Ashes player ratings - First Test
I sense there's some excitement out there about England's performance in Cardiff. And a whole heap of talk about Australia's. What an incredible match.
You might well disagree with the numbers I've dished out, but that's the point. Get stuck in and knock yourself out. I still can't believe what I've just seen...
ENGLAND
Andrew Strauss - 4
Got a start in the first innings before being foxed by Johnson's slingy bouncer and gloving to slip, but didn't even get that in the second. So disappointed with the top-edged cut off Hauritz that cost him his wicket in the second that he remained rooted to the spot for several seconds. Lacked inspiration and imagination in the field as his bowlers toiled.
Alastair Cook - 3
Two poor shots, two cheap dismissals. His bat was well away from his body on the first day, his front foot planted on the fourth. Technical problems to resolve.
Ravi Bopara - 4
Never looked comfortable even when scoring quickly on the first morning. Could have been out to Johnson's slower one before exactly the same delivery did for him again. Unlucky to be given out lbw by Billy Doctrove on Saturday - the ball was going over the top of the stumps, and Doctrove had turned down plumb shouts until that point - but was playing round his front pad.
Kevin Pietersen - 6
England's most fluent batsman on Wednesday, but the manner of his dismissal will anger traditionalists for years. Horrible misjudgement against Hilfenhaus as England fell apart, leaving alone a straight ball that lacked any real danger. Not the performance he wanted on the biggest stage of all.
Paul Collingwood - 9
Typically dogged knock early in the match as part of England's best partnership of the match with KP, although he gave his wicket away with a loose prod outside off. Hung around with immense determination for 345 minutes as his side somehow escaped - was heartbroken with the manner of his dismissal at the death, but did more than any other man to save the match.
Matt Prior - 6
Decent first innings flash and dash before a loose drive cost him a bigger score. One of his best matches with the gloves, but a poor choice of shot in the second innings cost England dear. If you're going to bat at six, you have to bat with the a number six's discipline.
Andrew Flintoff - 6
His fiery spell against Phillip Hughes was the most menacing period England managed with the ball in hand, but it was all too brief - his final figures were 1-128. Cheered to the rafters by the Cardiff crowd for everything he did and looked to be getting back into form with the bat, yet unable to exert a direction-changing influence on the match.
Stuart Broad - 4
A chastening experience on his Ashes debut. Spanked for 129 runs off his 32 overs, struggling to find a length and line that worried the Australian batsmen. Much has been made of his character, attitude and potential, but he struggles to take enough wickets or exert enough control at the moment.
Graeme Swann - 4
Possibly England's biggest disappointment. Went into the match as the leading wicket-taker in Tests this year but failed to claim a single scalp in three days of toil, ending with a return of 0-131. His solid batting will keep him in the team ahead of Panesar.
James Anderson - 9
For all the talk about him being ready to lead the attack, he had only one spell where he looked genuinely dangerous - dismissing Katich with a trademark inswinger and following up with one slid across Hussey. For the rest of the time, he failed to halt the Aussie advance. So much for the bowling. For his epic 21 not out off 53 balls, for holding his nerve when most had lost theirs, he goes straight up to a nine.
Monty Panesar - 7
Out-bowled by Nathan Hauritz. Got the prize wicket of Ricky Ponting, but only after he'd stuck 150 on the board and arguably thanks to Ponting's first error. Still no sign of the bowling progression that he's been said to be making, and now the man most likely to make way for another seamer at Lord's - but if he doesn't play another game all summer, they'll never forget that last-wicket stand. Was that Chris Tavare in disguise?
AUSTRALIA
Phillip Hughes - 5
In his brief innings, we saw both the good and bad in the young opener. There were the trademark cuts and back-foot drives, but also a weakness against the short ball angled into him. A tale in progress.
Simon Katich - 9
A man who knows his own limits and plays within them beautifully. His innings on the second afternoon and evening began to take the game away from England. Looks twice as happy and twice the player he was four years ago.
Ricky Ponting - 7
Four years ago in the first Test, Ponting wore a bouncer from Steve Harmison on his cheek. The only thing he wore on his face in Cardiff for four and three-quarter days was a big happy grin, but then came that incredible last stand. Wonderful chanceless knock of controlled aggression to grind England into the turf, but his captaincy will now come under further fire for his tactics on the last afternoon. Why was Johnson given so many overs when he was so clearly making zero headway?
Mike Hussey - 5
A rare Aussie failure with the bat, but took a sensational diving snag in the gully to dismiss Cook on the first morning, the first wicket in the series, and what appeared to be a key one to see off Colly at the very end.
Michael Clarke - 8
Lovely fluent innings as Australia turned the screw, his footwork as quick as Michael Flatley's and his strokes through the off side so easy on the eye.
Marcus North - 9
Seen as a county workhouse before his Aussie debut, he took the game out of England's reach with an uncomplicated but punishing century on Friday afternoon and Saturday. All the concentration and application in the world, and two tons in three Test knocks tells of a man moving up the ranks.
Brad Haddin - 9
Near-faultless behind the timbers, devastating with the blade. On the evidence of this match, a fitting descendent of Marsh, Healy and Gilchrist.
Mitchell Johnson - 6
Not the mortal danger many expected in England's first innings, although the slower ball that got rid of Bopara was a beauty, and the one angled in that trapped Cook lbw on Saturday afternoon began England's second demise. Struggled badly with his line on Sunday afternoon as Australia saw the win slip away.
Nathan Hauritz - 7
Slated before the series began, he took three wickets in the first innings and then made a mockery of those predictions by finding turn and bounce on Sunday to send the England skipper back to the hutch. Out-performed the much-vaunted combination of Swann and Panesar by a country mile.
Ben Hilfenhaus - 8
Only in the side because of injury to Brett Lee, he found wobble where England's bowlers found none. Got rid of Cook and Collingwood on the first day; came back on the last to take the key wicket of Pietersen. The sight of that off stump cartwheeling backwards was the moment that England feared their fate was sealed.
Peter Siddle - 7
Aggressive and hard-working, his spell late on the first evening nipped an England revival in the bud. Found in-dip to castle both Flintoff and Prior, and then came back to end Collingwood's brave resistance.
I'm Tom Fordyce and I cover cricket, rugby, tennis, athletics and - well, most sports except monkey-tennis. You can also follow me on 
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~18~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
Ratings are a bit high for Monty and Jimmy for me. Yes it was a game-saving partnership at the death but they're in the side as bowlers and simply neither did well enough
Complain about this comment
I think you've been too generous with your scores for the England players. Collingwood was really the only player on the team who performed to the required level over the course of the whole match.
Complain about this comment
ANDERSON ON 9?!
WHAT ARE YOU ON?!
Complain about this comment
Anderson 6, Panesar 5, the rest I can't really argue with. Down to the best pick for man of the match being Collingwood or Haddin, not Ponting.
Complain about this comment
Ponting didn't captain too badly...his fields were always inventive and he had plans for every bowler, sadly he had a bit too much faith in Mitchell Johnson but apart from that I think hs captaincy was excellent
Complain about this comment
I'd better dive in to defend my numbers for Jimmy and Monty before we get any more capped-up incredulity - they were on four each until that 69-ball last stand. Take their final readings as a reflection of their batting and nothing else.
Fair?
Complain about this comment
Bizarre scores for Anderson and Panesar, who were poor at what they are in the team to do.
As for their batting, they performed well enough - but really, they were just in the right place at the right time, with just enough time having been lost to weather and light throughout the test for them to hang on.
Overall I'm bemused at how some are acting as if England just pulled off some kind of famous victory.
Face it - Australia scored as much in one innings as England could manage in two. England were TERRIBLE, and spent most of the match being humiliated by an Aussie team who are no great shakes themselves.
Complain about this comment
How can you possibly give 4 to Graham Swann?
He played a big part in saving the match for England and he scored 78 runs for once out.
He more than made up for his bowling but I believe he was unlucky not to get at least 3 out LBW.
Complain about this comment
Now that is what I call TEST cricket!
England 4/10. Aussies 8/10.
What changes for the next Test for England. Lords will be another batting track so I'd drop Panesar and bring in Harmisson.
Complain about this comment
Congratulations England. No changes can be deemed necessary for Lords.
Complain about this comment
.Take away the 9 you say you eventually gave to Anderson for batting, 4 for Anderson before his batting??? How come!!!!
He was the most economical bowler and took more wickets than anyone else......and that cant be argued with. How does Freddy get a 6 for more expensive bowling and only one wicket, and if Anderson hadnt got any runs (actually he got 26 in the first innings as well)you would have given him a four???
I know none of our bowlers covered them selves in glory but four would have been shocking!!!
God you gave Mitchell Jonhson a 6, now he was shocking.....
Complain about this comment
Most of the ratings I think are fair, Panasar and Anderson a little high, but your reasoning reflects the general reasoning of England selectors, coaches and pundits that the tail must way.
Even during the 2005 ashes people were ripping our tail for being unable to bat, but boy could they bowl!
Now, here we are, 4 years later with a tail that can bat, that not only saved the match (and thus got England off to a better start than the last 2 ashes, despite us playing worse) but also saved us humilation in the first innings, the problem is they no longer seem to be able to take wickets!
Take Panasar for example, even when he was taking regular wickets he was being derided for his feilding and batting, he improved both, and at the same time stopped taking wickets, he spent way too much time practising batting and fielding to eek out a few extra runs and not enough time bowling, the rest of our bowlers aren't much better, your comments about Swann keeping his place because he was batting sum up the situation.
Does anyone actually think this current line up could take 20 wickets? Not when bowlers are picked for their batting they won't!
Pick the best bowlers, let them bowl and tell the batters they'd better get past 400 without the bowlers and we'd be getting somewhere. It won't happen though, too many people want to see a bowler who can hit a quick 30 and who cares if he cant take any wickets!
Complain about this comment
While I appreciate ratings are subjective...
How could anyone in a team that was nearly thrashed by an innings be given anything over 6???
The bowlers should be in the 1s and 2s for their dismal performance (over 600 runs conceded Tom did you miss that?) and the batsmen should not be much higher with the honourable exception of Collingwood who showed some grit. Or did you miss their performance as well?
Complain about this comment
Is that the worst performance since Hulk Hogan played Mr. Nanny?
Complain about this comment
I'd put Colly as man of the match definitely.
Listening to the reactions for every ball that was faced by Jimmy and the Montster I'd agree that they were worth more than 4 each. They were as others said woeful with the ball.
Interesting to hear Anderson described as the "senior batsman" when they were out there.
Nice to see no 'rabbit in the headlights' stuff from Monty.
Complain about this comment
Monty is 10, firstly he is not a batsman and played so many balls at death is certainly big thing...Top order should draw some sense from him.
Complain about this comment
Yeah sorry Tom, 9 for Anderson and 7 for Monty is silly, no matter how elated we are with the draw.
Also, if their ratings are due to their batting (which I agree should come into account), then isnt it a bit harsh on Swann to get 4? Unbeaten 47 in first innings and priceless 31 in second makes him our second highest scorer after Colly and surely worthy of at least a 6.
But lets not quibble over mundanities! Im off to watch the Great Escape and not get what Steve McQueen was making such a big deal about. Harmo in for Monty at Lords and someone try tempt Michael V out of the shortest retirment in history
Complain about this comment
collingwood's innings amazing held the aussies back this game has shades off adelaide 06 onlt we managed to hold them off. all the other england batsmen should take note and learn from collys batting and bring in harmison for the next test at least
Complain about this comment
I dont understand the selectors. Monty Panesar, as much as we all love him, has bowled very averagely all year and quite frankly shouldn't have been anywhere near that test team. Steve Harmison and Graham Onions have taken lots of wickets all year, what more is a bowler supposed to do to get in the side?
On the ratings i'd suggest Andersons 9 may be a little generous but he did just battle his heart out with the bat so fair play to the lad. I don't think the Aussies fear him with ball in hand though.
Complain about this comment
Good show by the boys at the end, and hats off to Paul Collingwood. Stella performance.
If they don't bring in Harmy (the man Ponting picked out as the Aussie's no. 1 threat), then I will further despair over England's chances.
We had a lucky escape, let's face it.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Do not compare Hauritz bowling figures with those of Monty. The point to note is Panesar should have been bowling at the time he was batting.
Complain about this comment
Slightly odd Ratings If Kp gets a 6 for a match total of 77 runs why did Swann get a 4 for a match total of 78 runs and a not out. I understand Swann was in the side as a bowler and was poor but its only fair you take into account both areas of peoples games.
Anderson again bowled poorly but contributed well with bat and maybe deserved a 6/7
Also another point if we were to base any changes in the side on the player ratings then cook is first to go then broad/Swann. Ditch panesar broad and bring in onions and Harmison
Complain about this comment
What an escape! That's test cricket. So much is mental, and hopefully with the Lords test coming up so soon, the Aussies will be down and we'll be up enough to get the first win there since 1934 (a shocking statistic). Sounds harsh, but I hope that Monty's heroics don't keep him in the team - he bowled poorly, and has been doing so for a year, and shouldn't be in the XI.
Harmison is incredibly frustrating and mentally weak, but the pressure is now off him somewhat, as nobody expects England to win after this insipid performance; plus the days when we built him up as England's Curtly Ambrose are over, and nobody expects much from him personally. He's playing at home, and has been in great form this summer, so I think he might just be able to relax, use his natural talent and pace, and do some damage.
Finally, wonder if the ECB's been on the blower to Banger Trescothick...?
Complain about this comment
6 for Flintoff? What are you on, man? Flintoff deserves a 1 AT BEST - his attitude was atrocious. Shaking hands in congratulation on conceding 100 runs while bowling? Ridiculous! And that's a senior player. Did anyone notice the grim determination on the aussie faces at all times??? Drop Flintoff - overated, overweight and a too high opinion of himself. Give him a free pass to the pub and get someone in who is actually bothered about the ashes and not living on past glories!!
Complain about this comment
Had to leave the house for one of those dreaded Sunday walks with 9 overs to go. I am absolutely delighted that we managed to save the match. There are certain England players and I totally agree with the scores above who have to have a long hard look at themselves over the next few days and let the management and the captain know if they can't do better for the rest of the series-Stuart Broad, Prior and KP in particular. Monty should feel himself very unlcuky to get dropped for Lords now and I hope this is what we need to launch us into a test match at a ground where we have not beaten the Aussies for decades. It might be the home of cricket we need to make it the English (and Wales) home of cricket.
Complain about this comment
Broad won't be ditched. If the English team had lost, he might have been. I imagine the only change will be Panesar for Harmison or Onions.
The ratings look pretty right although 9 for Anderson looks a bit high next to Colly. Colly even bowled ok unlike the rest of the English attack.
I would have given Colly MOTM. He stood firm in both innings and was completely solid today. Fine, fine effort. He was the only one who seemed to realise it was still a batting pitch apart from Anderson and Panesar.
Complain about this comment
Tom Fordyce gets a 3 for his player ratings! Howzat?!
Complain about this comment
Its been said that the match has been draw, so now England need to work way harder and I think they need to bring in Harmison for Broad and they should give Onions a chance for either Swann or Panesar.
Also Bopara should open with Strauss and Owais Shah should come in at no. 3.
Flintoff should get one chance at no 6 or 5, so he can get a bit more confident in batting.
Hard Luck or should I say bad luck for Australians, they worked really hard; Ponting captaincy was almost great except for he didn't give more overs to Hilfenhaus, who was bowling exceptionally well and picked up 3 wickets.
As for ratings I think 9 for Anderson and 7 Panesar is okay, since they battled for 69 minutes against Australia, where top order went for cheaply. As for Swann he didn't picked up any wickets but he batted termendously well, and should deserve atleast 5 or 6.
For Ponting I think he got his confidence back, and should deserve 8, with a brilliant 150 and for the almost win.
If it wasn't for rain, Australia would have been 1-0, so can't really mock Ponting for his captaincy effort.
Overall exciting Test Match, good luck to both teams.
Complain about this comment
I think I would knock a point of Colly, Anderson and Monty, but remember that Jimmy batted well twice in the match, and I do think he bowled with spirit, even if he didn't have that much success. Colly did a good job but 9 is too much. 8 is a deserved mark for him. I'd mark KP down an extra point for giving his wicket away in the first innings. And I am not sure what Mitchell Johnson did to deserve his 6.
Hopefully England can regroup and put on a better show at Lords now.
Complain about this comment
England were poor and the bowling was especially disappointing but, at the end of the day, it was the failure of the Australian bowlers, twice, to deal with the England tail, which determined the final result.
For England, the way forward is pretty clear: either Graeme Onions or Steve Harmison will replace Monty Panesar at Lords and give a better cutting edge. It is just possible that both might play with Broad getting a rest too, but the most plausible swap is Harmison for Panesar. For Australia, the options are more limited: their batting looks magnificent, but unless you can take that 20th wicket, you don't win, as England discovered twice in the Caribbean.
Complain about this comment
Don't know what the excitement is about. We struggled to survive on a pitch that the Aussies found little trouble with. We came very close to an innings defeat and more. Doesn't bode well for the summer if this is the best we can do.
Complain about this comment
Right. Stubborn rearguard action needed from Fordyce. Good point about Swann's batting in comparison to KP - and although in his primary role he failed, I agree that I've undermarked him. RememberRandall - if you're not a Notts fan then I'm Ben Dirs.
Complain about this comment
crackedrock - drop Flintoff? I think you've been smoking too much of your name.
gerrardswhiskers - a Sunday walk with 9 overs to go? Good god man, who wears the trousers in your house?! :)
Maybe we should play eleven bowlers at Lords - they bat better than the top order...
Complain about this comment
Complain about this comment
Funny game this. Thing is, right now England are on a high and the Aussies will feel like they lost. We have the chance to come into the next test with some good morale, and all this one really proved is neither side have very good bowlers for those conditions, but the Aussies have the better batting. What was interesting is how poor some of the Aussie bowling actually was today. Though also how ineffective Swann & Panesar were.
I think if we get conditions with some movement off the seam, maybe a few clouds about, something more to the liking of Anderson & Broad, and IF - a big IF - Harmy comes back and bowls near his best for a spell or two, we will see a very different result next time out. Oh, and full marks to Vic Marks who said on Day 1 this would be a draw!
Complain about this comment
Cricketing stargazer - good point about the Caribbean tour: England were the better team and yet lost. Could the same thing happen this time around?!
Complain about this comment
What a load of rubbish, forget all these player ratings...means nothing...at the end of the day this is a HUGE RESULT for England after the last 2 days...team effort even tho top guns failed. If England had lost they would be chasing the series throughout.
If I were to make any changes it would be ..Onions for Panesar, drop Pieterson, make him think about his responsibility to the team, give Bell a chance and get the bowlers to bowl at top of off stump...
Complain about this comment
Darth_Blader, personally, I would prefer Australia to think that they really won, that they are as good as they think that they are and to ignore the fact that they only took a handful of wickets in the two innings combined (most England batsmen actually gave their wickets away).
Yes, the Caribbean tour is an interesting precedent. 3 wickets were the difference between 1-0 and 1-2 and nobody should forget it.
Complain about this comment
It was clear that the ball was barely swinging, when it did Jimmy got 2 quick wickets. He is a dangerous bowler in swingin conditions, ask the top 7 of the New Zealand order.
We didn't bowl well, we batted without decent application. End of the day, both sides could have batted 700+ with the right attitude, no bowler was particularly great.
Whats a refreshing change is it was Australia not finishing a side off, we showed some real grit from 70-5 with 2 sessions to go, its great that we managed this. Now get some swinging conditions and some faith in the likes of Jimmy and Broady and we will be able to win, as long as we keep our focus.
And while many aussies will make statements about England celebrating the draw, someone should remind them of Old Trafford 2005...
Complain about this comment
By the way, Tom Fordyce, thanks for doing rankings for the Australian team. Most bloggers don't bother.
And I agree about Ben Hilfenhaus. Nothing to show that this is only his fourth test match.
Darth Blader, how many series can you compare this one to? 2005 is wearing thin already. How about none? It will have it's own rhythm and flow just like this game.
Honestly, if there are many more endings like this I'll be hospitalised before the series is out.
Complain about this comment
crackedrock - Are you serious? Any Australian will tell you that they would only take two players from Englands side and thats Fred and KP so lets not drop them hey! And the implication that Fred doesn't care about the Ashes makes your whole post laughable.
I'm an Essex fan but Cook worries me, is he really good enough against the top sides?
Complain about this comment
Tom if you were the sole selector picking a team for lords(barring possible injuries) would you pick harmison or onions or both or neither? Who would make way for them if you did?
Complain about this comment
6 for KP ? The man is either the best Batsman in the side (in which case why is he still being allowed to hide at #4?) or he isn't (in which case he is just a load of hype).
It is time for KP to prove his greatness or to forever be just a talented but ultimately flawed player.
Complain about this comment
I would suggest that when we look back at Panesar and Andersons batting this afternoon, you may agree with Tom. That is very likely to have a large baring on where the Ashes ends up, providing England improve .....
Complain about this comment
You know, OldRegret, I'd been listening to the Middlesex game rather than the Test most of the time having given up on the match on Thursday evening fearing what would happen (see my post when Tom Fordyce asked which scenario I thought was most likely). Mind you, the last 90 minutes today were just utterly riveting. It's odd that, having done the supposedly hard bit in both innings, Australia just could not dismiss the England tail either time: it is not a failing that we have seen from them much over the years.
Had England lost it would have been hard to see them getting back into the series. Now, there is just a chance that it could be a lot closer than we feared. I cannot believe that England will bat or bowl so badly twice and, as it did for the West Indies in the Spring, just avoiding defeat will give the players a lot of self belief. Roll on Lords!!!! Australia haven't lost there since 1934 and a sequence like that has to end some time, hasn't it :-).
Complain about this comment
cant believe the celebrations at end from players for getting a very lucky draw the performance from most of team especially bowling attack was embarrasing lucky bret lee wasnt there or it would have been over early
Complain about this comment
"get someone in who is actually bothered about the ashes and not living on past glories!"
Hmmm, a fair point, but on that basis, I'd have Onions rather than Harmison any day. As soon as Harmison gets back in the team, he'll have the same old attitude that he's a permanent fixture. He's had countless chances and wasted them all, letting him wear the shirt again would show how weak the ECB really are
And despite his batting heroics, it's back to the practice nets for Monty and bring in Rashid I feel, although not for Lords, which usually is a batsman's paradise (ergo England will get a woefully under par score, as in the first innings here)
Complain about this comment
Quinny i actually thought Englands celebration was muted in comparison to Australias in the old trafford game in 2005-the entire australian balcony erupted after they survived that test. England realised they were not really at the races in this game but are still level
Complain about this comment
Swann needs a 6. He bowled badly but against 7 left handers in the Aussie line up there was much more there for Monty than him to utilise. His batting alone helped save the game - twice. I was a bit miffed that Strauss mentioned Anderson, Colly and Panesar in his post match interview but didn't stick in a word for Swann's dogged effort. I think he'll get more value for his bowling at Lords and I think he is a tough character, much like Ashley Giles was, and will just go on to the next game without too much baggage about his bowling. He's a good honest player. 6 for me.
Complain about this comment
job done.
regroup and sort it out and lets win the next.
Please please please beat the ozzies.
Complain about this comment
As some one who actually was at Edgbaston ( all five days ) in 2005 all I can say is the last hour of the game today at Cardiff reminded me of the nail biting end to that game.
Clearly this is not the Australian side of that day or the one in 2006/7 which I witnessed at the MCG and Sydney.
Australia did not have Warney to finish the game today ..but the low point to me was the sending on of Englands 12th man with the phyiso was that really warranted ?
This Australian side is not great( YET ) but England are rebuilding and far too late to compete in this Ashes campaign.
Congrats to Colly though he earned his MBE today and the Ozzies cant take that away from him...shame the other batters could not contribute more ..plus I felt every ball Swanny blocked with his body .at least they with Monty and Anderson tried - so thanks lads see you at Edgbaston
Complain about this comment
KP on a 6?? The greatest English batsman was outdone by Collingwood. Threw away his wicket in both innings when he was the one to build a big innings. The whole stort is England rely to much on him.. Seems to me the rely to much on the likes of Collingwood, Prior, Swann and Broad to actually do their part...
For me KP no more than a 4. He is proving to be the Mat Le Tissier of Cricket.. Waste of talent..
Complain about this comment
Mind you, for all the moaning - it was bloody gripping entertainment!!
Complain about this comment
Pietersen should be dropped. I am sick and tired of seeing him play for himself and not the team. This ludicrous situation will continue until he is brought down a peg or two.
My team for lords..
strauss
cook
bopara
bell
collingwood
prior
flintoff
broad
onions
sidebottom
anderson
Complain about this comment
Very very true Mathna!!
Complain about this comment
In consideration, giving Anderson 9 is something of an insult to Collingwood, whose defence of the un-defendable position he found himself and in rallying the rear guard was gong territory. But that is forgetting he also did his job in the first innings and ended with bowling figures that rather shamed the bowlers. Given a better keeper than Prior, or more flair from his Captain he could well have ended with another 2 or 3 wickets in his 9 overs.
Don't think I'd penalise Jimmy by more than a point though as he performed well with the bat and by was no means the worst of the bowlers.
Then none of the bowlers actually performed badly compared to the batsmen, most scored better than the batsmen too, so the first four batsmen loose a point across the board!
Which brings us to Pietersen: Six for turning up on Wednesday?
Sunday's effort doesn't even count as a cameo! So knock two points off for being a lame brain!
Complain about this comment
Apart from Colly, I don't think anyone can be pleased with the performance of what they are primarily in the side for. All looked very nervous at the whole Ashes hype, and they will all do better now they are in the contest properly. I simply can't see that many players doing as badly next time, so do not advocate changes except Monty for Onions next time.
A telling moment for me was when Siddle and Broad had a shoulder barge in the middle of the pitch. They look a right pair of competitors to me, and I look forward to them squaring up again!
Complain about this comment
I cannot begin to see what KP did to deserve a 6 compared to Strauss or Bopara. He showboated a few runs in the first innings and threw his wicket away twice - the second time in an unforgiveable situation. Frankly, he gets the lowest grade on the team, and I'd almost be tempted to drop him for one game just to put a dent in his "I'll never be dropped because I'm God and the media reminds me of it everyday" attitude. This is clearly hyperbole, but I really think the England team needs a coach who'll give them the equivilent of Alex Ferguson's Hairdryer treatment - KP is in the team to be a serious batsman but he acts like the snickering teenage in the back row of science class who's always given special treatment by the PE teacher.
I think the whole Test Match selection procedure needs to be rethought to be honest - not too long ago England used to fail in ODIs and 20/20 because they fielded the Test team, but right now I think we've spun around to the opposite, we field the ODI team for Test. Evidence the comment that Swann will keep his place for his batting - pick the best spinner in County Cricket for a Test match, I don't care if he knows which end of the bat to hold (that used to be Monty, but on current evidence it isn't him either). Sexy shot-making and semi-threatening bowlers who can bat a bit are not what England needed in this match.
Complain about this comment
What an escape! It was always possible but our woeful all round performance really did not warrant a draw which in all honesty is as good as a win.
I believe the team needs a huge shake up. As Agnew said, we were outlcassed in every department and I don't think we have the players to beat Australia if we play 5 bowlers. I really feel that we should opt for 4 bowlers and then utilise part time bowlers, as the Australians have done so well for years.
My starting line-up would therefore be:
Strauss
Cook
Bell
Pietersen
Collingwood
Prior
Bopara
Flintoff
Swann
Harmison
Anderson
With Colly, Bopara, Pietersen and Bell all being able to provide 3-4 overs of something different if required.
It would give England sufficicent strength and depth in batting to ensure that we can post 2 good competitive scores and hope that wickets at Lord's, Headingley and the Oval can proivde added assistance to our bowlers.
Panesar is not a good enough bowler and although he is a hero tonight, come Thursday he doesn't deserve a place in the team. Broad had a poor game with the bowl and I think he is not quite ready to play the Aussies. Why Harmison wasn't selected for this test, I'll never know - some people haven't dropped the demons from 1 ball in Brisbane and whilst England were getting pasted around the park, he took a five-for! Roll on Thursday.
Cheers, Steve
Complain about this comment
As much as this sticks in my craw....bring in Ian Bell for Cook. Onions for Monty, Harmison has proved on countless occasions that he's not fit to wear the shirt.
16 backroom staff eh?...I'm sure they're earning their money (not!)..
Strauss is playing the game as if he was at Eton....we need a winner, not a sportsman...KP for Captain!
Finally, I hope Lords is not another lifeless flat track, designed by the ECB/MCC to get the full 5 days, otherwise it'll be last years South Africa game all over again
Complain about this comment
harmison has had many, many chances- mentally he is not up to it, this aussie batting attack would take him apart.
Complain about this comment
dylansvilla, I had the distinct impression that the winner in the Harmison v Australians contest in the Lions match was not the Australians...
Complain about this comment
"If you're going to bat at six, you have to bat with the a number six's discipline".
How Much more should this apply to Pieterson at No 4
His pathetic showboating shot put England in this position. Making 60-70 on this pitch was not good enough and if he had shown a little more discipline we would not have been put under so much pressure and would not be celebrating that our tailenders got us out of a hole twice (never thought i would say that about Englands lower order).
For me its
Strauss 4
Cook 3
Bopara 3
Pieterson 5
Collingwood 9
Prior 7
Flintoff 6
Broad 4
Swann 4
Anderson 6
Monty 5 (should have been lower but that last bit of batting was incredible)
Complain about this comment
Well I say bravo for giving Anderson a 9. We are well used to him getting 5s and 6s and being told that he is just too inconsistent even when he's been the best bowler on show. 9 is rather generous but I'll take it on this occasion.
But as for what The Hand Of Hidden Forces says:
"As for their batting [Anderson and Monty], they performed well enough - but really, they were just in the right place at the right time, with just enough time having been lost to weather and light throughout the test for them to hang on."
Words fail me! Just in the right place at the right time? They faced 83 balls between them. Anderson survived more than 18 overs and Panesar over 11. The key word is "survived" - while all the proper batsmen got in and got out as if they didn't fully understand that to secure the draw they had to prize their wickets and not give them away. All except the hero Collingwood, of course, the real star of the innings.
Complain about this comment
Tom,
Giving KP a 6 is hypocritical. If you're going to score Monty and Anderson higher because they performed heroically above their level of duty to save the game, the you should give KP a score reflecting how he performed in relation to HIS ability; I think 2 is fairer. Regardless of top scoring in the 1st innings he should have done better, he looked like a bored teenager in the field, and his 2nd innings performance was woeful, especially as yesterday on your blog I predicted him to save the game. So for letting me down, I say 2.
I also predicted Colly to save the game, and I'm glad he did his bit. He is the only England batsman who you can rely on not to gift the Aussies his wicket. Apart from Monty of course...
Complain about this comment
Pietersen 0.
He needs to be dropped. We don't need players who play for number uno letting the team down. I would rather 10 Collingwoods rather than one Pietersen.
Complain about this comment
Only Darth-Blader has realized the real reason for this debacle when he said "So much is mental". England are about as mentally tough as a piece of onion paper! They came out like swash-buckling pirates ready to demoralize a perceived weakened enemy only to be really shown how to do it by being put to the sword themselves. Mental toughness is something you can't teach overnight, so I suppose we just soldier on. Strauss is highly unimaginative, Cook and Bopara will find out through the series how good they really are - I suspect not very good at the top level. Pietersen, two awful shots, are he and Prior brain-dead? Collingwood - need 6 more like him. As for the bowlers, I'm sorry Monty but you have to go for Harmison, why was he not picked for the first Test? Onions should be given a go early in the series for the schoolboy Broad, keep Jimmy and Swann (who else is there?) but look no further than the derided Hauritz if you want to know about mental toughness. McGrath was wrong but we will still probably lose 3-1, winning the last Test when the pressure is off, as we usually do!
Complain about this comment
Your ratings for England show that your not up to the job ! Don't blog anymore on cricket please or if you do at least be honest and put realistic scores in , no England player deserved more than 4.
Complain about this comment
cricketing stargazer...that partly proves my point, the fact that there was no pressure on him to perform says it all. aussies were warming up in that game, everything to lose, nothing to gain...different story in test match.
like i say harmison has had many many chances and been proven to be not good enough.
Complain about this comment
@67
Spot on. He always has, and always will, play for himself. His comments after his first innings fiasco were typical. A testosterone-fuelled numpty - a criticism I have been posting on the 606 borads for many a year.
Complain about this comment
You mean, Steve Harmison needed to bowl badly for the Lions to help England's cause?
Anyway, I suspect that the selectors will go for Onions, who is far and a away the leading wicket-taker in First Class cricket this season (the only bowler with more than 50 wickets). Steve Harmison is some way behind in 2nd, although he is closing in on 50 in the current match and Liam Plunkett is a distant 3rd. He would be my dark-horse pick.
Complain about this comment
As much as I'm incredulously biased towards England, some of these ratings are very wrong.
KP a 6??? He was pathetic and then tried to make excuses for one of the worst test dismissals I've ever seen, and the second innings was hardly a stunning delivery either. Could be a great batsman, but his ego gets in the way, just look at Ponting, who when questioned in the presentation played down his 150. Personally I've have given Prior more than 6, because from what I saw he didn't make any mistakes with the gloves, for which he has been previously slated, and scored a 50 first innings and was dismissed by a decent delivery. Swann should be, as many have said, more than a 4, I would say probably 6/7. Can't give Jimmy or Monty that high for being able to defend, we may all be delighted, but that's what they should do every innings. So really we should be questionning why they can't apply themselves in this manner everytime. Plus Monty was poor with the ball, and Jimmy needs it to swing, which he demonstrated when it does, he is a world class bowler, but otherwise is ineffective.
As for the Aussie ratings, all very fair as they played well as a team but Johnson a 6??? I would have said a 3/4, he bowled very poorly and certainly was nowhere near the supposed 'greatness' tag he came with. He was their weak link.
Next match:
Strauss - perhaps this match is the kick in the teeth he needs, particularly regarding his captaincy on the field.
Cook - out, maybe Bopara to open and Vaughan to be coaxed out of retirement, he seems to rise to the big occasions.
Bopara - another chance as a first ashes test can be fairly daunting.
Pietersen - somebody please tell him to sort out his ego and play for the team, or he has to get ditched.
Collingwood - inspired, although he always seems to need situations similar to today's to produce the wonder innings.
Prior
Swann - given his batting I'd move him above Flintoff, which may allow Flintoff to feel less pressure and find some rhythm.
Flintoff
Broad - like Bopara, needs another chance.
Anderson - arguably the worlds most reliable batsman!! needs the ball to swing but if it does, beware Aussies.
Panesar - personally I'd still love to see Hoggard brought back, but I guess with Jimmy as well it puts too many eggs in the swing basket, so either Harmison or Onions. Prefer Onions but maybe with so many Ashes newbies feeling the heat maybe Harmison is the man to be a short fix.
Complain about this comment
I think Broad should be dropped for Harmi next test, all very well being able to bat but he's meant to be taking wickets primarily and isnt doing so. If it was upto me Harmison in for Broad would be the only change I'd make for Lords.
Complain about this comment
it just shows his ignorance and puerility when at the age of 28 he hasnt even worked out what decorum, integriy and doing the right thing is. Australia will work him out this series and show him what he is. A player potentially as good as sir viv richards but who will never will be because of his personality, self delusion and attitude.
Complain about this comment
I think Tom now agrees that he got both Swann and Anderson wrong.
Bit unsure about Ponting's low score though......
Overall, yet another match where the Aussies determination, aggression and downright will to (nearly) win completely outshone England's - I don't know how they do it, but they do it time and time again. Doesn't seem to matter who they pick, they always out-fight and out-passion English players (with a few notable exceptions in my lifetime anyway). For such a relatively small country you HAVE to admire them for that.....
Complain about this comment
Larry-the Lamb (post 13)plus other posters...nearly being beaten by an innings means jack. England fough for a draw, and got it. It's an 11 man game, and the bowling team have got to take all 10 wickets. The Aussies didn't. Look in the scorebook. Nothing else to be said.
Rookster.
PS, Tom, couldn't agree more with your ratings
Complain about this comment
Was there for the 2nd day and found bowlers to be lack lustre,Freddie only one with fire in his belly.
English batsmen need to take heed of the likes of Katich,barely remember a shot but got a ton with no problems.Monty now fields well and didn't look in any trouble fighting for the draw.
Freddie must lead attack and Harmi must come back for next test, we need some agression. Aussies took 19 wkts whilst we took 6!!
Can't wait for next England game in wales..well done Cardiff
Complain about this comment
Strauss failed to take any initiative in the field and the England bowlers only managed 6 wickets s a result. Pietersen played for himslef not England - why a 6? The spin duo strategy failed too, but Panesar was the more troubling of the two.
Ponting got 19 wickets in a rain reduced match (the real reason England managed to hold on was the time lost on days 3 and 4) with only one spinner (interesting how the pitch suddenly spun when H. was bowling). Ponting worthy man of the match - for his captaincy.
Complain about this comment
Think Swanny deserved more than 4 after his performance with the bat,the bloke is more or less an all rounder, but overall the scores were fair.
Was this not a typical start for England in the Ashes though? Surely we can't play as bad as we have in this game again.The only thing that worries me is that England seem to have the same old problem's, the top five batter's have failed again to put in a score on a batter friendly wicket where four Aussies basically took the game away, the bowler's constantly bowl down the leg side whereas even an average Oz bowler does the basics well,apart from Johnson in this game and we seem to rely too much on K.P. and Flintoff to change the game.
I would think about bringing Rob Key in at 2 in place of Cook and put Onion in for Broad who seems to have lost his way recently.I would remind K.P. of his team responsibility's and get the whole team to grow a spine and actually look like they dislike the Aussies and want to win by showing them footage of Siddle bowling at Swann.
Complain about this comment
Fabulous rear guard by Colly & the tail, but England will need to step up in the next game if they want to compete in the series. Anyone else think that KP looked like he was auditioning for the next 'striclty come dancing' with his leave alone? A perfect cha-cha IMHO.
Still - in the last few series we've lost the first test ... watch out Aussies!
Complain about this comment
England has demonstrated why are the number-1 Test team in the world - India is second - England thwarted a weak Aussie bowling attack and Aussie bowing incompetance was on display
England batsmen proved why they are the best in the world - I have often said Collingwood is the world's premier batsman and fieldsman = he prove dit in ample terms - Aussies were also struggling to handle Panesar in thsi Test - Aussie sneed to improve their ability to play Swann and Panesar
Overall England held the upperhand throughout this match - way to go england
Complain about this comment
I think given Strauss followed Collingwood into the chicanery of clearly wasting time by unusual means the Australians have taken this relatively well - the Silver Ferns accused Collingwood of being a cheat. Frankly I'd sack him if only for his continuing passive captaincy without him being exposed so badly today. BTW what other countries do or have done does not interest me, just my own - it's irrelevant.
Even ignoring his gamesmanship positive cricket is playing to a goal not playing shots with high risk and low tariff values and prattling about playing your natural game. England are like vast mantra chanting machine that takes the one liners they repeat as analysis, knowledge and strategy not as useful reminders and no more.
Also Strauss would be advised to keep his mouth shut rather than making sad pathetic excuses/insulting people's intelligence like the batters were not briefed on the rules before they went out! He's effectively saying we had to stretch the rules as we were incompetent and did not realise how cricket matches end - does he want to us to think he's totally incompetent?
Compare Ponting's response with the Lions - we did not lose because of that. The self righteous sanctimony of our sporting media in blowing up single acts in games and obfuscating losing behaviour is just silly.
On what we can control it was poor performance on a total draw wicket. The top 4 batsmen all reeked and I am not sure we can rely on Prior, Flintoff and the tail on wickets with a tad more for the bowlers. Our bowlers had frighteningly little penetration. Nice to see the central contracts had the players super fit only Broad, KP and Flintoff went off for injuries.
Hopefully England can pick up from here and now they can play underdogs again. I'd take out Panesar whose record like Harmison's suggests he needs fast bouncy wickets and his favourite grounds like Trent Bridge and Old Trafford are not on the agenda this year. He's the one mule in the field and normally an automatic out. Also one of Broad or Anderson. I'd then bring in Onions and Sidebottom to give us a different angle plus as the tests are back to back we can shuffle our pack as no one stands out and treat it like a 5 game series rather than wear out the same bowlers game in game out.
Hopefully nice that Panesar's career as somewhere near a first choide finished on a relative high. He has the right attitude just not the ability and with his fielding and batting a negative he needs to improve an awful lot to stay around the team surely bar injury and this time next year he might be 3rd choice spinner.
Complain about this comment
Just watch. England will go into the sheds & come out full of soul searching & great intent. The Aussies will go into the sheds, work out what went wrong & deal with it.
Complain about this comment
Despite his lack of success bowling I think Swan's rating is unfair onloy a 4 given he actually batted with aggression and bravery in his innings and gave the score a bit more respectable for England doing what KP failed to do to the Australian bowlers in both innings
People seem to forget he came out with average of 79 ! from the match with the bat.
KP's rating has divided opinion but where as in the past he has gotten away with it due to the bowlers taking the wickets or other batsmen hiding his failures on flat wickets . This time it almost cost England the match.. you are not gonna get many favours from the Australians this series... I hope we don't see any more of that first innings shot otherwise there will be calls for him to be dropped for failing to bat responsibly in the situation
Collingwood despite his critics has proven again what a fighter he is .. he is not as gifted as Pietersen but he slugged it out which would have impressed the aussies
I am also a bit concerned about the top order failing badly and especially Bopara deciding to flash at everything outside the stumps
Panesar for his bravery will be dropped for Onions or Harmison for the 2nd test as someone needs to back Flintoff in the attack.
Complain about this comment
OK Jimmy & Monty are in as bowlers but in 99 of any previous 100 tests that would be 1-0 the Matildas. To me they saved an unsaveable game. So respect to Jimbo (50 innings, no quacker) and Monty (and thus Colly, his batting buddy) The questions to be asked mainly involve Cook,Bopara & KP.
Complain about this comment
The way England players reacted at the end of the game was if they had won the whole tournament. This was a very poor performance. The weak spinner of Australia performed better than both "key to victory" spinners of England. The England team is considered a superior test team. I laugh at that.
The press builds up the team so much. And like the English football team they never perform.
Complain about this comment
My ratings:
Strauss: 4, batting was dissapointing.
Cook: 3, never got going.
Bopara: 5, got a start, but got out.
Pietersen: 5, looked alright, but played two ridiculous shots.
Collingwood: 9, Match-saving knock, good innings in 1st innings too.
Prior: 6, played well but nothing special.
Flintoff: 6, had an off-key match, but wasn't awful
Swann: 6, batted well, bowled averagely but was unlucky with LBW's.
Broad: 3, bad match, bowled woefully and batting wasn't great.
Anderson: 7, good batting, saved the game, arguably our best bowler!
Panesar: 6, decent batting under pressure, bowling wasn't too good.
Rather generous ratings, but I'm in a good mood as we saved the match.
Lords next, one change for me. HARMISON FOR PANESAR. Feel panesar wasn't at his best, pitch at Lords won't do him favours, plus harmison is better batsman too.
Complain about this comment
Shouldn't the cricket headline be:
"Outclassed England scrape a draw."
For most of the match, they were hardly defiant - if not for a rain interruption they would have lost.
Complain about this comment
Despite what most people think Monty Paneser is the only true world class spinner in England.
He has a natural inkling to take wickets, something I have not seen in an English spinner for decades.
What he needs to do is not overthink his game, forget about variation and other peoples opinions and just back himself, because if he does that the wickets will come due to his natural ability.
He is a bit like Tim Henman and I fear that overthinking will ruin his career.
Complain about this comment
Poor bowling performance but not from the spinners. When are an English team really going to give their spinners a chance to do what spinners need to do. Don't chop and change them, give then long periods to build up pressure. Monty was especially poorly utilised I thought. The 3rd day, before lunch, Monty takes Ponting, and Broad not Swann is brought on at the other end when we needed men around the bat. This has been the malaise of England cricket ever since I started watching the game. I can't even remember a more spin friendly wicket in England or Wales.
Complain about this comment
IMHO KP should be batting at number 3 , the position that most test playing countries bat their best batsman ..........and as KP thinks he's our best batsman , then that should be his position .
Strauss worries me , in that he doesn't appear to be a natural leader .......he got the job by default and doesn't impress ....give the job to Colly .
As regard to the ratings , then KP overrated ......Swann underrated ....
And as for the next test , Onions in for Monty (sorry Monty), KP batting 3 , Bopara 4 and Colly as captain (although it isn't going to happen )
Complain about this comment
The double standards on here and general whining about the unfairness of the result are music to our ears. Surely, the same people who vilified England when twice the West Indies escaped with are draw in similar cicumstances in the Caribbean can't be the ones vilifying England for escaping now... can they?
What happened to the mantra: "you have to take 20 wickets to win a Test"?
Complain about this comment
If I was Kevin Pietersen I would quit if the man scored 200 evertime he batted people on here would still not be satisfied.
He is an unorthodox player who scores runs by the shed load and has done from the word go. He got out to a poor shot in the first innings. Was he alone in doing this no he wasn't so did Cook Strauss Bopara Collingwood and Flintoff. In the second he misjudged a delivery Cook strauss Bopara Priorall played poor shots.
The thing that struck me was Collingwood's dismisal today. I like Colly he is good at grinding it out.His innings was heroic and he was out playing a poor shot. If that had been KP he would have been crucified at that stage in the game with 40 minutes go.
We have one set of standards for KP and a much lower set for everybody else. The other batsmen know they can play poorly or play stupid shots to get out as KP will either score lots of runs or top score with out a century and get slated by the media while no other batsmen is mentioned for their mistakes.
Complain about this comment
Aussie ratings:
Hughes: 4, saw flashes of goodness, but not enough.
Katich: 9, near flawless batting, careful but got big runs.
Ponting: 9, led from the front, 150 and inventive captaincy, one problem, they didn't win!
Hussey: 4, batted poorly, took a great catch which saves his rating.
Clarke: 7, so close but yet so far, good batting and average bowling, good.
North: 9, ashes debut, unbeaten century, says it all.
Haddin: 8, great batting, good keeping just not quite perfect.
Johnson: 4, got a couple of wickets in both innings, but line was woeful in 2nd.
Hauritz: 8, answered his critics with brilliant bowling and important wickets.
Siddle: 7, good fiery bowling, didn't get rewarded.
Hilfenhaus: 7, got the ball to swing and caused big problems.
Debate: Stuart Clark in or out? What about Brett Lee if fit? Problems for Aussies, hard to let go of hilfenhaus, he did a good job. Not Siddle, probably. Maybe Johnson? Give your opinions.
Complain about this comment
England 60/110. 6/11
Australia 85/110. 8.5/11
Team of the match: Australia.
Aussie player: Ricky Ponting.
England player: Paul Collingwood.
In Paris for Lords. C'mon England!
Complain about this comment
Right - let's have your line-ups for Thursday. You're somehow chairman of both sets of selectors - who's getting the nod, and who the old heave-ho?
Complain about this comment
Given mine Tom, what do you think?
Complain about this comment
oh dearie me! aren't you all rather missing the point, yet again?
Complain about this comment
I'm uneasy about people being too critical of KP - yes he gave his wicket away, but he still top scored in our first innings. The other batsmen have got to take on board the gritty determination of Collingwood and try to grind innings out at the moment to compensate for a maverick talent. KP has the ability to destroy the opposition and change the course of a test match, but he will always frustrate by playing in ways that are audacious if they come off, but look terrible of he gets out. We nearly lost this test through a combination of lack-lustre bowling, unimaginative tactics and tentative batting. Let's hope we break the Lord's voodoo by playing with confidence and passion.
Complain about this comment
josart12 - I think England are more likely to bring Onions in for Monty. Whether Harmie gets in might depend on whether they want to retain Broad. Apart from that, I think England will be unchanged...
Complain about this comment
Why have england got such a weak bowling line up when Hoggard is in the wings. The selectors will take a 4 man pace attack to lords who are all low on confidence, in Broad, Anderson, Flintoff and Onions, when Hoggard has been dooing so well, and he's a proven test wicket taker. Ang what about Sidebottom, Englands best current bowler with an average 27.70, the only one below thirty I think, but he's been ignored as well. Have england got a new policy of forgetting about bowlers once they're older than thirty, in the name of planning for the future. Anderson runs hot and cold, Broad needs a season or two more of county cricket before he's a test regular, but he'll get there. Flintoff's flintoff. And Onions has never really been a devastating bowler, he played well in his 1 test, but that was only against the windies and Ponting & co are a different kettle of fish.
And with 'building for the future' at the fore, why when going for a spinner who can bat a bit, did they go for Swann over Rashid. Englands selection policy seems to be without rhyme or reason.
And as I'm in full rant, Cook's not been particularly dazzling.
My Dream, (cos it'll never happen), 2nd Test 11
1)Andrew Strauss
2)Scott Newman
3)Owais Shah
4)KP
5)Ravi Bopara
6)Paul Collingwood
7)Andrew Flintoff
8)Tim Ambrose
9)Ryan Sidebottom
10)Matthew Hoggard
11)Monty Panesar
Good batting down to 7, a Proper Glovesman, 3 seamers, Englands best spinner, and two dibbly dobblers. Newman's been overlooked for years, lord knows why. Far stronger side than the one they'll actually field.
Englands give established batters too many chances, but don't give established bowlers enough when they hit some bad form.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Tom, they will name this XI, plus Onions and Harmison. This will give multiple options depending on the final state of the pitch. I suspect that Onions will get the nod and that Panesar will be named although there will be no real expectation of playing him.
Complain about this comment
The calls for dropping KP are laughable.
Would Australia drop Ponting if he only scored 69? Would West Indies drop Chanderpaul? Would South Africa drop Smith?
KP has a winners attitude. He has the same sort of attitude that the Australians have. It's not a bad thing. Sometimes it does go a bit far, but most of the time he scores the runs so it doesn't matter.
Two Ashes series so far, he finished top of the averages in 2005, and top of the England averages in 2006/7.
But people won't be happy unless he either scores 100 every innings, or if he turns into a nice guy like Strauss.
Oh, and I agree with one of the above posters who said that if KP had gotten out in Collingwood's circumstances today, he would have been crucified.
Complain about this comment
Hard to say what the lineup will be. I don't know what the wicket is like. I would assume the same squad with a choice between Panesar and Onions, depending on the wicket and Bell missing out unless injury to someone in the top 5. Could possibly see Broad lose his place to Harmlessone, but the latter underperforms so often, it would be a huge risk to actually pick him for the XI.
It is always best to leave the kneejerk reactions to the uninformed and the tabloids (usually a sub-set of the former), so I wouldn't give the heave-ho to anyone on one sub-par game. Before this test, many didn't want Collingwood in the side, and how stupid would they look now?
Complain about this comment
England were dreadful. As long as people continue to celebrate mediocrity so much the team will never get anywhere. If Australia had performed as badly as England there would have been a serious inquest, but as it stands people are in the mindset as if England have just achieved something through merit. Let's face it, the rain saved England, if the next Test is normal weather it's gonna be a thrashing.
Complain about this comment
So Hauritz, who bowled much better than any of England's spinners gets a 6 while Panesar gets a 9? Were you just giving out points for the last day or the entire test? Coz for 4 days, Monty, Anderson, Broad and Swann did absolutely nothing. They couldnt even get Australia's 10 wickets and even North got a 100 against that attack. Remind me again what did Flintoff do with the bat to deserve a 6? With the ball? Apart from Collingwood for his last day performance, none of the England players deserve more than a 5 and for Broad, even a 3 is generous. If Panesar is worth 9, Ponting deserves a 99 for leading from the front, getting England into massive trouble time and again with good innovative captaincy and getting the best out of an attack nowhere near the likes of what it was 2 years ago. The only mistake he made the entire game was not getting Johnson off the attack towards the end. England got out of jail today, and this OTT rating shows exactly why they'll be in the same trouble in the next test.
Complain about this comment
I am surprised England have not got Hoggard, one of the architects of England's win in 2005 and much better than any bowler they have right now. He gets the ball to move both ways, something England didnt do at all this match. Hoggard is probably the most under-rated England player at the moment and to not have him in the squad is proof of the complete incompetence of the selectors.
As for keeping Pieterson out, laughable idea. He's still England's best batsman by a mile and is a match-winner. He's got the same attitude winners and big game players have, the kind of attitude Ponting, Dhoni and Warne have shown over the years. Much better than Mr nice guy Strauss who's nice guy captaincy almost cost England this game.
Complain about this comment
Ricky Ponting deserves a 9 for giving England a test match batting master class and setting brutally efficient fields.His only mistake was in his choice of bowlers on the last afternoon - he didnt realise that Hilfenhaus 8 & Hauritz 8 were by far the most dangerous bowlers he had against those english batters- he even forgot that Fred has a habit of getting out to spinners!
Well done Paul Collingwood 9, and Anderson 9 sure showed he has nerve to hang around when needed!
Complain about this comment
I can only imagine what a lamentable headline the BBC would've used had Andy Murray or Scotland produced such a dire performance!
Complain about this comment
This is a sad indictment of the way English journalists and fans run hot and cold. The scores are ridiculous. Let's see: Panesar specialist spinner is 'outbowled by Hauritz' yet gets the same score. Hauritz was integral to getting Australia into a winning position on the final day. He bowled very well. He should have got more like an 8.
Ponting presents one of the great innings on a pitch which had just claimed 11 wickets and gets ... 7 the same as Panesar. Sorry your credibility has taken a serious dive. Incidentally this is the same guy that wins Man of the Match...
On my assessment no englishman deserves more than 7. You could give that to Collingwood for his defiance but fair dinkum anyone else and you are in danger of talking up a substandard performance by a less than average team.
Oh and you are right about Johnson. He was not impressive but for the bouncer that took Strauss' wicket in the first innings. That was a corker. On the other hand, Johnson is a slow starter. He'll improve as the series develops.
Cook is a technically suspect player. I think you'll find the Aussies have been paying attention.
One more thing, those who had touted Prior as a number 6 batsman are poor judges of batting. He'll do well against lowly teams but he does not have either the eye or technique to succeed as a specialist batsman. Haddin on the other hand has both. Steve Waugh, no poor judge of batting, rated him the best batsman out of the Aussie team while he was playing for NSW.
You can feel relieved that your team, and in particular, the rain which washed out a session on day 4, saved the day. But patting yourselves on the back for this performance will mean you have set your sights way too low.
Complain about this comment
Team for next test
Strauss (be a bit rude not to as he Is captain)
Trescothic (please please please come out of retirement, your country needs you)
Pieterson (get up the order and stop hiding like a scared school boy)
Bopara (play shots from 4 without the pressure on as top 3 should have put rins on the board)
collingwood ( there to keep it together when top 4 havnt put runs on the board)
Prior ( throw bat at the ball like the dandy swash buckler he is)
Flintoff (opening the bowling with that nice shiney conker)
broad ( concentrate on line and length lad over and over and over again)
Anderson (opening bowling with freddie using the slope to help change the angle when he does eventually swing it)
swann (tighten it up from one end to build pressure)
Onions (better alternitive to Harmison)
Complain about this comment
"Could possibly see Broad lose his place to Harmlessone, but the latter underperforms so often, it would be a huge risk to actually pick him for the XI."
Why a huge risk? Harmison is on fire at present, picking up another 5 wickets for Durham against Yorkshire at the weekend. He roughed up and nullified Hughes in the Lions game. Not only is Harmison presently in peak form but when riding this high, he is the one English bowler the Aussies truly fear.
Why on earth have two spinners at Lords? The plan failed at Cardiff. Bring in Harmison for Panesar. It's as obvious as Gordon Broon is doomed.
Complain about this comment
Tom, you must be smoking the funny stuff! How any England player can get more than 6 points is beyond me. Strauss, Cook & Bopara would each get 2 points each; one point for walking out to the middle in each innings and realising what end of the bat to hold. The top 3 look very weak, in particular Cook who looks like a walking wicket.
KP 5, Prior 4, Collingwood 6. Flintoff 5 will get better with this one under his belt and his batting looked as good as its been for a couple of years. Swann, Panesar & Broad were woeful from a bowling perspective and get 3 each. I really thought Swann would get amongst the wickets but his length was all wrong. And finally Jimmy 6 who never gave up with bat or ball.
Agree with most of your ozzie marks.
One thing that must no happen is for Harmlesson to be recalled. He's bowled his one good spell of the year already.
Complain about this comment
shouldn't the selectors decide between flintoff and broad as to the "all rounder" slot. Broad's bowling is not good enough for a place in the test team. AND how many chances can we give Cook. he always does enough to keep his place, but he has never contributed a match winning or saving innings.
Complain about this comment
Softandfluffy, nice to see someone speak some sense. Steve Harmison has rarely let England down in home Tests, even if he is a reluctant tourist. He bowled well for the Lions v Australia and probably bought Phillip Hughes' wicket for Andrew Flintoff. He is also desperate to play again and his form is showing it. Having had a dreadful start to the season he now has 42 wickets @ 19.4 this season, behind only Graeme Onions' 54 @ 16.8 and way ahead of the third highest wicket-taker (Liam Plunkett, with 31 @ 24.7).
If the pitch has some pace, play him now, while he is in form. The selectors faced a similar dilema last season and delayed picking him too late v South Africa but he made a significant impact when he did play. If not, let him know that he's in the mix and go with Onions.
The most important thing though is to pick the best side for the conditions and not let silly prejudices (for example, the habit of people who would never dare face him on a cricket pitch calling him "Harmlesson" - try saying that to some of the players who he has dismissed, or to Phillip Hughes, or to Justin Langer).
Complain about this comment
Monty Panesar is not someone I'd have on my team in a month of Sundays...he's several notches below Test caliber! And if you think that this chap is Test stuff, you have probably over indulged in mind-altering stuff!
That the selectors went with him in lieu of so many great talents around is baffling! I don't think these chaps have a clue; they must be replaced!
Complain about this comment
cricket has weird rules , in football 1-1 , or 2-2 etc is a draw, in cricket a team can declare with almost as many runs and less wickets lost , England gets two innings loses almost all its wickets gets about 20 more runs in total and its a DRAW??? , you can tell I don't know how the rules work, but for the headlines to say "defiant England" kind of makes it sound silly in my humble non cricket mind opinion
Complain about this comment
i watch county and one day cricket at trent bridge on a regular basis and the only change to the team for lords would be monty out and sidebottom in, this is hard on monty but we only need one spinner at lords and sidebottom bowling left arm over or round the wicket will make a tremendos difference to the bowling attack and he will get wickets!
Complain about this comment
I think it quite laughable that you have rated so highly for Anderson and Panesar. Ok, so they did good with the bat. But seriously, based upon that reasoning, you should have scored Swann as high if not higher than both of them. Anderson deserves a 6 or 7, Panesar deserves a 5 IMO. Just because they happened to be at the end of the batting order does not warrant them having an inflated score: as that does a diservice to the rest of the batting line up (in particular swann). Couldnt agree more with Collingwood's rating. He is often described as a gritty player: and this innings just proved it. England will have to improve considerbaly though for lords. Id only make one change though. Id drop panesar for onions. I think Broad deserves another chance. If he has another bad game then its harmy time.
Complain about this comment
Romeplebian can you please keep your humble non cricket mind opinion to yourself next time please!
To the cricket, I've got to be honest i'm a massive fan of Monty. I'm very partial to a cult hero and so i'm probably a little bit biased in wanting him to be part of the next team. Saying that of course, it's extremely difficult to drop Swann after his great start to the year and his rather good batting this week. I'd be tempted if Lord's is turning even slightly to have them both but only because i'm quite gutless at dropping people.
In truth I don't think it matters which one gets dropped since either will bowl a great deal better next time out (they cant bowl any less effectively) as long as Gonions is in there for the next test. I know what everyone's saying about Harmison (great in home tests, the one English bowler the Aussies are actually scared of (when he's in form (and after flintoff))) but what people are saying is just how good he's been lately with Durham and the Lions but he's played second fiddle to Gonions all year at Durham and lets not forget Gonions took to test cricket like a duck to water against (admittedly a lacklustre) Windies team.
Monty and Gonions for me!
Complain about this comment
I couldn't bare to watch... just listened to the radio pacing like an expectant father towards the end and then resorted to furiuos ironing as an attempted diversion. During Ashes 05 I aged a few years and if this keeps up I fear something may just burst.
Coming out with a draw felt like a victory after England had been ground into the dirt over the last few days, but this thrilling escape should not be allowed to fool the England camp into thinking there's not really too much wrong. England must drop the b******t philosophy that the batsmen should always play their 'natural game' and that an acceptable excuse for getting out playing an outrageous shot is 'well that's the way I play'. Curbing the reckless and stupid shots should not be beyond the mental capacity of our top batsmen and does not mean they can't still be attacking and aggressive. Collingwood again showed the way today and if Pietersen who has far more talent had half his resolve and patience he could be the best in the world. Hopefully England's top 5 will also have learn't something from the Aussie batsmen about how to construct an innings, especially the Ponting masterclass.
Bopara, who is rated by Gooch (a man who knows more about the game than I ever will) looked worryingly out of his depth and I can't help thinking Bell or even Rob Key would be better at three.
Panesar who still looks far from his best should make way for Harmison and Onions should come in for Broad who is also some way off his best.
If Vaughan hadn't retired there might also be a case for bringing him in despite lack of batting form just for his captaincy skills a la Brearley... Strauss looked simply clueless at times.
As an armchair fanatic it's easy for me to say all this and at the end of the day, my amateurish opinion based only on 30 or so years watching England with a moth to lightbulb like addiction counts for nothing.
The only change I really expect is Onions for Panesar for Lords and Pietersen to still be saying there was nothing wrong with the reverse sweep he played that went straight up in the air when he had the Aussie bowlers on the rack.
That said, I really hope against all the odds that whatever team goes out, England turn it around and we stuff the Aussies at Lords!
Complain about this comment
sisterkaren wrote:
If I was Kevin Pietersen I would quit if the man scored 200 evertime he batted people on here would still not be satisfied.
He is an unorthodox player who scores runs by the shed load and has done from the word go. He got out to a poor shot in the first innings. Was he alone in doing this no he wasn't so did Cook Strauss Bopara Collingwood and Flintoff. In the second he misjudged a delivery Cook strauss Bopara Priorall played poor shots.
The thing that struck me was Collingwood's dismisal today. I like Colly he is good at grinding it out.His innings was heroic and he was out playing a poor shot. If that had been KP he would have been crucified at that stage in the game with 40 minutes go.
We have one set of standards for KP and a much lower set for everybody else. The other batsmen know they can play poorly or play stupid shots to get out as KP will either score lots of runs or top score with out a century and get slated by the media while no other batsmen is mentioned for their mistakes.
-------------------------------------------------------------
SisterKaren you have got things totally out of proportion here. If KP scored 200 every innings we would be delighted. In fact he doesn't even need to do that. But with his ability we would like him to get big scores that really make a difference.
As to Collingwood's dismissal this afternoon, I think you are being really hard on the man. There is no comparison with the Pietersen dismissals. It was Colly's first error or lapse of concentration in over 5 and a half hours at the crease - 344 minutes to be precise. That's 31 minutes longer than it took Ricky Ponting to score 150. Collingwood was grinding out time and the runs were less important. Yes, he fell before the job was complete and it could all have been different but for the resolve of the numbers 10 and 11. But at least he took them nearly all the way and set the example, and your criticism is way off the mark. If KP had played that innings - unlikely that he would have - we would not have complained.
You're right though that the rest of the top order failed miserably and they also deserve criticism.
Complain about this comment
Fantastic result for England well done lads.... tactically we got the Australians in the end the time wasting tactic was excellent and with the 12th man issue seems to have Pointings back up. If we cant bet them on the field least we can focus on mental games. Thank God for rain and bad light.
Complain about this comment
Cricketing_stargazer wrote:
Steve Harmison has rarely let England down in home Tests, even if he is a reluctant tourist. He bowled well for the Lions v Australia and probably bought Phillip Hughes' wicket for Andrew Flintoff. He is also desperate to play again and his form is showing it. Having had a dreadful start to the season he now has 42 wickets @ 19.4 this season, behind only Graeme Onions' 54 @ 16.8 and way ahead of the third highest wicket-taker (Liam Plunkett, with 31 @ 24.7).
If the pitch has some pace, play him now, while he is in form. The selectors faced a similar dilema last season and delayed picking him too late v South Africa but he made a significant impact when he did play. If not, let him know that he's in the mix and go with Onions.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Yes, Harmison is more reliable in home tests. But England need to build a team that can play in all tests. This horses for courses stuff just doesn't work. And I don't know why you are quoting all his county figures. Every year he gets into form with Durham but he is different when playing for England. Yes he came back strongly at the Oval last summer but went off the boil again once the winter tours got underway. What are England supposed to do? Pick someone else to tour, he does brilliantly, but then drop him back in England because Harmison has taken a couple of fivefers at Durham?
If you're talking county cricket, his team mate Onions has done better than Harmison, he played a couple of test matches and did well, and he is younger. Time for England to move on, I'm afraid, Harmison has let them down too many times.
And talking of being afraid, do you seriously believe that the Aussies "fear" Harmison - after 2006/7?? I don't think so! He roughed Hughes up, something Flintoff was capable of doing and did.
Complain about this comment
Cricketing_stargazer wrote: "at the end of the day, it was the failure of the Australian bowlers, twice"
Are you for real mate??? if we "failed" by only taking 19 wickets on a deck like that - when compare to Englands 6 wickets... on a pitch that you guys were apparently going to pencil in as a win... what does that say about your pop-gun attack. Yes we didnt take the last wicket, but I think that was more through luck then good batting... I mean how many times did they play-and-miss???? good luck taking 10 wickets in lords, let alone 20. Aussies deserved to go ahead 1-0. You guys had the best of conditions and should have done a lot better then you did. What is it 1931 since you last won at Lords against the aussies (I stand to be corrected on the year) but its somewhere around there.
Complain about this comment
Ponting was rightly Man of the match but you have given him 7................one more than Pietersen.
The latter showed yet again why he remains a long way away from being the great player he thinks he is whilst the former showed, for at least the 38th time, just why he is a true great of the modern era with stats to match.
The marks you have awarded these 2 performances simply beggars belief and renders the rest irrelevant
Complain about this comment
As several others have said (and Tom himself has agreed to), the 4 for Swann is farsical in comparison to 9 and 7 for Anderson and Monty. Whilst not at the absolute death, Swann's batting was more important than either in saving the test over two innings. Should that place him above Monty in the selection for the next test? Hell yes.
I, for one, am fed up with the hype about Stuart Broad. Young? Yes. Willing? Certainly. Potential? Quite probably. But the fact remains that he is yet to even secure many first-class five-fors, let alone be considered a test-level bowler given the combination of poor average and poor economy rate. If I watched him with no knowledge of who he was, I would assume he was a batsman with bowling potential, not a bowler with "batting potential".
To use a simile, consider Sidebottom (and, incidentally, why was he not even in consideration for this game? Is he injured again?! Otherwise, given one of his T20 performances and the pace he bowled at, that seems another farsical choice). He played for England in a one-off over eight years ago - he took no wickets, got carted, and didn't seem the genuine article. Did England persevere with him for another 17 tests? Or did they send him back to county cricket, to learn his trade properly?
It was the latter, for those who are unsure. And in the last 18 months, he has produced the goods. Whereas those youngsters that England persevered with for several games (Plunkett, Mahmood, Tremlett to name a few bowlers) failed to make the progress needed, and are slowly learning their craft at county level. Broad needs to be turfed back to his county, and spend a few years learning his trade and proving his worth against seasoned county players. Despite the odd excellent performance, and the odd very good ball against a good batsman, he far too often looks out of his depth at this level, and I am not at all convinced that the best way to improve is to play test cricket against batsmen who can take you apart. You wouldn't put your talented 8-year-old goalkeeper against the likes of Ronaldo, Eto'o and Henry... and Broad does nothing to suggest he is more than a talent.
As for the batting... whilst it is hard to suggest that any particular batsman is dropped on this one performance, there are a couple of questions:
1) Is anyone really, really convinced that Bopara is an international #3? I can see him at 6, perhaps, but I am not sure he has the temperament to come in at 3 against quality attacks and, on this performance, I don't think he is sure of it either.
2) Is Pietersen ever going to be cut some slack? He only gets the abuse he does BECAUSE he is England's best batsman by a country mile, and when he gets out for 70 or so, there is a sense of inevitability that the team will fall apart. Most of the batsmen get out to stupid, irresponsible shots - he is the only one pilloried in the press and solely because every pundit and punter knows that he is so vital.
3) Given the performance of some of the Lions (not just in that game, but for the last 18+ months) such as Moore and Denly, and the complete inability of the England team to shake the "old boys club" mentality that sees players like Flintoff and Panesar immediately walk into the team at the first sign of fitness... is it even worth having county cricket? Even if Panesar outbowled Swann, does the fact that he'd taken 6 wickets at 50 or so a piece at county level mean nothing? How about the fact that, despite Flintoff being spoken about as some modern-day great, he averages under 32 with the bat and over 30 with the ball at test level?
I had high hopes that things might change under Flower, especially with the selection of players like Onions, but it looks like the same old story to me... One of the country's best T20 players (Napier) fails to even get a chance in the warm-up games, the fantastic performances of players like Onions (who completely outbowled Broad in the last series, in my view) see him get dropped, the enigmatic (though admittedly unreliable abroad) Harmison dismantles the Aussie top order in Worcester on a flat pitch and is overlooked... but Panesar dismisses a few tail-enders on a bowler-friendly pitch against a second-string county team and gets selected, because the pitch "might turn". Hauritz, the "pie chucker", completely outbowled the two English spinners. I couldn't be more glad... despite the sacking of Moores, the same fundamental selection issues remain with the England team, and I just feel saddened that after the inevitable stuffing that we'll receive over the next four tests, probably one player will be (unjustifiedly) made a scapegoat.
(END OF RANT)
Complain about this comment
I think we will all admit that we got out of jail there. We were totally outplayed and outclassed for the majority of the test match, however a draw will hopefully give the boys some momentum going forwards.
Not sure where the 'celebrated like they had won' comments came from about the English players (fans maybe). A few handshakes and pats on the backs aside, this was nothing like the scenes when the Aussies held on for a great draw 4 years ago (and rightly so as it was a great effort at the time). Ultimately they will have felt very relieved and anyone with an ounce of knowledge about sport or who has played any game will know the feeling of relief one has when you get away with a draw after taking a hammering. I'm sure the Aussies would have been pretty annoyed with themselves that they didn't finish it off.
I agree with some of the posters on here that KP is often unfairly judged. People want to either drop him / give him lower marks because he didn't bat to this true ability. Despite a couple of very soft dismissals the bottom line is he still top scored in the 1st innings and is our one true world class batsman that can win us a match. The Aussies would certainly like to see the back of him that's for sure. As a few have mentioned previously if KP got out in the circumstances that Colly did, he would have been dragged over the coals for being selfish and not playing for the team (not that anyone should after the innings he played yesterday). He truly is an enigma and I can understand people's frustrations, however he would be in my England 11 every time.
I live in Australia and was dreading coming to work today had we lost. It is beautiful to hear them whinging about the weather.."you would have lost if it wasn't for the rain" (probably but it was no surprise to anyone and Punter knew it was coming and could have declared earlier.oh and you still had a combined total of 15 overs at our no 10 and 11 and still couldn't wrap it up) and "you only got away with it cos you cheated..wasting time at the end" (to be fair I didn't mind the 1st time he came on with gloves and a message from the skipper..seen that many times in different sports all over the worldhave to admit I didn't like it when they came back again 5 minutes later and with the physio). Looking at the time at the end they wouldn't have had time for another over anyway and even if they didthey didn't look like they were troubling either batsman. Grasping at straws in the end which is a good sign.
Certainly a big smile on my face today and looks of stunned mullets from all around me. Have to say it was well worth staying up until 2am watching it unfold..despite my hands shaking at the end. I think I played every ball and I couldn't move in case my movement or desertion of the team for a nice night's sleep was in some way responsible for the loss of a wicket.
Anyway I'd bring in Harmy for Panesar and possibly Onions for Broad. No other knee jerk reaction changes required quite yet.
My scores;
Strauss: 4, Looked untroubled in the 1st innings until hurried into a poor 'shot'. Threw away his wicket in the second. Looked a little lost in the field but have confidence he will rebound.
Cook: 3, Thinking I may have been generous here as well. Looked completely nervous and ill at ease. Psychological rather than technical issues here.
Bopara: 4, Played some good shots in the 1st innings and will be disappointed at not pushing on, although did look very scratchy and nervous. 1st Ashes test so understandable. Unlucky decision in 2nd innings.
KP: 6, Top scored in the 1st innings but got out to a shocking shot. Not the only one though! Less said about his 2nd innings the better.
Colly: 8, Brave, gritty determined. What a star. A stand out in the top order. Two soft dismissals though and will be disappointed he didn't get a ton in both innings.
Prior: 6, Solid innings on the 1st day until bowled by a beauty from Siddle. One of his better performances behind the stumps. Looked comfortable in 2nd innings until soft dismissal.
Flintoff: 5, Not at his best, but some encouraging signs. Worked over Hughes beautifully. Unlucky inside edge in the 1st innings but didn't need to poke at the one in the 2nd.
Broad: 3, A disappointing game all around. Not on his game at all with bat or ball. Another player to give Hauritz some confidence.
Swann: 6, Fantastic performance with the bat, in both innings. Valuable runs and time that helped save the match. Wore a few from Siddle. Disappointing with the ball although was unlucky with a couple of LBWs.
Anderson; 6, Probably the pick of the bowlers in the end (but then that isn't saying too much I guess). Got some valuable runs in both innings and an immense effort at the end. Still no quacks in 50.
Monty: 5, The concentration and effort at the end there dragged him up (batting buddies clearly working for him), but another bowler disappointing with the ball.
Hughes: 5, Gave a sneak peak of his immense talent and flashes of brilliance. Worked over by Freddie after tea, but a real danger man if he gets going.
Katich: 9, Tough customer and England need to find a way to prise this guy out. Immense performance that set up the innings. Under bowled.
Ponting: 8, A true Captain's innings. Never looked troubled. Much better captaincy (although questions will remain over bowling choices at the end). He is filthy that they didn't win.
Hussey: 3, An ineffective game from a class and dangerous player. He will only get better over the series though.
Clarke: 7, Looked very comfortable until he gloved one late in the day. Deserved a century (but that would have made 5). Average bowling, never looked like taking a wicket.
North: 9, Unbeaten century on debut, slipped under the radar in the press after poor warm up games. This boy is quality though. Can bowl much better than he showed today.
Haddin: 8, Fantastic aggressive batting, when the pressure was off. Kept well although let a few squirt through his legs to the boundary.
Johnson: 5, Nowhere near his best in either innings. Line was awful with the new ball in the 2nd innings. I think he felt the pressure of his 1st ashes. Still picked up 5 wickets though. Beware!
Hauritz: 7, By far and way out spun his much vaunted opposition. Picked up some important wickets. Albeit one were cheap gifts but he created the pressure to get them. Will be hard to drop him for Lords.
Siddle: 7, Bowling figures didn't reflect the effort this boy showed. 2 late wickets on 1st day turned the match Australia's way and that over to Swann.just awesome. Thought he had done it when he got Colly.
Hilfenhaus: 8, Wasn't expected to play in the lead up, but was pick of the bowlers. Got the ball to swing all over the place on a flat wicket. Always looked dangerous. Glad Punter left him out to pasture at the end.
Total scores
England: 56 / 100
Australia: 76 / 100
If it was a boxing match it would have been stopped with England bleeding badly, concussed and asking for our collective mummy. Thankfully though we live to fight another day and can only get better.
Complain about this comment
travellingduttons - you dont work at my work do you :P
A lot of commonsense was written in your generally unbiased review... I found it a good read.
There has been a lot mentioned about Lee v Hauritz v Siddle, but the forgotten man in our squad is S Clarke. The guy is a clone of McGrath - bowls impeccable lines/ lengths and should be a definite starter for Lords. You cant forget that he is the 3rd ranked bowler in the world atm, according to the stats that matter. A little underdone in match fitness but certainly worth the gamble I think.
Personally, I think the time has come for Huss to perform. He has had a real lean trot of late, but Im sure he'll make this one count.
Whats made this series even more interesting is the friendly rivalry in our office as well. I was born in Wales but left to come to OZ when I was 8mths old, so I regard myself as an Australian - and one very proud and passionate when it comes to sport. One of my colleagues is a very very proud pom and has lived here in Perth for about 12+ years and cant stand Australians and despises any Australian team. So to make the series that more interesting we've put a bet on that money just cant buy... which ever country loses the Ashes, that person has to get their passport/ citizenship and be glad to be called an Aussie/ Pom. So you can imagine the pain when the aussies just fell short last night. Yes it finished at 2am her in Perth, but it was a lot later when I finally fell asleep. (At work today on 2 hrs sleep :|)
Really hanging for the 2nd test match... it will be interesting to see the final teams to face off on Thursday.
Really enjoying the feedback on this blog well done all.
Complain about this comment
sisterkaren wrote:
If I was Kevin Pietersen I would quit if the man scored 200 evertime he batted people on here would still not be satisfied.
He is an unorthodox player who scores runs by the shed load and has done from the word go. He got out to a poor shot in the first innings. Was he alone in doing this no he wasn't so did Cook Strauss Bopara Collingwood and Flintoff. In the second he misjudged a delivery Cook strauss Bopara Priorall played poor shots.
The thing that struck me was Collingwood's dismisal today. I like Colly he is good at grinding it out.His innings was heroic and he was out playing a poor shot. If that had been KP he would have been crucified at that stage in the game with 40 minutes go.
We have one set of standards for KP and a much lower set for everybody else. The other batsmen know they can play poorly or play stupid shots to get out as KP will either score lots of runs or top score with out a century and get slated by the media while no other batsmen is mentioned for their mistakes.
-------------------------------------------------------------
SisterKaren you have got things totally out of proportion here. If KP scored 200 every innings we would be delighted. In fact he doesn't even need to do that. But with his ability we would like him to get big scores that really make a difference.
As to Collingwood's dismissal this afternoon, I think you are being really hard on the man. There is no comparison with the Pietersen dismissals. It was Colly's first error or lapse of concentration in over 5 and a half hours at the crease - 344 minutes to be precise. That's 31 minutes longer than it took Ricky Ponting to score 150. Collingwood was grinding out time and the runs were less important. Yes, he fell before the job was complete and it could all have been different but for the resolve of the numbers 10 and 11. But at least he took them nearly all the way and set the example, and your criticism is way off the mark. If KP had played that innings - unlikely that he would have - we would not have complained.
You're right though that the rest of the top order failed miserably and they also deserve criticism.
I don't think I have in the press today KP is getting more inches of print than Colly.
I have seen him score over a hundred and be criticised on numerous occassions.
I am not having a go at Collingwood it was a fantastic innings but no matter how you look at it that shot exposed Monty Panasar for 11 overs and if Kevin Pietersen had been the person who played it he would have been pilorised for it.
Complain about this comment
crackedrock hit it right on the nail, both Flintoff and Petersen should be dropped as they have far too high an opinion of themselves and it shows in their commitment to team play. England will never prosper with both of them in the team.
Complain about this comment
Changes are required and they need to be bold. Rashid must come in Monty and Swann must go - Harmison must come in as well. Cook needs a break to sort out his obvious technical problems and Denley must surely be given a chance. The final call is to bring in Ryan Sidebottom (assuming he is fit) for Stuart Broard, who like Cook, needs to improve - they are both becoming comfortable 'permenant' fixtures and need to understand that their places are not automatic. Therefore its:
Strauss
Denley
Bopara
Pietersen
Collingwood
Prior
Flintoff
Rashid
Sidebottom
Harmison
Anderson
Complain about this comment
Why on earth is everyone anti-Pietersen. It is not up to him to score every run in the team and never get out. Fact is he scores runs, generally more than the rest. Yes he does some wayward things, Sunday's dismissal was attrocious, but he's not the only player who gets out with poor shot selection. Most wickets in cricket are down to batsmens mistakes.
Flintoff doesn't have problems with attitude. It's the fact he never is allowed to recover properly so he's constantly injured. He goes from injury to no recovery to next England series. He needs time to properly heal first, then some county cricket to get practice and form right. Niether him or Pietersen could ever live up to the hype and expectation the media put on them.
For Lords, swap Panesar for Onions only. One bad game doesn't make a bad team overall. Swann is a better spinner, Panesar still only bowls 1 delivery and everyone knows how to play it now, that's why doesn't get any wickets anymore. Onions is the best seamer at the moment and he played well enough against the windies, don't know why he wasn't playing in Cardiff. Harmison is not good enough. Getting wickets in '05 means nothing in '09. If I was Ponting I'd want him in the England attack as well!
Complain about this comment
Yes, it's more different than before. Take it on http://61.143.225.26/14.shtml
Complain about this comment
why are people complaining about the ratings for anderson and panesar. it was made clear in the blog why they were rated so highly despite their bowling performance. some of the comments are in the vein of 'just because they saved us from defeat'. if anytthing panesar was rated too low at 7. i was not surprised by anderson's batting performance, the guy recently had a song written about his batting by neil hannon. but panesar's batting astonished me. when it was nine down and he walked in i thought the game was up. monty=legend.
Complain about this comment
Strauss doesn't deserve 4. Why on earth he was even picked as captain mystifies me. He failed before. Who are the selectors?
Vaughn should come back, even though he is out of form with the bat{ so was Mike Brearly} but he captained England to memorable wins.
I rate the selectors Nought.
As far as rating your ratings attempts I'd suggest you take up monkey tennis mate.
Complain about this comment
A lot of flack flying around for Broad, however Flintoff and Swann were also expensive, but still the blame for me has to fall at the feet of the batsmen, by asking our tail-end to do so much work over the five days its no wonder we couldn't find that extra 10% in the field. The bowlers didn't have a chance to recuperate all game.
Still, this is a warning, not a tragedy.
Complain about this comment
ONLY 7 FOR PONTING?! NOT AN AUSSIE BUT THAT DOES SEEM A LITTLE HARSH! TOP SCORED FOR THE TEST MATCH, SET REALLY GOOD FIELDS, DECLARED AT EXACTLY THE RIGHT TIME. YES, BOWLING NORTH AT THE END WAS WEIRD BUT ASIDE FROM THAT, HE HAD A GREAT TEST MATCH.
PS - SOMEONE NEEDS TO BREAK IT TO sundanceingspaceace THAT VAUGHN HAS RETIRED. YOU OBVIOUSLY DON'T FOLLOW CRICKET, STOP POSTING COMMENTS.
Complain about this comment
As a keen sportsman coming from a background of squash/badminton. I happened to watch a fair chunk of the match (a rarity these days given the move away from terrestrial TV).
The following seemed apparent:
- A number of the players don't even look fit. e.g. Flintoff is carrying weight - and is likely to re-injure himself given the stresses of fast bowling. I would have thought that its pretty fundamental that a professional sportsman shows enough commitment to get fit (too much time on publicity/photo-shoots?). If their not fit don't pick them!
- Are these the best players in the country? Look at the rankings - pick the best players regardless of image/reputation. If you work hard and deliver you should be picked. I'd rather have a hungry, motivated group - than a bunch of posers living on past glories. Give the message that no one is safe - you have to deliver to get picked (look at cycling/swimming).
- Poor team spirit. Too many individuals in this team. First sign of pressure they folded. Its a team game - the Aussies looked more of a unit.
Complain about this comment
Let's face it. The Aussie bowling was poor. Let's face it. The performance of the England top batsmen was even worse. The tailenders should give some net instruction to Nos. 1-4 on the importance of concentration and keeping the head over the ball.
Complain about this comment
Paul Collingwood showed what can be done with some decent application...the rest of the english top-order were an embarrassment on such a slow pitch.
Psychologically, England are going to meekly capitulate unless some real mental strength is added to the squad - England's bowling attack were completely out of their depth, and only Flintoff and Swann should retain their places on the strength of their batting. Gone is Duncan Fletcher's mental steeliness of 2005.
Bowling changes:
Sidebottom in for Anderson
Steve Harmison in for Stuart Broad.
Graham Onions in for Monty Panesar.
Australia will be looking for a fit-again Shane Watson and Brett Lee to compete for a places in their team. Depending on conditions, all of Ben Hilfenhaus, Peter Siddle and Nathan Hauritz could come under pressure for their places in the team. Australia has the luxury of leaving out the no.4 best bowler in the world, and injured world class players Shane Watson and Brett Lee sitting on the sidelines. Everything comes down to balance for them.
TEAMS:
ENGLAND
Andrew Strauss, Alastair Cook, Ravi Bopara,Kevin Pietersen, Paul Collingwood, Matt Prior, Andrew Flintoff, Graeme Swann, Ryan Sidebottom, Graham Onions, Steve Harmison
AUSTRALIA
Phillip Hughes, Simon Katich, Ricky Ponting, Mike Hussey, Michael Clarke, Marcus North, Brad Haddin, Mitchell Johnson, Nathan Hauritz, Ben Hilfenhaus, Stuart Clark
Complain about this comment
KP's number too high for a start,batted like a berk like the rest of the team apart from collingwood and the last pair at stumps.The test as a whole England were completely outplayed,Funny how the pitch offers nothing to our bowlers but the worst Aussie attack in years (minus Brett Lee as well) can make our lot give their wicket away.Strauss is an awful Captain with a poor team get ready for a summer in the Dentist's chair Lads!
Complain about this comment
I agree with most people that the ratings for Jimmy and Monty were 2 high. I felt our batting lacked a positive nature. If you go back to the 2005 ashes the aussies commented on how tresco and strauss took the game away from playing positive cricket at the top of the order. Tresco took bret lee to the cleaners on several occasions.
The boys need to bat more positively. As an opener i can under stand wanting to asses the conditions see if the ball is swinging etc. but we just didn't play enough positive strokes.
Going back to 05 again we talk about the first day, first session. England did no talking with the bat, Strauss is a great cutter of the ball and Johnson's first ball was wide enough to cut just back of a length. What a statement Strauss would have made if he had hit the first ball of the series to the point fence?
We need to go back to the basics play straight, have a positive intent and look to score and be more enthusiastic in the field, i understand that the bowlers also didn't do there job but we should have given them more runs to bowl with and never should have got in to the last day situation.
Complain about this comment
Looking over the whole five days, there is to be honest very little to be positive about. On a fairly benign pitch the technique of the batsmen or their shot selection meant that had it not been for the tail wagging a bit we wouldn't have got close to a par score (450 on that pitch IMO) - the bowlers (and Strauss's captaincy of them!) then failed to at least restrict the scoring rate, never mind bowl Aus out; the batsmen then mostly failed again. Colly comes out with enormous credit for the way he applied himself with the bat - I'd give him a 7 or 8 - but the rest? Prior maybe a 6, but I think he's batting a place too high; KP a 5, and that's a huge disappointment as he could and should have got a big hundred in the first innings that could have seen us heading for 600 ourselves, the rest maybe 3s and 4s. Yes it was fantastic resistance from the likes of Anderson at the end, yes Swan got some good runs, but runs from the tail should be a bonus not a necessity to help save a game, and better bowling and captaincy should have made it not an issue.
Complain about this comment
Our very poor cricketers need look no further than Worcester to see how the game is played..... by the England women !!!
Guts, application , technique and concentration on display there when needed, none of that really on display in Cardiff save for Collingwood.
Though our tailenders hung on for the draw, some shameful gamesmanship was used to assist and I won't be surprised if the Aussies retaliate when necessary.
IF this is our best 12 players, we are in deep plouter !!
Complain about this comment
Most performances in this match were poor.
Englands 1st innings batting poor.
Australia's 1st innings bowling poor compiunded by poor capantncy by Ponting.
Englands 1st Innings Bowling, poor. Strauss's 1t innings capatncy again lacking.
Australia's 1st Innings batting good, but given what they were facing it should have been.
Englands 2nd innings batting prior to collingwood and Flintoff's innings very poor, after that did exactly what was needed to be done.
Australia's second innings bowling? Let England self destruct, then ran out of ideas, any attack which has 35 balls against monty and cant dismis him isnt worthy of test cricket.
Of and Ponting cant really complain to loudly about timewasting, its not like he has a spotles record.
Complain about this comment
Can't bowl, apparently (but was the only England spinner to take a wicket)
Can't bat, apparently (but saved the match for England)
Can't field, apparently (but saved several runs when I was watching)
...give Monty a break fellas - and keep him on.
Complain about this comment
Classic English scoring - overrate your own team, underrate the opposition. I suppose its part of the the great British PR tradition, of if you tell everyone what you would have liked to believe, they will believe it. Fancy rating Panesar the same as Ponting, and Anderson equal to Katich and North! Unbelievable! I suppose you think England still rule the waves, too!
Complain about this comment
Lankyboy606 you're way off...
Our problem WAS that that we did swing at balls that should have been left well alone. Discretion was the big difference between the great Aussie innings and our woeful efforts, this is test cricket, make the bowlers force you to play. We were getting out to the cricketing equivalent of unforced errors. Whereas the aussies play steadily, frustrating the bowlers and then punishing mistakes.
Complain about this comment
On the subject of KP - I get the feeling that the problem a lot of fans have with him isn't so much that he gets out to the odd daft shot, as he then refuses to accept that it was daft or that it's anything to worry about. His dismissal to Hauritz was poor shot selection - his reaction? "I'd have got away with it if it hadn't hit my helmet, and that's the way I play". Contrast Michael Clark, who got out and said afterwards that he'd played a poor shot. KP simply never seems to admit that there's the slightest possibility that he might have got something wrong, and the arrogance that comes over as a result means people are always going to be quicker to turn on him.
Complain about this comment
Let's just hope our batsman sort their heads out for the second test. The Aussies showed us how to bat and how to compile big scores - whereas we seemed to be stuck in a Twenty20 mindset and threw our wickets away. Pietersen's dismissal was one of the worst I've ever seen watching Test Cricket but given the situation I think Graeme Swann's in the second innings eclipsed it.
Complain about this comment
#152 But that unstinting self-belief is very reason he has become the player he has. We English never seem to be able to grasp the difference between self-belief and arrogance, and I think it's one of the main reasons our sporting performance suffers.
The likes of KP aren't going to crumble and be contrite in the face of the media, and we shouldn't want them too. The last thing we need is people instilling more self-doubt in the team. He believes he is a great player, not because he is arrogant, but because he has to.
Complain about this comment
Comment 67 from badalandaband is spot on. Pietersen plays for himself & not the team. Drop him for the second Test, with any luck he may go running back to SA to see if he can play for them.
Did you see Collingwood after he was out? Absolutely gutted & despondent even though he held out for almost six hours. That's my idea of spirit, and no mean amount of talent either. Colly reminds me of Martin Johnson after the Lions lost the deciding test to the Aussies in 2001 - Johnno was almost too gutted to speak. Well done Jimmy & Monty - pride in tact, let's up the performance for the next one.
Complain about this comment
Who would you rely on to bat out the last overs and rescue a draw - not KP the bloke is incapable of playing for the team. If the batters were any good then we wouldn't need heroics from Monty and Jimmy. I'll paraphrase the earlier comment and say that Collingwood is worth 10 KPs.
Complain about this comment
Yes. Ratings for Jimmy and Monty are too high.
More importantly, we need a complete overhaul of the team if we're going to be competitive in the Ashes.
Firstly, it should have been apparent to everybody that the main reason we won in 2005 was Vaughan's captaincy. He out-thought Ponting and that gave the players the boost they needed to up their performances. Bring in Rob Key as captain for the remainder of the Ashes series. Give Strauss support & confirm him as long-term captain, but stress that Key's being brought in to provide experienced captaincy when we need it. Bringing in Key will also strengthen the batting.
Secondly, Broad should be dropped and Harmison brought in. Harmison is bowling very well at the moment and taking wickets. He can also 'rough-up' the Aussies better than any of our current attack. Broad is not showing the quality against the strongest side in the world to justify his place. He is primarily a bowler and must bowl better.
Thirdly, nobody, not even Flintoff, should be guaranteed a place in the team. Flintoff batted well at Cardiff. He didn't bowl well. Do we need him, or would a 'stock' bowler such as Onions or Sidebottom be a better bet in the team?
We also need to take a good, hard look at both Cook and Bopara. Everybody knows that Cook's major problem is that he doesn't convert fifties into hundreds, but his dismissals by the Aussies demonstrate a couple of flaws in his technique, which need to be ironed out. A spell back on the county circuit could be what he needs to help him do this. Bopara is another one who should come under a lot more scrutiny. He scored 3 successive centuries against a very weak West Indies side and now needs to step up a level against Australia.
Team for the second test:
Strauss
Cook
Key (capt)
Pietersen
Collingwood
Prior
Flintoff
Swann
Sidebottom
Anderson
Harmison
What was most worrying about this test was that the Aussies got spin and movement from the pitch but we didn't. Wholesale changes may come about in the very near future...
Complain about this comment
For the second tests, drop Panesar and bring in Onions or sidebottom. I'd personally go for sidebottom, as he's a lefty and creates a different angle. If Stuart broad does not improve, he should be dropped too. Must keep an eye on Bopara too. Maybe Shane Warne was right after all.
Complain about this comment
Very generous for our players, and Johnson too, he didnt bowl one ball all day yesterday that would have hit the stumps!
Complain about this comment
Take Colly, Anderson and Swann (for 2 fine batting performances) out of the equation and no English player even deserved their pay, let alone a score above 1 out of 10.
Someone needs to beat into our team that this is TEST MATCH cricket, not 20/20 or an ODI.
Complain about this comment
Englands use of 12th man and the physio to kill time was the worse example of gamesmanship since the 1981 match between Australia and New Zealand when Trevor Chappell bowled a daisy-cutter as last ball to insure NZ had no possibility of getting the runs required to tie the match. However, Heaven hath no wrath as an upset Australian on the field of play and Ponting did look a bit peeved. Im watching the next match hugging a pillow.
Best wishes
Mike Mapstone
Complain about this comment
First, the positives. I missed yesterday's play and was astonished to turn on the radio and hear we'd saved the match. For the last few years I've grown accustomed to seeing England limply concede these kind of matches, usually about halfway through the afternoon session.
So well done Collingwood et al for showing the kind of fighting spirit we'll desperately need to get anything out of this series.
On the downside, on Wednesday at 11am, most of us were of the belief this England side was nearly as good as the Australians and that a very close series awaited.
Now, we're cheering a draw secured by the narrowest of margins as if it were a famous victory. Maybe it will prove to be a turning point in the series but it looks far more likely to be a temporary reprieve.
If one side can first make batting look easy, and then just moments later make taking wickets look a doddle, they're probably better than their opposition.
If we're to make a fist of this series, Cook, Strauss and Bopara need to improve their techniques, Pietersen needs to stay at the crease for twice as long, Broad and Anderson need to find something with the ball and keep a tight line and length if they can't, and Panesar needs to go.
The Aussies don't have nearly as much work to do.
As for the ratings, to consider whether they're reasonable, ask yourself what a neutral, from say South Africa or India, would make of Monty Panesar getting the same mark as Ricky Ponting - or James Anderson being rated better than eight of the Australians and equal to the remaining three.
Complain about this comment
KP? Must be nuts ;-)
Complain about this comment
All that really happened was that our tail confirmed what the Aussie batsmen showed:-that the wicket was an extremely slow, easy one to bat/survive on, and that wickets fell only as a result of errors by the batsmen or during the occasional, brief periods of swing. Our batsmen made some horrible mistakes to give their wickets away against largely toothless bowling.
All you had to do to survive on that wicket was to get yourself "in the zone" and concentrate hard on building an innings. North, Ponting, Haddin, Katich, Collingwood and Anderson showed that with the right application for that particular pitch, it was not hard to graft a score. Flamboyant stroke-making was not the way to go. The Aussies adapted to the conditions far better. The wicket was always too slow to allow flamboyant shot-making.
Get rid of the ridiculous number of backroom-staff and simply get in a man who can advise the players on the tactics to adopt based on the type of wicket they are confronted with, and a sports psychologist that can ensure that our batsmen walk out to the middle with total focus and steely determination. Pieterson desperately needs the services of such an expert. Even Gichrist would have had to rein himself in on that wicket which screamed "Draw" from the first moments of the match.
The fun part was watching Punter resort to North(!), the hapless Johnson or the spitting but ineffectual Siddle, where in the past he would simply have tossed the ball to Warne and McGrath to close out the game.
Complain about this comment
My XI for Thurs
Trescothick
Strauss
Bopara
Pietersen
Bell
Collingwood
Prior
Flintoff
Swann
Anderson
Sidebottom
First, Trescothick, he doesn't want to tour end of story. But why shouldn't he play in England. Surely we should pick our best players NOW not thinking ahead to some tour in six months time. Play him in England and Cook abroad where he seems to make his best scores.
Bell needs to come in to strengthen the batting. My only hesitation is Sidebottom or Harmison. I would like to see Harmy as he is in form but Sidebottom offers something a bit different, both with swing and a left armer. If he is not fit go for Harmy - either way I don't see a need for Broad at the moment as we bat down to No 10.
Complain about this comment
Re: Harmison - (post 126)
Battingwitharunner,
"But England need to build a team that can play in all tests. This horses for courses stuff just doesn't work."
What utter piffle! This is the Ashes, for goodness sake, not some second rate knock against the Windies. You play the strongest team you have - right now. Harmison is on fire. He is bowling at his very best... You therefore pick him. Ok, if he then does his usual dance with the fairies come September, you drop him again. Simples!
As for the Onions argument, he has no experience (just one Test). Blooding a player against the Aussies, that is a truly high risk. Look at Broad. One of the more experienced England bowlers, but youth got to him and nerves took over in the 1st Test. Hopefully, he can quickly bounce back.
The selectors would be mad not to pick Harmison for Lords. We know he is mentally fragile but rather like a sensitive artist, the best performance occurs when at their peak. They cut their ears off when low! It is a case of catching Harmison at the right time. And this is his moment.
Complain about this comment
Softandfluffy:
Harmison is on fire and bowling at his best - for Durham. We know all about this. But there is a chance that he might do the same at Lord's so I see why people want him back. Unfortunately you can't rely on him time and time again and meanwhile other bowlers don't get their chance. Onions is also at his best and played two tests v. W. Indies, not just the one. I know there's a huge difference between WI and Australia but he is an experienced bowler who has honed his craft, unlike Broad who was selected for test cricket on potential, batting ability and good results in ODIs. His youth and inexperience showed at Cardiff but hopefully Onions has that bit more experience and a good head on his shoulders.
This sounds as if I'm wanting to replace Broad with Onions, but it was just for comparison. I think Onions should come in for a spinner (sorry it has to be Panesar). The selectors might stick with Broad - heaven knows he's kept his place while others around him have been dropped - Anderson, Sidebottom in the West Indies, etc.
Complain about this comment
battingwitharunner,
My frustration is why doesn't cricket take the same view as football?
If a forward is not scoring goals and out of form, then you drop him from the 1st team and find a replacement. Meanwhile, that forward plays games for the 2nd team - regains his confidence; starts scoring goals again, and hey presto, he is back in the 1st team. That is accepted and done practice in football. It goes on all the time. So, why not cricket?
Harmison is the best bowler England have when on form. He is not consistent, we know that. Call it mental fragility - call it what you want. So, use him when on form and drop Harmison when not - as in football. We must get away from this rather blinkered "consistency in cricket" theme. The top sportsmen are never consistent. They will always experience a dip in form. The problem with Harmison... it is so marked.
Complain about this comment
I realise that it is important for the brit press (sorry - english) to keep the 'chins up' by kicking the aussies in the guts every once in while - but 7 for the captain? How does 150 +, and rain delay off an innings + defeat compare to the effort of your south african fella (6). Doesn't strike me as objective cricket journalism - lift your game BBC.
Complain about this comment
Typical nonsense 'marks out of 10'. Just a complete over-reaction to a drawn test match.
true England had to scramble because they didn't score enough runs, but scramble they did
frustrating that one of them didn't reach 3 figures in the 1st innings. but if they had then the only difference would've been that the game would've had a dull last session instead of a thriller - top class sporting competition should be celebrated, and that includes when the actuall standard of batting and bowling isn't especially great on either side like was the case on that pitch.
get a grip people and enjoy the b***dy series instead of thnking you have to judge everybody all the time.
Complain about this comment
6. At 7:26pm on 12 Jul 2009, Tom Fordyce - BBC Sport wrote:
I'd better dive in to defend my numbers for Jimmy and Monty before we get any more capped-up incredulity - they were on four each until that 69-ball last stand. Take their final readings as a reflection of their batting and nothing else.
Fair?
With the greatest amount of respect Tom, how can they be fair when they are picked initially to bowl the opposition out. Give Monty 7 out of 10 for his batting LoL. You gave Swann 4, yet how many runs did he score?
The only thing you have right in this blog is yes, there is a sense of excitement out there, but not from this blog there's not. Sorry Mark. Your way of the mark on this one.
Complain about this comment
Ok i'm an Aussie,hopefully with a balanced view to this dialogue. Collingwood is a player Australia respect and he batted well to save the game. He dosent deserve a 9 maybe a 7, given that 4 Aussies made centuries that dont seem to get a mention.
The English team dont seem to be taking this very seriously. As the Aussies past 600, your bowlers were giggling and laughing and congratualting each other on making a "100" Compare this to the other side.
Johnson did bowl poorly but still took more wickets than Flintoff, Broad, Panaser and Swann combined. He will hit his stride and watch out when he does. All this talk you have heard isnt just made up .. and yes just wait till he bats
Complain about this comment
#154 - no, self-belief and confidence is thinking that you won't get out unless you play a bad shot or get an outstanding delivery; arrogance is refusing to believe you might be capable of playing a bad shot, even when you patently just have....
Complain about this comment
Hopefully the England hierarchy follow your opinions on Anderson and Panesar and pick them for the next test. Afterall they were both picked for their ability to bat for 40 minutes to save a game rather than take wickets and allow England to compete.
Complain about this comment
Do these BBC journos actually watch cricket or do they just listen to Radio 5 live and read the Sun/Mirror and the Star.
Prior was awful, his keeping to both spinners and coming up to the stumps for Colly was schoolboy stuff, on the first day alone Prior must have dropped 5 or 6 easy stops, if there had have been edges he would have dropped them.
Haddin, again his keeping was poor just because he didn't drop any sitters doesn't mean he played well.
Panesar, did you actually watch anything but the highlights?
Mike Hussey, has been in poor form for nearly a year, you do know cricket is played outside of England?
Complain about this comment
I think in general the bowlers' scores are harsh. No-one dominated with the ball, Australia didn't really take any more wickets than England, it's just that their batsmen didn't hand them over on a plate. Johnson getting six when Swann got 4 is baffling, but I agree with pummelling our batsmen. I don't think KP earned his 6 (after all, he made a small score in his first and nothing in his second on an airbed, and got himself out both times - not noticeably different to Cook over 2 innings). Bopara was unlucky, and I back him to top score for us at Lord's.
Complain about this comment
My team for the next test:
Strauss (cpt)
Cook
Bopara
KP
Colingwood
Prior
Flintoff (harmison if he isnt fit)
Broad
Swann
Anderson
Onions
I think many people on here are being a little too drastic in their hiring and firing of players. You should not drop people if the have one bad game (as in the case of Broad, who has played well up until the last test). Broad is a young and developing cricketer. He has improved his bowling a lot this year. Last year he was bowling at about 80-85 mph. This year he has upped his pace and is much more dangerous at 85-90mph (he even got up to 93mph in cardiff). His problem is accuracy. But i think he definately deserves another go at lords. He's useful with the bat too. If he fails at lords then consider dropping him, but not yet. Swann has to picked ahead of panesar. Panesar averages something like 85 in county cricket which is no way near good enough. Onions is the man in posession of the place. He has been bowling well in the county championship so should retain his place. Harmison is an attractive alternative but id stick with onions. If flintoff is injured though or even a little unfit come thursday then harmison is a certainty for that place.
As a final thought, I honestly dont know why people berrate pieterson so much. We should count ourselves lucky that he plays for us at all. It has been a long time indeed since there has been a batsmen who averages over 50 for england. I think cook might do well to have a bit of a throwback to the county championship. But there isnt really anyone to replace him. Bell is not an opener and the idiotic calls for vaughn to be brought back are quite frankly bizaare. I dont think there is anyone in the batting line up who is clearly out of form. Therefore they should all retain their place for the time being. Bell is a ready made replacement should one of them slip up.
Complain about this comment
Just to comment about Bopara... I think he should replace Cook as an opener (who should be dropped really, there's nothing inspirational about him) as that role would clearly suit him better. I think he wobbled under the pressure of Cook's early dismissals, with weight of #3 Batsman on his shoulders. He might go out with a sense of purpose as an opener and put some decent runs on the board. He's also a quality fielder which is important.
Strauss - Doesn't seem to be focusing on his game due to Captaincy. I would give the title to Colly and let Strauss get back to being a stoic opener.
Bopara
KP - Seems to believe he should be here, so let him.
Bell - Another excellent fielder and should be given his bat back.
Collingwood - Only person with his head screwed on the right way. Give him Captaincy.
Prior
Swann - With no Panesar might feel a bit more important and bowl better, needs to get his lengths right.
Broad - First Ashes, give him another go, might be surprising.
Anderson - If we really can't have Hoggard, closest thing.
Sidebottom/Onions
Harmison - when on form, and he should have the chance as England don't have a lot to lose it seems, CAN be lethal.
We know there very well might not be a Flintoff, if there is put him in and take Broad out. Then shuffle batters respectively. We need to take wickets, so lets throw the kitchen sink at them. 5 bowlers (+Colly), stronger batting side (no Cook, added bell). What have we got to lose.
Quickly @ 172 the Aussie - Typical British sense of humour. When failing abysmally, take the p***. Think it's some kind of psychological defence thing. Don't worry the Aussies will still win.
I'm a 20-year old girl and would still probably do better then our selectors, even if I talk a load of bull...
Complain about this comment
#65
Trescothick wont be picked to tour for England let alone play in this test series because he doesnt want to and after that performance in Cardiff i cant say i blame him.
Complain about this comment
sorry #165
Complain about this comment
I am delighted to see Harmison is back in the 14 man squad for Lords.
The selectors must have been reading the BBC cricket blogs! All down to Flintoff now. If he can pass his fitness test on Thursday morning then it's down to either Onions or Harmison to replace Panesar. If not, both quicks will enter the Ashes fray.
Complain about this comment
#173 I think your example is a good one. But as far as I am aware KP has never claimed he is incapable of playing a bad shot (I don't claim to know what he is thinking), he simply refuses to be browbeaten by reporters and apologise for it after the event.
Nothing wrong with that in my book, I've had enough of sporting apologists and excuses. Chances are that by the end of the series he'll have been our best performing batsman once again and, if he is, nobody will give two hoots whether he's done it for the team, himself, or his Auntie Mable.
Complain about this comment
Think we are all agreed these ratings are meaningless as you've rated Monty and Anderson on their batting but not Swann!
Lets hope you put a bit more thought into it next time!
Complain about this comment
I was lucky to be at Cardiff for the 1st and 5th day, what a wonderfull advert for cricket, I have never been so gripped as I was yesterday.
I would give Sturat Broad a higher mark than KP. Whilst Stuart didn't have the best test with the ball, but no bowler did that well, It's the batsmen that let the side down, Stuart contributed more to the match than KP. We need to keep faith with Stuart, he is the man for the future.
Complain about this comment
# 184 your contribution is almost as ridiculous as the original blog!!!in what way did Broad contribute more than pieterson? Is being young and having potential a contribution in itself?
Complain about this comment
Just briefly, on KP: people have been saying that the entire top order managed to lose their wickets to poor shot selection, and that's more or less true, but the reason to focus on KP's is that it was especially egregious. That's the way he plays, is it? Impossibly arrogant, stupidly premeditating and maddeningly stubborn. He had all the time in the world to abort that shot, which is what makes it so vexing that he chose not to.
That said, of course it'd be lunacy to drop him. I'm just saying he doesn't get the special criticism for nothing.
Complain about this comment
KP gets 6? For throwing hit wicket away twice?
Much talk of Broad not being on line, etc. That's also a reflection of the captain, Strauss should be knocked down more points for failing to enforce bowling discipline.
Complain about this comment
Well what a dump Cardiff turned out to be. Thanks Wales for providing such a bad slow pitch our tailenders could save the game. If we had played on a 1/2 decent pitch Austraila would have slaughtered us.
If I was Austrailian I would want Cardiff fined for providing a pitch not fit for a test match.
The groundsman has been on Sky explaining in detail why the Cardiff pitch is so bad saying some very deep digging is required to replace the lot. I am glad it was England that had to hang on. If I was Austrailian I would be hoping mad.
Complain about this comment
In player ratings Monty getting 7 and Anderson 9 makes sense. These two tail enders saved the day for England. Their joint saving act will be discussed for a long time to come, perhaps in the same breath as the heroics of the four centurions before them.
Dr. Cajetan Coelho
Complain about this comment
Apart from the execrable England team (no apology from Strauss yet?)no one has mentioned the equally ghastly performance of Blofeld in the TMS box. Always getting the score and wickets wrong, chattering like an excited child about anything and nothing, never giving an objective assessment of the state of the game. Sack him. Worse than useless because he positively misleads.
Complain about this comment
9 for Collingwood - for almost saving the match on his own, but also for his anguish at getting out. The others (especially KP) behaved as if it didn't really matter.
As for the others - the bowlers didn't bowl and the batsmen didn't bat, but they'd get points for effort if they'd put some effort in. As it is, I'd give them 1 point. Between them. Pick ten more guys who are actually willing to try hard for five days, and give this shower the week off.
Complain about this comment
The Australian ratings are perhaps an indication why the English ratings are low. They seemed more committed and better organised as a team, and performed better than England in Cardiff. Too much analysis and fault finding based on one match will not help the English game.
Complain about this comment
Carlgreenhalgh.....that depends where you work fella......anything is possible.
Glad you enjoyed my review of the game (I try to be unbiased as I can despite the rose tinted glasses occassionally falling over my eyes).
It's great being a POM in Perth during these series....the banter is fantastic. Although some people get a little carried away with it. No doubts we were outplayed in this test match, but I would hope we will come back stronger in the Lords Test. A lot of England's players underperrformed to their abilities in this match and this gives me confidence that they the next game will be closer and more of a contest. To walk away from this and still be level is a real let off and will hopefully shale up a few of our players.
I certainly haven't forgotten about Clarke mate, or the way he performed in the last Ashes when he was the leading wicket taker. Not sure whether I'd want to see him line up or not. He is clearly under cooked at the moment so could play into our hands by picking him on reputation (I know the irony of my comments looking down the list of England players in the team). Definitely a danger man but he may struggle to get in the team anyway considering the way you guys played in this test.
I guess Lee, Clarke, Hauritz and Siddle are challenging for 2 spots in the side. Ironically I thought Siddle's stats didn't quite do him justice and Hauritz's flattered him considerably. I'd be more than happy to see Hauritz line up again (so long as the English are more aggressive). As for the other place a line call....but I'd probably go with Siddle or Clarke if I was selecting (leave Lee to recover more).
Not a bad dilemma to be faced with though.
I just hope we don't make too many changes and give most a chance to redeem themselves. Hanging out for the game to start on Thursday and praying that Punter loses the toss (he'll probably have a whinge about the English coins being different and we cheated their as well ;0).
Keep up the good work fella.
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS