England Vs Australia 1st Test - Ratings

[Maranello]

Originally Posted by Oliver

Ok here are mine:

Vaughan 0 Ponting 4

Giles 0 Warne 7

That's what I was talking about!

[John]

Firstly I am glad humour has returned to todays comments. Well done England fans.
1. Vaughan 2 Ponting 4
2. Tresco 5 Hayden 4
3. Strauss 4 Langer 5
4. Bell 1 Martyn 5
5. Pietresen 6 Clarke 7
6. Flintoff 4 Kaitch 7
7. G. Jones 4 Glichrist 4
8. Giles O Warne 9
9. S. Jones 4 Gillespie 2
10 Hoggard 5 Lee 7
11. Harmison 6 Mcgrath 9
England 39 Australia 63
Maximum 10 to Giles for so long deceiving people he has quality at this level.

[The Phantom Ram]

Originally Posted by Richie Benauds Love Child

Vaughn 4 - Ponting 6
Tresco 6 - hayden 5
strauss 5 - langer 6
Bell 3- Martyn 7
Pietersen 8 - clarke 7
flintoff 5 - katich 7
Jones 3 (and thats for the first innings bat) - Gilchrist 6
Hoggard 4 - Mcgrath 10
S. Jones 6 - Gillespie 5
Harmison 9 - Lee 7
Giles 1 - Warne 9

England 54 - Austrailia 75

Would you give Ashley Giles one?

[R W S]

I'm going to repeat this thread a couple of days after each test in the series - and at the end I'm going to get myself a bottle of Remy Martin from the duty (not free if you are european) free at Schipol on my way back to blighty and spend an evening doing some amateur number crunching and provide an analysis.

As with all statistical analysis' (what is the plural of analysis?) the sample number determines the value of the results - so please take part!

I will give a 'bottle of your choice' to the the person who participates the most - incentive enough?

(in the event of a tie I will donate 25 GBP to the forums running cost)

[Lemming]

Originally Posted by R W S

...what is the plural of analysis?...

Analyses!

I don't get your taking part and winner thing? Can you please clarify! Although I'm a mathematician I often shied away from hardcore statistics!

[R W S]

More fool you for admitting that! I was thinking that as the series goes on we may find that the difference between the best side in the world and the best of the rest changes. Maybe there are clues in the expert opinions of our members as to where that difference lies....

I like to challenge those around me to quantify their opinions (comes from being a freelance ERP project manager) and to therefore show the difference between those that are good at value assessment and those that are not - in an entrepreneurial business world it identifies those whose should have a louder voice and those that should STFU.

It doesn’t always work though!

[stereotype]

Vaughan- 2 Ponting 6
Tres- 6 Hayden 5
Strauss- 5 Langer- 6
Bell- 3 Martyn- 7
Pieterson- 8 Clarke- 8
Flintoff- 6 Katich- 7
Jones 3- Gilchrist 5
Giles 3- Warne 8
Harmisson 7- Gillespie 4
Hoggard 6- Lee 7
Jones 6- McGrath 9

55- 72

[Irish Left Armer]

Vaughan 2 - Ponting 6
Tres 5 - Hayden 5
Strauss 5 - Langer 5
Bell 0 - Martyn 6
KP 7 - Clarke 8
Flintoff 4 - Katich 8
GoJo 2 - Gilly 5
Giles 2 - Warne 8
Hoggard 4 - Lee 7
Harmison 8 - Gillespie 4
S. Jones 5 - McGrath 10

Total: Eng 44 - Aus 72

Kp would have scored higher but for 3 dropped catches. Vaughan's reasonable captaincy saves him from a 0. Flintoff's 1st innings bowling and ability to get Gilchrist save him also.

[GlennMcGrath500]

Originally Posted by Oliver

Ok here are mine:

Vaughan 0 Ponting 4
Trescothick 4 Hayden 4
Strauss 3 Langer 4
Bell 1 Martyn 5
Pietersen 7 Clarke 7
Flintoff 5 Katich 7
G Jones 3 Gilchrist 3
Giles 0 Warne 7
S Jones 4 Gillespie 1
Hoggard 3 Lee 6
Harmison 8 McGrath 9

England: 38 Australia: 57

Or am I meant to give people a point for turning up.

I give our sub three points for catching Ponting off our worst seamer in the pressure-cooker atmosphere of Lords at a time when England still believed that they could win.

your votes are a bit harsh aren't they

[Oliver]

Originally Posted by GlennMcGrath500

your votes are a bit harsh aren't they

I imagine you're just yanking my chain here... but nevertheless - no-one scored a hundred, one England player made two fifties, one Australian player made ninety on the back of some reasonably hard graft from some of his colleagues. McGrath and Warne did what they do against an unexceptional batting line up. Gilchrist and Jones similarly underperformed. By and large I've scored the bowlers for the amount of wickets that they took, though without looking, I think that I marked Hoggard down for being a waster and Gillespie up for irritatingly prolonging the Australian second innings.

I don't understand Association Football player rankings that mark a player 5 when he's done sweet FA all match.
So I've given Giles and Vaughan not a sausage for being worse than useless.

Ponting wasn't brilliant, merely functional and he captains a side who are exceptional. Here he has the advantage over Vaughan who as Maranello said "over bowled Hoggard and underbowled Jones" except for that period in the first innings when Australia seemed to be recovering, until he finally brought back Harmison for that four wicket burst - rather late in the day, I thought.

Perhaps I was generous to give Bell one (as it were) but then he did play the shot of the combined first innings' and he wasn't the England captain.

No, I don't think I've been harsh - just realistic.