Australia in South Africa 2011-12 November 22, 2011

Young Cummins stands out for Australia

Marks out of ten for Australia following the 2011-12 tour of South Africa
45

Australia secured a drawn series with their victory in Johannesburg, a fine way to finish a tour that had more ups and downs than the Table Mountain cable car. The individual performances were mixed and ESPNcricinfo runs the rule over the 13 players Australia used during the series.

8
Pat Cummins
The find of the tour for Australia. At 18, he was the country's second-youngest Test debutant of all time but any questions about his readiness for Test cricket were erased over five days in Johannesburg. The best bowler in both innings, he swung the ball and used his bouncers wisely, taking 6 for 79 in the second innings and seven for the game, and hit the winning runs. Man of the Match in his first Test, his future is bright.

7
Shane Watson
In a two-Test series, Watson made two important contributions: a five-wicket haul in the loss in Cape Town and 88 in the first innings at the Wanderers. His influence could have been far greater had he not strained his hamstring while bowling his fourth over in Johannesburg. The Australians missed his swing and accuracy, but by combining with Phillip Hughes for a 174-run opening stand he ensured a first-innings lead for Australia. All the more impressive was that Watson batted without a runner - they have been abolished - and pushed through the pain barrier caused by his right hamstring. It was a partnership that might get overlooked after the events of the final two days, but it played an important role in the win.

Michael Clarke
The captain finished with scores of 2, 11 and 2, but the lasting memory of his South African series will be his wonderful 151 over the first two days at Newlands. Importantly, it was scored in tough conditions as the South African fast men moved the ball around in the air and off the pitch. It was Clarke's best international century. The second-innings capitulation for 47 and subsequent loss might take some of the shine off Clarke's innings, but in isolation it was a brilliant effort. Clarke rallied his troops well in Johannesburg and handled Cummins appropriately.

6.5
Usman Khawaja
He won his chance at the Wanderers due to Shaun Marsh's back injury and he ensured he will be strongly considered for the next Test by making a calm and crucial 65, his first Test half-century, in the chase. Khawaja came to the crease in the first over, after Watson's duck, and immediately halted South Africa's momentum with a pair of boundaries, a classy on-drive and a well-placed cover-drive, off Vernon Philander. His partnership with Ricky Ponting was a key turning point.

6
Ricky Ponting
Made only one decent contribution for the series, but it came just when the team - and he - needed it most. He walked to the crease on the fourth day in Johannesburg at 19 for 2, and Australia's target of 310 seemed out of reach. But Ponting battled hard and found some of his old touch. He missed the chance to go on and score a century but his 62 was a key factor in Australia's win. It has also increased his chances of holding his place, after his 8, 0 and 0 in the first three innings of the series put him under intense scrutiny.

Phillip Hughes
Like Ponting, Hughes had only one score of note in the four innings. The Australians would no doubt like more consistency from him, but a century in the final Test in Sri Lanka and 88 in the first innings in Johannesburg is encouraging. It was a mini-flashback to the way he handled the South African fast bowlers in early 2009. More is needed from him, though he seems to be on the right path.

5.5
Brad Haddin
He was on track for a disastrous series with the bat until the final innings of the tour, when his 55 helped steer Australia to victory on the fifth afternoon. He played some fine drives and missed some flashes outside off, but all that mattered in the end was that he pushed Australia within touching distance of victory. But his two poor strokes to get out in Cape Town were irresponsible, especially in the second innings, when he left Australia at 18 for 6.

Shaun Marsh
It is hard to judge a man on one innings of a series, but Marsh's effort on the opening day in Cape Town was impressive. In tough conditions, he was the only man to offer significant support to Clarke, his 44 confirming him as one of the most reliable batsmen in the side. Unfortunately, he hurt his back during the innings. Bravely, he batted at No.10 in Australia's second-innings disaster but was lbw to a ball that stayed low, and flew home before the second Test.

5
Nathan Lyon
As an offspinner in a series dominated by the fast men, Lyon's workload was not enormous. In fact, he bowled only three overs in Cape Town, where he also top scored in Australia's second innings with 14. In Johannesburg, Lyon picked up two wickets in each innings, a good effort considering the conditions again favoured the fast bowlers.

Ryan Harris
Another man who flew home before the second Test, Harris took 4 for 33 in South Africa's first innings of the series, when they were dismissed for 96. He tried hard in the second innings without success, and remains a first-choice bowler when fit. It remains to be seen if that will be for the first match against New Zealand.

4.5
Michael Hussey
Coming off a remarkable tour of Sri Lanka, where he was Man of the Match in all three Tests, Hussey crashed back down to earth in South Africa. He scored one run in Cape Town, his dismissal in the second innings one he'd like to forget, and 20 in the first innings at the Wanderers. However, his 39 in the chase in Johannesburg gave Australia hope, before Haddin, Johnson and Cummins took them home. Overall a disappointing tour, but he remains one of the first picked in Australia's side.

4
Peter Siddle
Picked up four wickets at 51.25 across the two Tests and while he worked hard, he was not nearly as threatening as Cummins. Siddle will be one of the men waiting to see if he retains his place for the opening Test of the home summer.

Mitchell Johnson
Must surely be out of chances, if not now then soon. Johnson scored useful runs in both innings at the Wanderers - his unbeaten 40 was a key reason Australia won the match. But he is in the side to take wickets, and a series tally of 3 for 255 was inadequate. He changed his run-up halfway through the Johannesburg Test, a sign of his uncertainty, and is the man most under pressure leading in to the New Zealand series.

Brydon Coverdale is an assistant editor at ESPNcricinfo

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • Okakaboka on November 24, 2011, 5:14 GMT

    @zenboomerang...Exactly! Both are great...Wade and Paine. Wade is fit...Paine isn't. As for your scores...Yep, fair assessments and I take your point. At least you assessed the whole team. Mmmm...your'e even more brutal than me. This is not a criticism in any way....merely a comment. Certainly a 100% better assessment than the writer of the article who I bet having read the arguments on this forum would change his assessments.

  • landl47 on November 24, 2011, 3:32 GMT

    In general, I don't have too much trouble with these marks, though Haddin didn't merit a 5.5 based on just one decent innings and a pretty shoddy performance with the gloves. However, to give Ponting a 6 when he failed dismally in three innings of the 4 and in the other got out chasing a wide ball when the side needed him to dig in and sell his wicket dearly just blows my mind. Andy Strauss against India had a highest score of 87, a lowest of 16 (that would be higher than 3 of Ponting's 4 innings combined), an average of 38 for the series and he also captained England to a 4-0 win.... and he got 6 as well! Whoever is doing these ratings needs to strive for a bit more consistency. Ponting, as the senior member of the side batting at the key position of #4, got 70 runs in 4 innings at an average of 17.5. That's at best a 4 and more realistically a 3. Why are his failures treated so much more lightly than anyone else's? Because he used to be a great player?

  • zenboomerang on November 24, 2011, 3:17 GMT

    What an illogical story, you cannot get +5 scores for 3 out of 4 failures... Peter Roebuck would be LHAO... Batters have to get runs consistantly & bowlers wickets... Watson 5.5... Clarke 4.5... Hughes 4... Ponting 3... Marsh = 5... Khawaja 5... Hussey = 2... Haddin 2... Johnson 1... Siddle 3... Lyon 5... Harris 5.5... Cummins 8 for his match winning performance...

  • zenboomerang on November 24, 2011, 3:14 GMT

    @Okakaboka... Wade & Paine are both Tasmanian... just as Cowan is from NSW, Cosgrove SA, etc...

  • IndianaJones79 on November 24, 2011, 1:19 GMT

    Pointing got 6? for what? is it for batting well in nets or mentoring players????joke... People have started to justify his place in team by any means.. 4 innings,total 70 runs..62 in last game..he did not finish job even in last game..it was because of Haddin/Johnson/Cummins, aussie could cross finish line..don't know what kind of marking is this.

  • straight_drive4 on November 23, 2011, 20:47 GMT

    @okakaboka - yes i agree with you, it is an outrage!! i cant believe johnson was only rated the same as siddle!!! both did nothing with the ball but siddle also did nothing with the bat too whereas johnson scored 2 valuable innings. what a joke. siddle should have gotten 3/10, not 4/10. siddle had a series almost on par with the last victorian to tour south africa.... one BRYCE MCGAIN. the reason there is a "national push to have no victorians in the team" is because they are getting heavily thumped in all domestic formats. if you focused more on australian cricket as a whole and whats better for the country (nationally) as opposed to victorian cricket only, then people might take you seriously. yes james pattinson has potential, but to suggest him and peter siddle are both better than cummins... hahahaha that is a good comedy routine. also, i forgot to ask you what happened with your push to replace clarke with cameron white? you went quiet on that issue

  • Scube on November 23, 2011, 17:15 GMT

    Brydon, even though some of your marks are funny, I truly appreciate your sincerity in pudblishing viewers harsh yet honest comments like that of Okakaboka! Some of your colleagues will do well to follow your example! By the way, how on earth a specialist batsman averaging 17.5 over 4 innings can get 6 out of 10 is beyond my comprehension! Then, Cummins should have got 20 out of 10 for his out of the world performance!

  • stormy16 on November 23, 2011, 14:25 GMT

    Not going to debate the marks and two tests makes it ever harder but Haddin and Siddle showed little to suggest they should play against NZ. I am a Johnson fan but even I am getting tired of waiting for this guy to swing or seam something useful. Ponting looked good just once but he looked really good that once and back to his oldself and based on his record, has done enough to play the summer. Cummins is a the runaway star but I thought Kawaja showed some real class and plenty for the future there. Still have doubts over Hughes but cant ignore his vital 88 on back of his hundred in SL.

  • RandyOZ on November 23, 2011, 8:40 GMT

    @Okakaboka - I am anti-Siddle but I am not anti-Victorian. In fact I have been a Pattinson fan for a long time. I also believe Wade should be in the side over Paine at the moment. That said, Siddle is rubbish and has to go, I am sick of seeing him carted around the ground for no wickets.

  • RandyOZ on November 23, 2011, 8:38 GMT

    @tfjones1978, mate you have got it spot on, I couldn't agree more. What was Brydon thinking when he created this list? Had he had one too many Castles? Apart from Hussey those last 4 can get the chop as far as I am concerned.

  • Okakaboka on November 24, 2011, 5:14 GMT

    @zenboomerang...Exactly! Both are great...Wade and Paine. Wade is fit...Paine isn't. As for your scores...Yep, fair assessments and I take your point. At least you assessed the whole team. Mmmm...your'e even more brutal than me. This is not a criticism in any way....merely a comment. Certainly a 100% better assessment than the writer of the article who I bet having read the arguments on this forum would change his assessments.

  • landl47 on November 24, 2011, 3:32 GMT

    In general, I don't have too much trouble with these marks, though Haddin didn't merit a 5.5 based on just one decent innings and a pretty shoddy performance with the gloves. However, to give Ponting a 6 when he failed dismally in three innings of the 4 and in the other got out chasing a wide ball when the side needed him to dig in and sell his wicket dearly just blows my mind. Andy Strauss against India had a highest score of 87, a lowest of 16 (that would be higher than 3 of Ponting's 4 innings combined), an average of 38 for the series and he also captained England to a 4-0 win.... and he got 6 as well! Whoever is doing these ratings needs to strive for a bit more consistency. Ponting, as the senior member of the side batting at the key position of #4, got 70 runs in 4 innings at an average of 17.5. That's at best a 4 and more realistically a 3. Why are his failures treated so much more lightly than anyone else's? Because he used to be a great player?

  • zenboomerang on November 24, 2011, 3:17 GMT

    What an illogical story, you cannot get +5 scores for 3 out of 4 failures... Peter Roebuck would be LHAO... Batters have to get runs consistantly & bowlers wickets... Watson 5.5... Clarke 4.5... Hughes 4... Ponting 3... Marsh = 5... Khawaja 5... Hussey = 2... Haddin 2... Johnson 1... Siddle 3... Lyon 5... Harris 5.5... Cummins 8 for his match winning performance...

  • zenboomerang on November 24, 2011, 3:14 GMT

    @Okakaboka... Wade & Paine are both Tasmanian... just as Cowan is from NSW, Cosgrove SA, etc...

  • IndianaJones79 on November 24, 2011, 1:19 GMT

    Pointing got 6? for what? is it for batting well in nets or mentoring players????joke... People have started to justify his place in team by any means.. 4 innings,total 70 runs..62 in last game..he did not finish job even in last game..it was because of Haddin/Johnson/Cummins, aussie could cross finish line..don't know what kind of marking is this.

  • straight_drive4 on November 23, 2011, 20:47 GMT

    @okakaboka - yes i agree with you, it is an outrage!! i cant believe johnson was only rated the same as siddle!!! both did nothing with the ball but siddle also did nothing with the bat too whereas johnson scored 2 valuable innings. what a joke. siddle should have gotten 3/10, not 4/10. siddle had a series almost on par with the last victorian to tour south africa.... one BRYCE MCGAIN. the reason there is a "national push to have no victorians in the team" is because they are getting heavily thumped in all domestic formats. if you focused more on australian cricket as a whole and whats better for the country (nationally) as opposed to victorian cricket only, then people might take you seriously. yes james pattinson has potential, but to suggest him and peter siddle are both better than cummins... hahahaha that is a good comedy routine. also, i forgot to ask you what happened with your push to replace clarke with cameron white? you went quiet on that issue

  • Scube on November 23, 2011, 17:15 GMT

    Brydon, even though some of your marks are funny, I truly appreciate your sincerity in pudblishing viewers harsh yet honest comments like that of Okakaboka! Some of your colleagues will do well to follow your example! By the way, how on earth a specialist batsman averaging 17.5 over 4 innings can get 6 out of 10 is beyond my comprehension! Then, Cummins should have got 20 out of 10 for his out of the world performance!

  • stormy16 on November 23, 2011, 14:25 GMT

    Not going to debate the marks and two tests makes it ever harder but Haddin and Siddle showed little to suggest they should play against NZ. I am a Johnson fan but even I am getting tired of waiting for this guy to swing or seam something useful. Ponting looked good just once but he looked really good that once and back to his oldself and based on his record, has done enough to play the summer. Cummins is a the runaway star but I thought Kawaja showed some real class and plenty for the future there. Still have doubts over Hughes but cant ignore his vital 88 on back of his hundred in SL.

  • RandyOZ on November 23, 2011, 8:40 GMT

    @Okakaboka - I am anti-Siddle but I am not anti-Victorian. In fact I have been a Pattinson fan for a long time. I also believe Wade should be in the side over Paine at the moment. That said, Siddle is rubbish and has to go, I am sick of seeing him carted around the ground for no wickets.

  • RandyOZ on November 23, 2011, 8:38 GMT

    @tfjones1978, mate you have got it spot on, I couldn't agree more. What was Brydon thinking when he created this list? Had he had one too many Castles? Apart from Hussey those last 4 can get the chop as far as I am concerned.

  • Okakaboka on November 23, 2011, 5:24 GMT

    @satish619chandar....I absolutely agree with you but you need to realize there is a national push to get Siddle out. It seems to be a National thing to have no Victorians in the team.. People are suggesting Paine over Wade when Paine isn't even fit and hasn't played for 3 months. Pattinson..has been chucked to the bin EVEN THOUGH HE HAS DEMONSTRATED HE IS A BETTER BOWLER THAN CUMMINS!!! GO FIGURE! Watch how others will dispute this on the basis of performance in one test. Yes!..He has great potential no doubt....and yes, he is a better bowler than Siddle already..but so is Pattinson. Look at the number of Bloggers who think Cutting should be in the team. Have you watched him bowl? Not near Pattinson in ability. To all you Siddle haters out there....He got as many snicks or edges as Cummins, they just didn't land in fieldsmens hands..look at the commentary notes! Whatever way you like to look at it, our bowlers completely outperformed our batsmen (if that's what you call them) in SA.

  • satish619chandar on November 23, 2011, 4:00 GMT

    Peter Siddle should have got more marks than punter/Haddin and even Hussey.. Lyon did what was asked from him and deserves more marks..

  • on November 23, 2011, 3:55 GMT

    Now is the time to bring changes. New Zealand are a side Aussies could blood a new line up against. Remeber the selectors dropped Healy before he got to choose - may be time for Punter to go. Should these players all be fit, here is my 12 to take on the Kiwis: Watson, Warner, S Marsh, Khawaja, Clarke, Hussey, Paine, O'Keefe, Harris, Cutting, Cummins, Mitchell Marsh (12th Man)

  • Sulli001 on November 23, 2011, 3:50 GMT

    Ponting a 6?... with one half century in 4 innings, Johnson should be a 3, Clarke 5.5, Hughes 2.5

  • inefekt on November 23, 2011, 3:15 GMT

    Ponting averages 17.5 for the series and gets a 6? He deserves a 4.5 at best.

  • Okakaboka on November 23, 2011, 3:00 GMT

    No! No! No! These scores are NOT RIGHT! How can Hussey get a 4.5? He failed 4 out of 4 times.Anything below 40 for a batsman is a failure. His score should be 2.5. Ponting's score should be 3.5. Johnston......Good one. As a bowler 0 out of 10. As a batsman......3 out of 10....So...3 should be his score. Haddin's score is the biggest joke of the lot..... Wicket keeping? 1 out of 10....he is crap behind the stumps. Now batting.... The best you could honestly give him is a 2.5 Even Khawaja is really barely a 5. One good innings out of 4. Clarke....honestly 6...one innings only. The rest were mega failures! Sorry Coverdale....in marking your assessments of our players I give you a 3 out of 10. Anyone would think you are trying to keep Haddin, Ponting and Johnston in the team... Sorry...these 3 need to move on!

  • on November 23, 2011, 2:48 GMT

    Hard to understand jonesy2, how anyone could say Johnson bowled well throughout. In a series where the fast bowlers were given massive assistance he picked up 3/255, and his radar was as per usual either wide of off or straying onto the pads.

    Based on the evidence from the last couple of years.. what are people seeing that I'm not in Johnson? At 30 if he's hasn't learned how to put it at a good line and length, I don't think he ever will. The runs are handy and appreciated, but when Watson is injured Johnson is one of only 4 bowlers in the attack. And he's next to useless.

  • Meety on November 23, 2011, 2:17 GMT

    This is always subjective & very hard to mark on a 2 test basis, particulalry players who only played in 1 match. About the only difference I would have is - Pup ahead of Watter (7.5?). I think Lyon's score is tough - but he had no opportunity in Game 1, (effectively only played 1 match), he outbowled Tahir IMO!

  • __PK on November 23, 2011, 1:32 GMT

    To all those who think Johnson needs to be replaced with Bollinger, just try to imagine what the batting order would look like with Siddle at 8, Cummins at 9, Lyon at 10 and Bollinger at 11. All this after an out-of-form Haddin at 7. Talk about 5-out, all-out.

  • on November 23, 2011, 0:47 GMT

    Boy, are you just so generous with the marks you gave Ponting, Hughes and Johnson

  • JB77 on November 23, 2011, 0:30 GMT

    Lyon's score should be higher. Conditions were against him and I think he performed admirably despite a lack of opportunity. The scores and comments above illustrate why a 2 Test series is ridiculous - not enough opportunities for anyone.

  • orangtan on November 23, 2011, 0:29 GMT

    Definitely a 6 for Lyon, and 5 to Ponting and Haddin.

  • inthebag on November 22, 2011, 22:58 GMT

    The only thing less relevant than these lists is the lineup that needs to say how wrong they are.

  • Nerk on November 22, 2011, 22:05 GMT

    @jonesy2 - maybe if Johnson did his job as a bowler and took wickets he wouldn't have had to score those runs. On wickets where all the pacemen were getting movement in the air and off the pitch, MJ was bowling straight. It was as though he was on a highway and all the other bowlers on a minefield. 12 tests without contributing, even Ponting must be jealous.

  • Winsome on November 22, 2011, 21:57 GMT

    And another thing. how could Hussey get more than Johnson? Lord, these ratings are weird.

  • zico123 on November 22, 2011, 21:56 GMT

    why Ponting got 6 points, he along with Mitch should have been at the bottom

  • Winsome on November 22, 2011, 21:54 GMT

    What about a bit of assessment of Haddin's keeping? Ian Healy said how awful his keeping was, he fumbled around behind the pegs like a player with a blindfold on.

  • on November 22, 2011, 21:21 GMT

    Okay the series was won with the ball you gave it to the batsman. Lyon did more than Haddin johnson more than Hussey.

  • jonesy2 on November 22, 2011, 18:19 GMT

    are you actually kidding?!! this makes me so angry!! johnson bowled well throughout and his runs in both innings under pressure pretty much won them the game!! for god sake! thought lyon was brilliant as well, out bowled his counterpart and many of the fast bowlers from both sides.

  • on November 22, 2011, 16:27 GMT

    Y ponting is palying in no 4 ?did know.....???????thes guy are joking with ponting

  • Clive_Dunn on November 22, 2011, 15:45 GMT

    I demand more talking up of Phil Hughes. We don't want the Aussies to drop him.

  • abhyudayj on November 22, 2011, 15:41 GMT

    Ricky pointing should retire and provide the services as coach

  • suraj71 on November 22, 2011, 15:36 GMT

    lol...dont knw why 5.5 to haddin??? probably just becoz he scored 55 in last inn ;)

  • tfjones1978 on November 22, 2011, 15:30 GMT

    My point system: SHANE WATSON (7) Best player inconsistent side. Nearly 1x100 from 4 innings & bowling made diff in first test. PAT CUMMINGS (6.5) Played 1 of 2 tests & had 1 brilliant innings bowling. MICHAEL CLARKE (6.5) Scored 1x150 but 3 dud innings & is the captain. RYAN HARRIS (5.5) 1 test & got four wickets for 100 off 24 overs. USMAN KHAWAJA (5) Played 1 test & scored 65 in second innings. PHILIP HUGHES (5) Nearly 1x100 but three low scores. SHAUN MARSH (5) 1 innings of 50 before getting injured. NATHAN LYON (5) Under bowled due to the conditions, got 4 wickets for 120 in 32 overs. MITCHELL JOHNSON (4) 100 in 4 innings, 3 for 255 off 62 overs. BRAD HADDIN (3) 76 runs in 4 innings, 2/3 score of a passble wicky. Wicket keeping was below par for international keeper. RICKY PONTING (2.5) 70 runs in 4 innings, half runs for a batsmen only player. MICHAEL HUSSEY (2) 60 runs in 4 innings, 40% runs for a batsmen only player. PETER SIDDLE (2) 4 for 205 off 58 overs in bowlers series.

  • crazycricketfan4life on November 22, 2011, 15:25 GMT

    It is a joke that two of the best teams in the world have to play a two-test series while we have hordes of T20s and the pathetic schedule in the form of "The Future Tours Program". Wake up ICC Test Cricket is real cricket and this series was a testament to the fact. Long live Test Cricket and for God's sake can we have a 5 match Australia-South Africa series instead of these T20s or even worse an England-India 4 match test series in England...lol

  • Manush on November 22, 2011, 14:22 GMT

    Ponting's contribution in the second innings batting and his throw to claim a vital wicket, still confirms his importance and utility in the team. It is a shame that ICC could find only two test time table for these top teams contest. It was very interesting nerve wrecking close finish which added to thrill of good test match. Cummins seems to be a good new find for the needy Australians. Sadly barring Philander rest of the SA bowlers did not measure up to the expectations. Thahir could hardly pitch the ball at vital stage of the game and Hussey , Haddin and later Johnson utilized all his full tosses to their advantage and took away the game.

  • RD270 on November 22, 2011, 14:18 GMT

    Phil Hughes is a joke, not an international batsman. He will probably score once every 10 innings. His technique is too poor and does not look like it will get any better.

    People who think he is in the Sehwag mould, wait, Sehwag averages 50+ in test cricket over more than 60 test matches.

    How can international selectors be such poor judges of talent, technique? Phil Hughes is not an international batsman, full stop.

  • Matt. on November 22, 2011, 13:33 GMT

    the majority of this is wrong

  • on November 22, 2011, 13:31 GMT

    Brad Haddin 5.5? That's a pass isn't it? His effort in the first test was akin to handing in an assignment covered in vomit. Mental note: don't employ anyone with qualifications from BCU (Brydon Coverdale University)

  • JFAB on November 22, 2011, 13:29 GMT

    Hey Flashdakota, you seem to have forgotten a small matter of Watson taking 5 wickets in his first 15 balls in the first test!!!!!

  • dsig3 on November 22, 2011, 13:23 GMT

    I feel a little sorry for Johnson, if we had some consistent senior bowlers he could work around things would be better for him. He is after all a unique talent. When he first got into the test side he had to be top dog because everybody else was retiring. He just cannot lead an attack with his style. If he had McGrath or Gillespie or McDermott to lead him he would not cop so much pressure. Watching him in this last test it was apparent that he knows its all over now. He always gave everything and did it with a smile on his face. A sad end to an international career.

  • Stump_Mike on November 22, 2011, 13:22 GMT

    SERIOUSLY?? This is a poorly thought out ranking scheme that should by rights extend beyond the range of 8 to 4. Cummins must be a 9 - what more can you realistically ask of him - not to mention some stunning catches. Johnson took 3 wickets at over 80 - more like a 3 or 2.5. Why is there no mention of Haddin's poor keeping? A 6 for Ponting!! I seem to recall this same writer calling for Ponting's head unless he got a century in that last innings, but now a 60 is satisfactory? How can his two ducks be so easily forgotten?! Clarke captained well, took wickets and top scored for the team yet manages only 1 point above. Go back and do this properly, Brydon

  • Y2SJ on November 22, 2011, 13:04 GMT

    Cummins was very good in the 2nd test. But we have seen more impressive debuts fizzle out. Time will tell where is destined to.

  • Flashdakota on November 22, 2011, 12:45 GMT

    Shane Watson - 7 ARE YOU JOKING???? 1 decent score out of 4 innings 1 good bowling spell out of 4 innings....

    And you give him a 7?

    Most of these rankings are 2 points too high except for Clarke, Cummins ans Usman.

    Nathan Lyon most certainly deserves more praise than Watson.

  • Saeed.Lodhi on November 22, 2011, 12:39 GMT

    I would not give Hughes even 2 for his efforts .... David Warner should be opening with Marsh and Watoo at No. 6

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • Saeed.Lodhi on November 22, 2011, 12:39 GMT

    I would not give Hughes even 2 for his efforts .... David Warner should be opening with Marsh and Watoo at No. 6

  • Flashdakota on November 22, 2011, 12:45 GMT

    Shane Watson - 7 ARE YOU JOKING???? 1 decent score out of 4 innings 1 good bowling spell out of 4 innings....

    And you give him a 7?

    Most of these rankings are 2 points too high except for Clarke, Cummins ans Usman.

    Nathan Lyon most certainly deserves more praise than Watson.

  • Y2SJ on November 22, 2011, 13:04 GMT

    Cummins was very good in the 2nd test. But we have seen more impressive debuts fizzle out. Time will tell where is destined to.

  • Stump_Mike on November 22, 2011, 13:22 GMT

    SERIOUSLY?? This is a poorly thought out ranking scheme that should by rights extend beyond the range of 8 to 4. Cummins must be a 9 - what more can you realistically ask of him - not to mention some stunning catches. Johnson took 3 wickets at over 80 - more like a 3 or 2.5. Why is there no mention of Haddin's poor keeping? A 6 for Ponting!! I seem to recall this same writer calling for Ponting's head unless he got a century in that last innings, but now a 60 is satisfactory? How can his two ducks be so easily forgotten?! Clarke captained well, took wickets and top scored for the team yet manages only 1 point above. Go back and do this properly, Brydon

  • dsig3 on November 22, 2011, 13:23 GMT

    I feel a little sorry for Johnson, if we had some consistent senior bowlers he could work around things would be better for him. He is after all a unique talent. When he first got into the test side he had to be top dog because everybody else was retiring. He just cannot lead an attack with his style. If he had McGrath or Gillespie or McDermott to lead him he would not cop so much pressure. Watching him in this last test it was apparent that he knows its all over now. He always gave everything and did it with a smile on his face. A sad end to an international career.

  • JFAB on November 22, 2011, 13:29 GMT

    Hey Flashdakota, you seem to have forgotten a small matter of Watson taking 5 wickets in his first 15 balls in the first test!!!!!

  • on November 22, 2011, 13:31 GMT

    Brad Haddin 5.5? That's a pass isn't it? His effort in the first test was akin to handing in an assignment covered in vomit. Mental note: don't employ anyone with qualifications from BCU (Brydon Coverdale University)

  • Matt. on November 22, 2011, 13:33 GMT

    the majority of this is wrong

  • RD270 on November 22, 2011, 14:18 GMT

    Phil Hughes is a joke, not an international batsman. He will probably score once every 10 innings. His technique is too poor and does not look like it will get any better.

    People who think he is in the Sehwag mould, wait, Sehwag averages 50+ in test cricket over more than 60 test matches.

    How can international selectors be such poor judges of talent, technique? Phil Hughes is not an international batsman, full stop.

  • Manush on November 22, 2011, 14:22 GMT

    Ponting's contribution in the second innings batting and his throw to claim a vital wicket, still confirms his importance and utility in the team. It is a shame that ICC could find only two test time table for these top teams contest. It was very interesting nerve wrecking close finish which added to thrill of good test match. Cummins seems to be a good new find for the needy Australians. Sadly barring Philander rest of the SA bowlers did not measure up to the expectations. Thahir could hardly pitch the ball at vital stage of the game and Hussey , Haddin and later Johnson utilized all his full tosses to their advantage and took away the game.