Australia’s World Cup campaign saw several veterans flourish, an inexperienced player have his breakout momen and a host of other players disappoint. These are my player ratings.
Mitchell Starc (9/10) – 27 wickets at 18
The express left armer dominated his second successive World Cup, breaking Glenn McGrath’s record for the most wickets in a World Cup. It was a particularly remarkable effort given how little ODI cricket he had played in the previous two years. He is in wonderful rhythm and looks primed for a big Ashes series.
David Warner (9/10) – 647 runs at 72
Australia’s best ODI batsman of the past decade, Warner was surprisingly doubted by a huge number of cricket fans who did not believe he could return from his year-long ban and make an immediate impact in this tournament. The veteran left hander came back as a more cautious opening batsman and formed the bedrock of the Australian batting line-up.
The signs are very good for the Ashes.
Alex Carey (8/10) – 375 runs at 62
One of the breakout stars of this World Cup, Carey was skilful, calm and, perhaps most impressively of all, extremely versatile. Whether being asked to put out fires or add fuel to the blaze the wicketkeeper-batsman excelled.
Carey consistently made tough runs and looked elegant in the process. His glovework was ordinary, though, and needs work, which is why he was marked down.
Aaron Finch (7.5/10) – 507 runs at 51
The Australian skipper displayed sharp tactics throughout the World Cup and bossed the first two-thirds of the campaign before fading late. His aggression against spin was particularly important for Australia as they finished second on the table after the group stage.
Steve Smith (7/10) – 379 runs at 38
Smith had a bit of an odd tournament, asked to bat out of position at four and coming in quite late in the innings at times. He’s always been at his best stationed at three with plenty of time to build an innings.
That was just what he did in the semi-final against England, steering Australia out of disaster territory. He was not at his most fluent in this tournament but showed good signs against England that he was finding his rhythm.
Jason Behnrendorff (7/10) – nine wickets at 25
Just months after making his ODI debut, Behrendorff became a key member of the Australian attack. His ability to earn late swing, particularly back in to right-handers, made him a man to be respected by opposition top orders. Behrendorff ran amok against England in the group stage and was also excellent against New Zealand.
This performance could potentially vault him into Test contention over the next six months, especially if Australia’s main quicks are beset by injuries, which is a common occurrence.
Pat Cummins (6/10) – 14 wickets at 30
Cummins’ economy rate of 4.96 runs per over was elite and helped to build pressure for other Australians to capitalise on. But after a barnstorming start to the tournament his penetration waned, as he took just three wickets in Australia’s last five matches.
Usman Khawaja (6/10) – 316 runs at 35
Australia badly missed Khawaja’s composure and talent against pace in the semi-final. Although he wasted a lot of starts in this tournament, the left hander’s 88 against New Zealand saved the Aussies. He deserves to start in the Ashes but will have to prove he has recovered from his hamstring injury.
Kane Richardson (6/10) – five wickets at 22
While the South Australian’s stats look good, I think they flattered him a touch. More than six years since making his ODI debut Richardson has never looked at home at international level. Australia should have played Josh Hazlewood ahead of him.
Nathan Lyon (5/10) – three wickets at 60
If Richardson was flattered by his stats, Lyon was done no favours by his numbers. In the semi-final he was offered an extremely difficult task, brought into the attack with England’s gun opening pair on the rampage and few runs to defend.
Up until then he had done a very good job of building pressure in the middle overs, conceding a miserly 4.1 runs per over in his first three games. Lyon was never going to be a major wicket-taking threat but performed his holding role well.
Nathan Coulter-Nile (4/10) – 4 wickets at 70, plus 98 runs at 32
Coulter-Nile’s bowling was a 3/10 at best but he gets an extra point for that remarkable, match-winning 92 against the West Indies. About to turn 32 years old and with the next World Cup now four years away, his international career may now begin to wind down.
(Photo by David Rogers/Getty Images)
Glenn Maxwell (4/10) – 177 runs at 22
Maxwell entered this World Cup in arguably career-best form and was very good in the first half of the tournament, scoring at a strike rate of above 200 despite fairly limited opportunities. But when it really mattered, at the business end of the World Cup, Maxwell went missing.
Marcus Stoinis (4/10) – 87 runs at 14, plus seven wickets at 35
Stoinis did a decent job with the ball but, pencilled in to bat at number five in most games, making runs was his main role and he failed miserably. That came as no surprise to everyone bar the Australian selectors given Stoinis had been in a deep form trough with the blade for more than a year.
It beggars belief he was retained in the Australian line-up even after suffering two side strains.
Adam Zampa (3/10) – five wickets at 47
Zampa came into this World Cup in fine nick after playing well in India and the UAE but then bowled like a man bereft of confidence. When he trusts himself and uses his variations Zampa is a good ODI bowler.
But all too often in his international career he has seemed to be held back by self-doubt.
Shaun Marsh (2/10) – 26 runs at 13
Marsh has been a wonderful servant in the ODI format but I think that, after suffering a broken arm, his international career may be over.
Peter Handscomb (1/10) – four runs at 4
Handscomb deserved to play the semi-final against England after performing very well in ODIs this year. Predictably lazy criticism has been directed at him since his failure in that match.
Those who follow cricket year round, not just when it is in the glaring spotlight, know he earned that opportunity.
Sgt Pepperoni
Roar Rookie
I recommend the book 'signal in the noise' by Nate Silver for an excellent study of the science of prediction and bayesian theory. Predictors are absolutely judged on the outcome and as you say, over time their accuracy will be revealed Sport is very difficult to predict - that's a big part of why we watch it. What I object to is making predictions with great force and treating any other prediction with forceful rebuke
JamesH
Roar Guru
Most of Warnie's calls that get criticised are made without justification, though. I mean, he wants Stoinis and Short in the test squad. There's no logic to that because neither of them have shown enough in first class cricket to warrant selection. It's just Warnie going with his gut and/or playing favourites. Yes, Ronan got some calls wrong. That doesn't make them poor calls that were deserving of criticism because they were very much justifiable at the time. If a meteorologist looks at all the available data and uses a proven methodology to forecast that it will be 16 degrees tomorrow, but it turns out to be 18 degrees, does that make the prediction itself a poor one? No, not if it was justified by the information available at the time. It was just wrong because sometimes that happens with predictions. No one is Nostradamus. Conversely, my wife - who knows nothing about AFL - could have tipped the Bulldogs to beat Geelong a week ago. She would have been right in the end, but that wouldn't have made her stab-in-the-dark prediction a good one. All available evidence suggested that the first placed Cats would win. It's called an upset for a reason. Over time, Ronan will get more right than wrong. That's also the nature of predictions, so long as they're based on rational analysis. Law of averages will apply.
Sgt Pepperoni
Roar Rookie
Ok have another comparison. Warnie makes calls all the time and they're often rubbish and he is held to account. Any pundit can make any claim but the proof is in the pudding Ronan is meant to be the leading cricket analyst on the site and he's had a shocking world cup. He is not above criticism
JamesH
Roar Guru
Umpires don't make predictions, they make one-off decisions based on what they just witnessed. It's a silly comparison. A lot of pundits got a lot of predictions wrong this tournament. I'd rather someone make a prediction based on sound, justified logic, than not make a prediction at all. How boring would that be?
Brian
Guest
9 too high for warner. S/R more important then averages. Failed in the semi. Cummins too low.
Brian
Guest
I agree ronan overrated dorff and sold cummins short. Dorff was bought in cause ncn and maxwell were expensive but it threw off what was a successful starc and cummins opening parrnership
badmanners
Roar Rookie
3rd highest score for us batting in the semi as well!
Dart
Guest
Sgt Pepperoni, I think that is unfair. He also argued that Australia’s approach was too cautious and that would cost them in the end. Australia were extremely cautious in the semi-final. Our best batsman batted for 46 overs and made 85 runs. Maxwell had a disappointing tournament but at least he looked to score runs. England threw caution to the wind and chased the total down in just over thirty overs. Credit to them for the positive brand of cricket they have played for a few years now. India mightn’t have won the tournament but they were the best team. They just had a bad day in the semi-final.
DaveJ
Roar Rookie
My only small quibble would be that 4 is surely too high for Stoinis. Got to be a 1 for batting, which is his no.1 job, and no better than 5 for bowling, which is probably generous. So for me 2.5. Perhaps 5 is a little tough on Lyon, too, given how tightly he bowled coming in well into the tournament. Overall the batting was the biggest letdown- the only convincing batting performances were against three of the four weakest attacks - Sri Lanka, Afghanistan and Bangladesh. One aspect to be proud of - they fielded as well or better than any team in the comp. Don’t recall anything straightforward put down in the field, apart from Carey missing a couple of chances, and several really good catches taken.
Ronan O'Connell
Expert
Starc took the most wickets EVER in a World Cup, if that's not worth a 9/10 then I don't know what is. I already marked him down for the semi final, if he had played better in the semi I'd have given him a 9.5/10.
ForwardsWinMatches
Guest
Yeah, agree. Starc was ordinary in the biggest matches. Appreciate he was very important in terms of getting us a top two spot, but his opening spells against SA and Eng were sub-standard and made him not worthy of a 9/10.
PeteB
Roar Rookie
Geez...can someone point me to the eye-roll and thumbs down button on this comment ?
Ronan O'Connell
Expert
Carey's batting was a 9/10 but his keeping got him marked down one point.
Sgt Pepperoni
Roar Rookie
Ronan is a professional analyst and he was wrong wrong wrong. The only thing he got right we calling for was Behrendorff and Lyon If an umpire was consistently this wrong we'd call for their head
TheCunningLinguistic
Roar Rookie
Fair enough. I reckon his bowling was worth less than that, but I guess it’s fairly subjective.
U
Roar Rookie
Possibly I’d knock Carey’s mark down 1 because of his poor keeping throughout the tournament. And everyone that didn’t perform in the semi final when it mattered as well
Paul
Roar Guru
1)Who did you predict to win the Cup, Sgt? My guess was India. 2)The article you mention doesn't count as a prediction, it was an opinion piece, the majority of whom supported his view. Which way did you go or did you not respond? 3) How could he NOT support Handscomb over Wade when Langer made it clear Handscomb was Khawaja's replacement? Again, not a prediction. 4) I'm not sure he was any different from any other writer, where most if not all were expecting similar conditions to last summer, where pitches for ODI games were either roads, or slightly in favour of spinners. In the weeks leading up to the Cup, I certainly recall him writing about the pitches being in control of the ICC, not the ECB and they would not be the absolute roads England "demanded". IMO, the only prediction you mention Ronan got wrong was the team to win the Cup. I'll bet he's in good company with being wrong there, with a billion or more on the sub-continent thinking the same. And me!
Sgt Pepperoni
Roar Rookie
Well that's all fine Paul except he was wrong about prettymuch every prediction Nevermind he can have another go next world cup
Paul
Roar Guru
Sorry, Sgt, but why are you giving Ronan this score? I'm not trying to defend the man ( because he's perfectly capable of doing that himself), but the wonderful thing about The Roar is - it's all about opinions, predictions, etc. I find his pieces both an interesting take on the game as well as being challenging in terms of what I believe - which is EXACTLY what's required. I can only think of one occasion where he has not supported his views with clear facts, so even if you disagree, it's hard to refute. The good thing, he takes a position and justifies it, which is what a good writer should do. For mine. he's an 8/10 writer at least, even if I think he's wrong from time to time!!
Insult_2_Injury
Roar Rookie
Seemed to try too hard for a breakthrough and lost rhythm when first change. Has to open, it's also a psychological thing with top order bats.