197 comments
England Test ratingsInternational Tests England by Mark Mitchener - BBC Sport (U1647645) 23 December 2008   England's two-Test tour of India is over - but who has enhanced their reputation and booked a ticket to the West Indies, and who will be looking over their shoulders ahead of next summer's Ashes? ANDREW STRAUSS - Hit a century in each innings at Chennai and was unlucky to be denied the man-of-the-match award by Virender Sehwag's blistering innings. That made him easily England's highest run-scorer on the tour, although he followed it up with a duck at Mohali - 8/10 ALASTAIR COOK - Scored half-centuries in each Test, but his fifty-to-century conversion rate remains poor and has now gone more than a year without a Test ton. His catching is also a concern after he shelled two or three important chances during the series. 6/10 IAN BELL - The fact he made an inconsequential 24 not out on the last evening when the game was dead and India's fielders had given up should not hide the fact he had a wretched tour (save some spectacular fielding in Mohali) and must be under pressure for his place from Owais Shah. 4/10 KEVIN PIETERSEN - Two failures with the bat in Chennai, but his 144 in Mohali kept England in with a hope of squaring the series. Led the side fairly well - they were beaten by a superb side on top of their game in Chennai - but allowed himself to be drawn into a slanging match with Yuvraj Singh, and nearly allowed himself to get out to the part-time spinner in the first over of that century. 7/10 PAUL COLLINGWOOD - Batted superbly with Strauss in Chennai as a typically gritty hundred helped set up the chance fo a victory, but was less effective in Mohali. His bowling was barely required, although he remains a class fielder. 6/10 ANDREW FLINTOFF - A lionheart with the ball, Flintoff was England's main threat and the man Pietersen turned to time and again when the going got tough, and he usually delivered, appearing to be pain-free after years of ankle problems. Played a good, cautious, supporting innings to Strauss at Chennai and was an admirable foil to Pietersen at Mohali before a misjudgement by Anderson left him exposed in the last over of the day. 8/10 MATT PRIOR - Having reclaimed his Test wicketkeeping place from Tim Ambrose, Prior did enough to retain possession of the gloves for the meantime. His keeping was tidier than it was in his last Test appearances a year ago, despite the occasional blemish, while a gritty 53 not out in Chennai was his best effort with the bat. 6/10 GRAEME SWANN - England's latest Test debutant did everything asked of him. Took two wickets in his first over, bowled some long spells and may have done enough to establish himself as a genuine alternative to Panesar in the Windies - when England are likely to take two spinners on tour but only play one. However, much has been made of his superiority to Panesar as a batsman - and he failed to contribute in three innings with the bat. 7/10 STEVE HARMISON - Managed just one wicket in Chennai, where his good friend Pietersen did not seem to trust him during the run chase, and was dropped for the second Test. After an encouraging return to the fold against South Africa, England will hope he is not returning to the "Homesick Harmy" of old - and can find his form in the West Indies where he was so devastating in 2004. 5/10 JAMES ANDERSON - Was the mainstay of England's new-ball attack, but after making impressive progress during the English summer, showed shades of being the frustratingly inconsistent Jimmy Anderson of a year ago. Was also barely used/trusted by Pietersen during the run chase in Chennai. His batting continues to improve, but he was widely criticised for exposing Flintoff in the last over on day three at Mohali when he was nightwatchman. 6/10 MONTY PANESAR - Looked rusty after three months without a game, even when conditions favoured the Indian spinners. He was outbowled by spin rival Swann, and it was telling that by the end of the tour, captain Pietersen always seemed ready to turn to Swann as his primary spinner. However, his fielding showed signs of improvement - taking three catches and dropping none, while he was reliable in the deep. 5/10 STUART BROAD - Returned from injury to replace Harmison in the second Test, and picked up one crucial wicket in each innings - Sehwag and Dravid. But was not quite on the form he showed earlier in the year, and made the wrong choice when he was bowled by a ball he chose to leave in his only innings. 6/10 Tim Ambrose, Amjad Khan, Adil Rashid and Owais Shah were in the squad but did not play in either Test. Do let us know what you think - although I would like to stress that these ratings take into account the context in which runs were scored and wickets were taken. If you consider averages to be the sole mark of a player's ability, I can point you towards the series averages here: news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cri... Latest 10 commentsRead members' comments or add your own
comment by
captaincarrantuohil (U9787683) posted Dec 24, 2008 Ian Bell probably does need to rediscover his form away from the Test match arena. However, in suggesting that his record is ONLY eight centuries in 81 Test innings, Tom Fordyce underestimates how well this stacks up against some of Bell's renowned predecessors.
comment by
GenesisTub (U2547317) posted Dec 24, 2008 It's an eery coincidence that the three players who all peaked (or came close to it) in the Pakistan series in 2006, have all gone off the boil and are fighting for their places at roughly the same time too. I'm talking here about Bell, Panesar and Harmison.
comment by
keynotespeaker (U13702074) posted Dec 24, 2008 Andhesgone/captain...: the biggest concern about Bell for me is that it's not just a simple slump, but a continuous slide downhill since the Pakistan 2006 series:
comment by
captaincarrantuohil (U9787683) posted Dec 24, 2008 Agreed, keynotespeaker, and I'd reiterate that a period on the sidelines would seem to be the right option for Bell now. However, it should be said that Bell's most prolific spell has come at Number 6, to which he seems temperamentally more suited than first drop. Number 3, a perennial problem for Egland, should really be occupied by the side's premier batsman. At the moment, without contest, that man is Pietersen.
comment by
yorksfan (U13746958) posted Dec 24, 2008 just checked the stats, ian bell scores a hundred every 10.1 innings, and a fifty every 4.3 innings
comment by
enanjay (U10233016) posted Dec 24, 2008 Some of this I agree with, but the one who needs dropping is Harmison, not Anderson. For the Ashes - the bowliong attack is Sidebottom, Anderson, Simon Jones and Flintoff - spinner is Panesar and wickie is Prior. It is the number 3 or 5 batting position that needs a good look.
comment by
keynotespeaker (U13702074) posted Dec 24, 2008 captain...: in agreement with you there. Suppose he'd come back at 6, with Pietersen at 3, would you move Collingwood up to 4 and Flintoff up to 5? Or Flintoff down to 7 and another batsman (e.g. Prior or Patel) at 4 or 5?
comment by
jolomo (U6564185) posted Dec 26, 2008 If England want to move forward steps have to be taken.
comment by
therewesaidit (U5702043) posted Dec 27, 2008 This is easy to explain....
comment by
JeffFew (U9446749) posted Dec 28, 2008 I would like to blood Rashid sooner rather than later and would probably give him a go in the WI and Sidebottoms stock has risen whilst he has been inactive. I still like Anderson, Flintoff is probably a given and in swinging conditions Mark Davies should be a handful. With Simon Jones hopefully on his way back, I don't think the bowling is in too bad shape. Comment on this article |
Home
