Ashes series players' ratings

By Steven McBain / Roar Guru

Now that the dust has settled and the Oval wicket has dried out and been hosed down hopefully, it’s time to reflect on what each player brought to the occasion.

Let’s start with England.

Alastair Cook: 3/10
Having been part of the selection process for a rookie opener alongside him, Cook needed to lead from the front and he failed to do so, averaging a miserable 27.7. He was also outshone by Michael Clarke in the field and looked a long way short of the batsman that dominated Australia last time around. Much room for improvement.

Joe Root: 4/10
Tough to judge Root as his huge score at Lords distorted his numbers hugely. Nevertheless, he did achieve that one big ton but failed abjectly otherwise. His batting position will give the selectors much thought.

Jonathan Trott: 4/10
Another English batsmen that failed to average even 30. Trott had cemented himself previously as one of the most reliable No. 3 batsmen in Test cricket. He quickly needs to re-find his form for England down under if they are to prevail.

Kevin Pietersen: 6/10
A ‘nearly’ series for KP who often threatened to take over proceedings but somehow kept falling a little short. He remains the batsman that frightens the opposition the most and, at times, showed a new found maturity. Looked close to ‘clicking’ again.

Ian Bell: 9/10
Most pundits’ man of the series with an average in excess of 62 dominating a summer of low-ish scoring. Bell played with authority and class and, most importantly, did it when it mattered. A high class series.

Johnny Bairstow: 2/10
A fairly hopeless effort from a player that England have such high hopes for. He was horribly bogged down in the main and looked like a man just waiting to get out. Faces an anxious wait before the touring squad is named.

Matthew Prior: 3/10
Abject performance with the bat from the Wisden cricketer of the year. Glove work was patchy at times and some over zealousness with the DRS system also. Prior needs to get his head down and regain his form quickly.

Stuart Broad: 8/10
A little inconsistent at times but Broad is a match winner and provides good support with the bat also. Will be key for England in the return series.

Tim Bresnan: 7/10
Didn’t have a huge opportunity to shine but did what was required when asked of him. Always a good honest performer who never hides.

Graeme Swann: 8/10
26 wickets for England’s premier spinner. Spin remains the one true area where England can claim to hold a trump card over Australia in the shape of Swann. England need to keep him fit.

James Anderson: 7/10
Patchy series from Anderson who started well and finished well but looked a little low on energy levels in between. He remains a potent weapon, however, and England will be sure to make sure he is well rested before heading to Brisbane.

And now for the chaps in the baggy greens.

Chris Rogers: 8/10
An excellent series for Rogers, who offered stability and calm at the top of the order. Rogers has come to Test cricket late in life, but he definitely made up for lost time.

David Warner: 4/10
Tough to call Warner as his pugilist exploits left him out of the opening matches; however, it was his own fault he couldn’t contribute. Definitely added to the team on his return and will be an important player in the series to come. Disappointing average however.

Shane Watson: 6/10
Finished the series with a wonderful ton, but unfortunately in an effectively meaningless match. Watson’s economy rate with the ball and sheer number of maidens were important in frustrating the opposition batsmen. A genuine all rounder.

Usman Kawaja: 3/10
Doesn’t seem to have the authority or the class to solve Australia’s No. 3 conundrum.

Phil Hughes: 4/10
Another player who is tough to mark properly as he was jettisoned after just two Tests.

Michael Clarke: 7/10
An average of just over 47, but it almost felt like a case of ‘what if’ as one was left feeling that he could have scored many more runs. Clarke was also hugely positive in the field, coaxing the very best out of his bowlers. Definitely has the captaincy edge over Alastair Cook. A good series.

Steve Smith: 6/10
Seemed to grow in stature throughout the series and will look to contribute fully from the start Down Under. Not always aesthetically pleasing, but a good competitor and finished with a wonderful hundred.

Brad Haddin: 7/10
A solid performance from Haddin. His average of just under 23 didn’t reflect some selfless batting while trying to push the score on. Excellent glove work saw him comfortably outshine Matt Prior.

Peter Siddle: 6/10
Plenty of heart and effort as usual from Siddle, but found it hard at times to make a real impact. Will, however, be a shoe-in for the return series.

Ryan Harris: 8.5/10
Missed out on the first Test, but was Australia’s standout performer thereafter with a constant stream of wickets. Managed runs with the bat also. Australia will be hoping that his hamstring injury heals quickly. Challenged Bell for man of the series.

Mitchell Starc: 6/10
In and out of the team and showed glimpses of his talent, but needs more consistency.

Nathan Lyon: 7/10
Bizarrely left out initially, Lyon came back into the series firmly. Whilst Lyon will never be a prolific wicket taker, he asked plenty of questions and bowled with control. He needs to be played from the outset in the return series.

James Pattinson: 6/10
Only two Tests and didn’t do a lot wrong. Like Starc, he would possibly benefit from a longer run in the team.

Ashton Agar: 5/10
His famous 98 with the bat aside, Agar’s contribution with the ball – what he is there for – was lacking and he needs much more work before he can be considered a true Test bowler.

The Crowd Says:

2013-09-03T10:31:16+00:00

davos

Guest


maybe take a half point off haddins rating as well ....but he was reasonably solid I thought ...Clarke has/had some issues with the English quicks so I can understand people downgrading him..i hope he can get it sorted as I feel he will be targeted on the return leg ...maybe we are really about to find out what clarke is made of ..like I said I have read several of this type article post ashes ..and some made me laugh out loud...thought yours was fair and balanced ..point here or there but no biased howlers imho

AUTHOR

2013-09-03T07:02:36+00:00

Steven McBain

Roar Guru


Cheers Davos, not everyone would agree with you, that's for sure! It's been very interesting to see the different perspectives, especially how the Aussie fans rated Clarke and Haddin in particular far lower. The series has definitely polarised a lot of opinions and a lot of it (to me at least) was far from clear cut which I think is why there's just so much room for debate. Cheers for taking the time to read it mate.

2013-09-02T20:40:38+00:00

davos

Guest


one of the better player ratings Steve, I have seen so far ...there have been some shockers ...maybe for mine lyon one less and also pattinson one less as well ...when he did bowl he wasted much of the new ball...steve smith 6.5...but all in all pretty fair and accurate

2013-09-02T15:36:07+00:00

JimmyB

Guest


"Australia were denied two tests by the weather..." what exactly were Australia denied Stephen? This assumption that Australia were preordained to win those tests but for the weather is laughable really, lest we forget that Australia have forgotten completely how to get over the line in test matches. Let's just say that rain had come in on the final afternoon at Durham with Australia two wickets down... We would be hearing how Australia were robbed by the damn English weather. If this was 10 years ago, I would agree that England were saved by the weather, but this is not the England team of 10 years ago and not the Australian team of 10 years ago either.

AUTHOR

2013-09-02T15:19:27+00:00

Steven McBain

Roar Guru


Cheers Chris, there's plenty of shooting for sure and it makes you think about it a lot more. Clearly the impression I had of Haddin and Clarke from an England supporters' perception is vastly different compared how to how the Aussie fans felt.

AUTHOR

2013-09-02T15:17:41+00:00

Steven McBain

Roar Guru


Yep, seems that the Aussie fans for sure feel I overmarked him. I personally thought he captained well and I guess we all get an idea in our head. Cricket's about so much more than statistics so there's a big perception element. It may also be what particular sessions you watched in detail, I watched most of his big ton so maybe that stuck in the mind a bit!

AUTHOR

2013-09-02T15:15:38+00:00

Steven McBain

Roar Guru


Yeah I understand your points completely SS. I think I just have very high expectations of Cook. I think the crease occupancy is a valid point but I also think that England's run rate was hindering them a good deal and Cook was as culpable as anyone for that. The point I was trying to make with the expecations is for instance, if Root and Pietersen had scored the same amount of runs, fifties, tons etc I'd have marked Root higher than KP as he's was less experienced and seasoned. I just feel several of the England players - the batsmen in the main - underperformed other than Ian Bell. Cheers for the feedback.

AUTHOR

2013-09-02T15:09:31+00:00

Steven McBain

Roar Guru


I think the points I was trying to make Hookin' was that I didn't think Cook did all that much to really change the course of any of the games. I thought Clarke was far more proactive with his fields and bowling changes and also using what he had at his disposal which was less than Cook. Yep it was 3-0 but Australia were denied two tests by the weather and England's wins were in the main due to a period of individual brilliance by the likes of Anderson or Broad or at Lords, a batting implosion by the opposition. With Root a rookie at opener I just felt Cook needed to do a lot more with the bat. Cheers for reading the article and the feedback.

AUTHOR

2013-09-02T15:06:51+00:00

Steven McBain

Roar Guru


Sorry you didn't like it dc-nz.

AUTHOR

2013-09-02T15:06:32+00:00

Steven McBain

Roar Guru


I think it's a big problem in test cricket frisky that the toss (and the weather) has such a huge effect. No way around it I guess......

2013-09-02T14:07:14+00:00

frisky

Guest


I find it hard to judge this series. The toss seemed to decide who won. Australia would probably have won two tests but for the rain. Imagine “what if” it had rained when England were on top and stayed dry when the Aussies were in charge. The Aussies seem so weak that this would have produced a bizarre result in my eyes. The only conclusion that I can draw if I try to discount the toss and the luck of the weather is that there is not much between the teams. Can this be right? It was not my estimation prior to the start of the series.

2013-09-02T13:45:04+00:00

dc-nz

Guest


hahahahahahaa this article made me laugh. sorry thats all i can say.

2013-09-02T09:44:54+00:00

Hookin' YT

Guest


"Alastair Cook: 3/10 ... Cook needed to lead from the front and he failed to do so, averaging a miserable 27.7. He was also outshone by Michael Clarke in the field" Outshone? Who won 3-0? Who was the winning captain? Cook scored 3 fifties and an agg of 277. Clarke made 1 fifty, 1 enormous century and the other 8 innings he looked like Jim Higgs or Hellen Keller.

AUTHOR

2013-09-02T09:38:39+00:00

Steven McBain

Roar Guru


Completely agree Jack, the performances were very skewed.

2013-09-02T09:10:05+00:00

Jack Smith

Roar Guru


England did not play better than Australia. Bell, Anderson and Swann played better than Australia. Rest were pretty dismal. Looks like a smashing at 3-0 but at closer look and it easily without rain could have been 3-2/2/3.

2013-09-02T09:09:10+00:00

Jack Smith

Roar Guru


Smith definitely should be in there somewhere. Kick Bell out... Jokes :p Kick Cook out and that says alot. Forgot who the captain was for them on the series :/

2013-09-02T09:01:43+00:00

Jack Smith

Roar Guru


Least he performed. Smith was easily the 3rd best batsmen, behind Rogers and Clarke - who played amazingly. Think Haddin had one good one, think it was the first one with the bat?

2013-09-02T08:11:35+00:00

Hookin' YT

Guest


Huh? KP is the most enigmatic and gifted player there. He scored 388 to Smith's 345 and his 100 aside in that 2nd innings at the oval he treated the Australians like Country 3rd graders.

2013-09-02T03:33:25+00:00

Hookin' YT

Guest


"Michael Clarke: 7/10 An average of just over 47, but it almost felt like a case of ‘what if’ as one was left feeling that he could have scored many more runs." What if my Auntie had been born with balls? She'd be my uncle. Take out his 187 and his record against England over the last 2 Ashes series is abysmal. With the 187 at Manchester its 574 @ 33.76; without 387 @ 24.19.

2013-09-02T03:16:14+00:00

Statistic Skeptic

Guest


Anderson delivered in the first test, but wasn't anywhere near as destructive for the other four. Swann turned the second test England's way and was troubling in the others, but hardly dominant. Bell was consistent all series long - and I'd agree he was a lynchpin... but he did get good support in each innings. Compare his 109 in the 2nd innings of the 1st test (team total 375) with Rogers 110 in the 1st innings of the 4th test (team total 270). Broad had the lowest average of any frontline English bowler. Bresnan was key to providing a wicket taking change bowler in tests 2-4. Pieterson made some very handy runs throughout, etc, etc, etc Sure England sans Swann / Anderson / Bell is a worse team... but I'd venture not anywhere near as fragile as Australia without Harris / Rogers / Clarke.

More Comments on The Roar

Read more at The Roar