England vs SA Series Ratings

These are Graham Gooch's:

These are my ratings for the England players who were involved in the Test series against South Africa.

Andrew Strauss: 6 Has kept all his shots in his kit-bag this series, finished with a good half century at The Oval to keep his doubters at bay.

Alastair Cook: 7 Consistent, and still a big part of England's future but will be frustrated that he can't get rid of the "60 man" tag. He knows that hundreds win matches.

Michael Vaughan: 6 Led England in his normal calm and assured manner and in my opinion should have carried on to the end of the series. His batting sadly has lacked authority and purpose, but if he can find the style he showed as an opener when he started with England, he could regain top spot in India.

Ian Bell: 7 Out of the blocks early with a superb 199 at HQ, needs to add presence to his game if he's to be a dominant player at first wicket down.

Kevin Pietersen: 9 Big on numbers and style, hopefully the captaincy will help and not hinder him.

Paul Collingwood: 6 Possibly saved his Test career with a fighting hundred at Edgbaston, good guy to have in the side and if you were judging on character he'd be a 10 out of 10.

Andrew Flintoff: 7 England are a more formidable unit with him in the side, adds menace and presence to the bowling attack. Still needs to improve his footwork with the bat and learn to mix defence with attack.

Tim Ambrose: 5 Tidy with his glove work throughout the series but I'm unconvinced by his batting technique off the front foot at Test level.

Stuart Broad: 6 Improved in final Test, but his bowling still needs work. A chip off the old block with the willow, should progress to be a genuine all-rounder for his country.

Steve Harmison: 8 Impressive on his return, would like to carry the pitch used at The Oval around in his bag.

James Anderson: 7 Continues to improve his consistency having been given the responsibility of taking the new ball. Increasingly will become a match-winner for England.

Monty Panesar: 6 Still to learn the value of variation at the highest level. As for his appealing, less please.

Ryan Sidebottom: 6 Played two Tests. A willing performer but looks weary after heavy recent workload.

Darren Pattinson: 5 Like the famous Three Degrees song of 1974, it's a case of "When Will I See You Again?" - but not his fault that England's batting failed at Headingley.


Link.

Kind bloke, that man Gooch, sure he wasn't as kind in his captaincy reign. Bit of a sham.

Maybe 8 for Belly?

To cease the WUMry, he IS a good close fielder. ....

Considering the ignominious performances, the fact the lowest is a 5 totally negates any credence one can give to the article.

Yes but the scale is:

10 = top. excellent .............. 5 = copper merchant, shoot.

Gooch has certainly mellowed with age.
He's also got blind and senile at the same time - either that or he was watching another test series.

PeterCS wrote:Maybe 8 for Belly?

**thud**

Jebus, a 6 for Vawn. Generous in the extreme.

PeterCS wrote:Yes but the scale is:

10 = top. excellent .............. 5 = copper merchant, shoot.

Oh. In my day, we used numbers 0,1,2,3,4 as well.

They're the most generous rating I think I've ever read.

Vaughan six for scoring forty runs from five completed innings and presiding over a 2 love series defeat.

Did I miss all his spectacular catches and his wickets?

Any pom want to do a more realistic appraisal?

Is 0 a number?

But Gucci was ordered to take the proz... positives.

Red wrote:

Any pom want to do a more realistic upp raisal?

I'll drop me trousers if you like.....

oh .... "appraisal" ....

.... bugger .... must go to spec savers.

holcs wrote:
Darren Pattinson: 5 Like the famous Three Degrees song of 1974, it's a case of "When Will I See You Again?" - but not his fault that England's batting failed at Headingley.

Darren Pattinson -5 Too Aussie by far.

Red wrote:They're the most generous rating I think I've ever read.
...

Any pom want to do a more realistic appraisal?

Nah.

Strauss - 4 - Looked nothing short of a shotless wonder. Crabby to the extreme, and looks still at odds with his game. 50 in last innings has done nothing to change this.

Cook - 7 - Consistency personified, its just a shame that they were consistently 60's and none of them were big scores. Needs to stop wafting like a pungent smell in a classroom, outside the offstump when set!

Vaughan - 4 - Was woeful with the bat in the series, and his captaincy was fair to middling. Fell on his sword, and may be away from the arena for a while.

Bell - 5 - His 199 not withstanding on a featherbed deck in the first innings, it was same old same old for NPB. Pretty 30's at number 3 is not what we need a one drop! Still needs to grow some balls, and make runs when it counts.

KP - 9 - Best batter by far on display in both sides. Still has the odd brainfade, but amassed plenty of runs and hopefully the captaincy won't hinder him. Was a a headless chicken on Red Bull through the test, and could end up getting weary!

Collingwood - 7 - Saved his test career with the 100 at Edgebaston and followed up with a 60 at the Oval, but not sure how long he will be around for, as still looks overly scratchy early on.

Flintoff - 7 - His bowling and fielding are still as good as ever, but will never take big wicket hauls. Batting is still well off the pace, and he cannot be batted at 6!

Ambrose - 5 - Keeping, very tidy. Batting very poor. Probably out in the Wilderness now.

Broad - 6 - In the side as a bowler, and doesn't take enough wickets. Lacks penetration. Bowled better after a rest at the Oval. Batting is coming on nicely, shame the bowling isn't progressing half as fast.

Anderson - 8 - Most improved player so far anyway. Seems the AC got stuck on consistent, and hopefully it is broken and there for good. Bowled manfully with little reward, and there wasn't even a finger buffet in site for most of the series

Monty - 6 - apart from innings at Lords, showed he still lacks variation, and needs the right pitch alot of the time. Moores needs shooting for the lack of development here.

Harmison - 7 - Came back with a bang and it was good to see. Good for England if he can reproduce

Sidebottom - 5 - Looked weary and lacked zip. Also injured. But he was a willing trier.

Pattinson - 4 - Shocking selection, and he didn't do too bad really. But as he's an Aussie Fark him!

More Jimmykins love....

It's all going to end horribly.

I'd go along with your assessment Chas -
...'cept I'd ratchet Harmi up one to 8 - great effort on return after all the slagging off ...
and Broad down one to 5 (he's not in the side to bat) - doesn't look threatening as a bowler - yet.

holcs wrote:Anderson - 8 - Most improved player so far anyway. Seems the AC got stuck on consistent, and hopefully it is broken and there for good. Bowled manfully with little reward, and there wasn't even a finger buffet in site for most of the series

**nods**

Merlin wrote:

Red wrote:

Any pom want to do a more realistic upp raisal?

I'll drop me trousers if you like.....

oh .... "appraisal" ....

.... bugger .... must go to spec savers.

There are a few of the pommie players whose upp raisals I might appreciate.

STFU Rob, you tire me greatly.

Merlin wrote:I'd go along with your assessment Chas -
...'cept I'd ratchet Harmi up one to 8 - great effort on return after all the slagging off ...
and Broad down one to 5 (he's not in the side to bat) - doesn't look threatening as a bowler - yet.

He broke through the Saffy lower order on Sunday, though, where others couldn't.

Andrew Strauss - 4. Managed to cover up an amateurish effort with the bat throughout the series with that last innings 50 in a dead rubber. I feel that he's now back to where he was before playing New Zealand and that's not a very good place; full of technical problems that usually sees him over-indulging in thin edges to the keeper of first slip. His biggest problem is that he hasn't got any shots to play to get out of trouble.

Alastair Cook - 7. Our second best batsman in the series, who scored consistently across the Test matches. It was obviously infuriating to see him getting out in the nether regions between 50 and 100 so often, but he scored runs in just about every situation and was sawn off a few times before he had got going in earlier Tests. In all, Alastair celebrated a welcome return to form that is only 100 away from consolidation. Any suggestion that he should be dropped is idiotic.

Michael Vaughan - 2. His batting has been all over the place for a long time and that fact was compounded by a number of half-decent deliveries in his early innings. However, his defence and his foot-work never looked like getting him the runs even if he survived and it was only a matter of time before he slipped away in the night. There were no classical strokes in the series, no captaincy master-classes, and very little in the way of intuition or inspiration. A bedraggled Vaughan deservedly departed on a low, unfortunately.

Kevin Pietersen - 9. A near perfect series for him in that he did as much as humanly possible to single-handedly stave off a strong South African attack. There were moments of frustration and eccentricity, most notably at Headingley where a stroke-filled 45 came to a rash end, so too a domineering, Twenty20 style 13 in the second innings. Either side of which came an egotistical 94 and two fantastic hundreds. I think that that's called entertainment.

Ian Bell - 3. His 199 at Lord's was the typical storm before the calm. For the rest of the series he proceeded to do absolutely nothing worthwhile and got by self-aggrandising as he listened to all and sundry eulogising his previous innings. If he can't score runs under pressure then he's not worth having in the team. His 199 was enjoyable whilst it lasted but in the context of the match and the series it was worthless. As classical a player as Bell looks he flatters to deceive and is consistently our most ineffectual batsman. Apart from Faisalabad, I can't think of a match in which he has had a positive effect towards a draw or a victory, and that's unacceptable to me.

Paul Collingwood - 7. Saved his career with a couple of gutsy knocks which is more than can be said for some. I don't personally think this deserves to be heralded as the 'return' of Paul Collingwood, but it took character for him to come back from the dead like that and prove he's worth a damn. I personally hope it's the start of great things, but at the same time I hope it's not the start of another vicious circle where Paul Collingwood is safe because he scored that 135 against South Africa all those months or years ago. It's got to be the start of something good for it to deserve more substantial praise than what it was - a creditable innings in a losing cause.

Andrew Flintoff - 6. Bowled well without reward, batted terrible without any reward due. He looks a million miles away from being an all-rounder, but is still the aggressive monotone of a bowler that he was before. He's a welcome addition to the side but one has to wonder if his persistent inclusion in the side throws the balance of the team off kilter. He simply isn't good enough to bat at 6 (or even 7) at the minute, so is really only a bowler who can slog a few. Hence the rating of 6 his bowling exploits deserved.

Tim Ambrose - 4. I don't think he was quite as terrible as some have described him because his keeping was generally acceptable. People are looking at his batting and are rightly gleeful, but I still think we're being a little too hasty in ostracizing Ambrose. He didn't excel in what is perceived as the necessary discipline, but I still think his returns don't quite do him justice. He batted determinedly and tried his best but it simply wasn't good enough in the end. There's no need to be gleeful and I'd personally be happy to see him given one more series just to see what he's made of.

Stuart Broad - 5. Another batting series for Stuart. He looks a wonderful, classical lower middle-order batsman when he's at the crease, full of delightful strokes through the on side and off side. He pulls the ball well, he drives well, he has that classical 'stand on your toes and half-cut half-drive through the off-side' shot like his dad too, but ultimately he needs to start taking some wickets, and not just tail-enders, as quickly as possible if he's to retain his place and continue to progress in this England side. He has loads of potential and that's great, but there will come a time where potential alone is not enough. On the flat-tracks of India we'll need more than just potential to make a difference.

James Anderson - 6. A series without return for Jimmy in which he bowled and batted well. There were typical moments of brain-fade with bat and ball but he toughed out the series and proved that he has progressed in his last year in the side. His line and length are getting better, though there's still room for improvement, and he can be a monstrosity when the ball's swinging. Still a long way to go and it was by no means a great series for him, but he's improving at last.

Ryan Sidebottom - 5. Not his greatest series even if he kept it tight and returned decent figures. Looked unfit from the start and finally fell by the way-side having been pushed one match farther than he should have been. Featured in some pleasant moments, most notably at Edgbaston with the bat in pushing us up to a (in theory) defendable score, and when yorking Kallis at Lord's, but he wasn't up to the standard consistently. When he's fit and bowling at 85mph he's amongst our best bowlers nonetheless. Needs a rest and will come back better for it.

Steve Harmison - 7. An unwelcome return to Test Cricket in many quarters, but a welcome one by the end as he lead us to our first victory against decent opposition in god knows how long. Sparkled throughout the first innings at The Oval from ball one, and turned the match on its head with two wickets in two balls when we were really struggling. Bowled equally well without reward in the second innings and batted superbly to turn a precariously small lead into a substantial one. For once, he showed guts, and that deserves all the praise in the world. Can he show the same guts in big old India a million miles away from home though? If not, it's the end.

Darren Pattinson - 4. Didn't bowl as badly as some people made out, but ultimately wasn't good enough for Test Cricket (or at least for South Africa). Shouldn't have played and is decidedly too Australian to ever have done, but he didn't pick himself and he didn't do any worse than anyone else in the match he played in (not literally, just on appearances). Batted pretty well in a last-wicket stand that avoided an innings defeat and I suppose that is a small amount of credit to his name.

Monty Panesar - 5. Like Sidebottom he didn't bowl anywhere near as well as his figures suggest. He picked up key wickets in a couple of matches but was typically one-dimensional and lacking in inspiration in those huge moments where we were in desperate need of a wicket. His series could have been very different had he taken Smith's wicket (as he should have done) but one cannot help but thing that it was poetic justice that his appeals were turned down given how overly vociferous they have been in the last eighteen months. For Monty, he needs to become the quiet yet comfortable slow-left armer who is at peace with his game and the world again. Currently, he's less effective in between being an annoying, spoilt brat.