiled and laghed, just some odd fans of both England and India, are making a un-needed fuss.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details
  176. At 12:28 PM on 03 Sep 2007, Peter Elkin. wrote:

    Dear Ashley I think in general your scores are about right, but Imust differ about your score for Ian Bell I think he is worth at least 7 in your ratings. He is now becoming the anchor man for England and I think he has got a lot more good chricket to come. Best regards Peter Elkin.

    Complain about this post
    Post a complaint

    Please note Name and E-mail are required.

    Contact details

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites



About the BBC | Help | Terms of Use | Privacy & Cookies Policy