England Vs Australia 1st Test - Ratings

[Robb]

Vaughan 1 Ponting 3

Trescothick 5 Hayden 4

Strauss 3 Langer 5

Bell 1 Martyn 7

Pietersen 7 Clarke 8

Flintoff 4 Katich 7

GJones 3 Gilchrist 5

Giles 1 Warne 9

SJones 4 Gillespie 4

Hoggard 4 Lee 7

Harmison 8 McGrath 9

England 41 Australia 68

[Trescothick]

Had Vaughan and Bell, and Pietersen and Flintoff all lived up to the openers standard and made some more partnerships we would have won... I was still hopeful up until Flintoff lost his wicket, with GO Jones still left and Pietersen and Flintoff making a BIG partnership we could have won.
But he didn't and we lost

[Oliver]

Originally Posted by Trescothick

Had Vaughan and Bell, and Pietersen and Flintoff ...

That's it, just four largeish fifties out of twelve possible players and we'd've won.

It's a funny game is cricket.

[Andy Mellon]

Originally Posted by Maranello

Hoggard 0 - Lee 6

Hoggard 0? For that dismissal of Hayden, surely he deserves a point or two? He did more than 'turn up for his pay cheque'

My scores:


Vaughan 0 - Ponting 4
Trescothick 4 - Hayden 3
Strauss 4 - Langer 5
Bell 1 - Martyn 5
Pietersen 6 - Clarke 4
Flintoff 3 - Katich 7
G Jones 1 - Gilchrist 3
Giles 0 - Warne 8
S Jones 6 - Gillespie 1
Hoggard 2 - Lee 6
Harmison 8 - McGrath 10

England 35 - Australia 56

I've been fairly harsh because I don't think anyone other than Warne and McGrath performed up to how we'd expect. I marked Pietersen down for playing for his average. I mean, taking a single of the 2nd ball of a Warne over to leave Hoggard with 4 balls? Not good. McGrath gets full marks. I've never seen him play so well. Bowled superbly and batted well as well. Giles and Vaughan were very poor and might as well have not turned up. GO Jones and Gilchrist were very disappointing - one for his keeping, the other for his batting. Harmison was easily England's best player.

[stereotype]

but you gave Langer 4 despite being awesome in the first innings before getting out to a bad call.......Clarke made a ninety on the back of superb batting....he was given a rough decison in the first innings...Kevin Pieterson is good...but id have Clarke as a batter and fielder over Pieterson

[stereotype]

Originally Posted by Andy Mellon

Hoggard 0? For that dismissal of Hayden, surely he deserves a point or two? He did more than 'turn up for his pay cheque'

My scores:


Vaughan 0 - Ponting 4
Trescothick 4 - Hayden 3
Strauss 4 - Langer 5
Bell 1 - Martyn 5
Pietersen 6 - Clarke 4
Flintoff 3 - Katich 7
G Jones 1 - Gilchrist 3
Giles 0 - Warne 8
S Jones 6 - Gillespie 1
Hoggard 2 - Lee 6
Harmison 8 - McGrath 10

England 35 - Australia 56

I've been fairly harsh because I don't think anyone other than Warne and McGrath performed up to how we'd expect. I marked Pietersen down for playing for his average. I mean, taking a single of the 2nd ball of a Warne over to leave Hoggard with 4 balls? Not good. McGrath gets full marks. I've never seen him play so well. Bowled superbly and batted well as well. Giles and Vaughan were very poor and might as well have not turned up. GO Jones and Gilchrist were very disappointing - one for his keeping, the other for his batting. Harmison was easily England's best player.

Clarke 4? you are a tough judge...especially if he scores less than Pieterson and only the same as Strauss and Tres

[Andy Mellon]

Originally Posted by stereotype

Clarke 4? you are a tough judge...especially if he scores less than Pieterson and only the same as Strauss and Tres

I suppose that does appear a bit harsh on Clarke, I scored him lower because of the hype of heard of him and this innings - although good - coming no where near the hype. Plus, he could have been out for a lot less and the innings was not without its faults - it was hardly blemish free. However, seeing the innings in the context of the game, it was a lot more important than I have given it credit for. Strauss and Tresco score 4s as well as I have to admit I wasn't expecting much from them and they batted with determination in the 2nd innings under very difficult circumstances. I suppose though, I should bump up Clarke to 5.5 or 6. Definately no more

[Moss]

Vaughan 2 (for captaincy) - Ponting 4
Trescothick 3 (for starting an innings (ish) - Hayden 3
Strauss 2 - Langer 3
Bell 1 (for looking like Bod...only joking) - Martyn 3
Pietersen 7 (would have been more but for the drops) - Clarke 8 (not just for his G4 looks)
Flintoff 3 (poor except snaring Gilchrist twice) - Katich 6
G Jones 2 - Gilchrist 4
Giles 1 (for a good catch) - Warne 9
S Jones 3 (for being unlucky) - Gillespie 3 (for batting, not bowling)
Hoggard 1 (got the ball rolling on day 1) - Lee 8
Harmison 7 - McGrath 10

England 32 - 61 Australia

Out of our 11, only 2 performed for us, Harmison and Pietersen.
Out of the Aus 11, only three bowlers and one batsman really contributed, but what a contribution...

[greg]

Vaughan 3 Ponting 6 Trescothick 5 Hayden 4
Strauss 5 Langer 6
Bell 2 Martyn 7
Pietersen 7 Clarke 7
Flintoff 4 Katich 7
Jones 3 Gilchrist 5
Giles 1 Warne 9
Hoggard 4 Lee 7
Jones 5 Gillespie 3
Harmison 8 McGrath 10

England 47 Australia 71

What sums it up best is that Gilchrist had a poor game but was still way better than Jones.

[Wiljoy]

Originally Posted by Trescothick

Had Vaughan and Bell, and Pietersen and Flintoff all lived up to the openers standard and made some more partnerships we would have won... I was still hopeful up until Flintoff lost his wicket, with GO Jones still left and Pietersen and Flintoff making a BIG partnership we could have won.
But he didn't and we lost

On the other hand,IF---Langer,Hayden,Ponting,Clark,Gilchrist,and Katich had all scored centuries,Australia would have won by an innings & plenty,wouldn't they??