Champion's Trophy Team Review

cricket_icon

International Cricketer
Joined
Apr 13, 2011
As Group B has reached completion and two teams have been eliminated (WI and Pak) I think it's time for my team reviews. Everyone else is welcome to post their assessments of the various participating nations.

Pakistan Player Ratings
Nasir Jamshed: 5/10
Imran Farhat: 2/10
Mohammad Hafeez: 4/10
Misbah Ul Haq: 7/10
Shoaib Malik: 4/10
Asad Shafiq: 4/10
Kamran Akmal: 2/10
Umar Amin: 3/10
Saeed Ajmal: 6/10
Junaid Khan: 5/10
Mohammad Irfan: 6/10
Wahab Riaz: 7/10


Overall Score: 4/10, Abysmal

Review
This has been Pakistan's worst tournament since the 2007 World Cup, which ended in similarly abysmal fashion, where Pakistan were humiliated by Ireland and beaten by the West Indies. This however, may be construed as something worse, due to Pakistan's lackluster showing against India and a complete lack of batting strength.

The teams newcomers, the likes of Jamshed, Shafiq and Amin didn't play with the enthusiasm or fearlessness of youth exhibited by the likes of Dhawan and Voges. It was made worse by the fact that Jamsehd and Shafiq had shown so much promise in the previous 12 months yet here they looked like rabbits caught in the headlights. It may be a harsh criticism, considering both men scored in the double digits throughout the tournament and Jamshed even managed a half century but that is to take away from their total lack of conviction when they were set. The captain, much maligned in the Pakistani media was once again the saving grace, not just as a batsman but surprisingly as a fielder too. Sadly it seems his days are numbered and the vultures are circulating.

And then we come on to the bowling, the much vaunted ace in the deck for Pakistan. The three main quicks, all left handers, seemed to do more than a decent job, with Wahab Riaz's second spell at The Oval an electric performance. He was fast, furious and on top form. The best spell of pace bowling in the tournament? Possibly. But the bowling, for all it's bluster failed in the subsequent matches, not quite living up to the hype. Ajmal wasn't his usual magical self and Khan lacked the fire and precision that had made him a mainstay of the ODI outfit. Better than the batting but not as dangerous as expected.

West Indies Player Ratings
Johnston Charles: 7/10
Chris Gayle: 6/10
Darren Bravo: 5/10
Ramnaresh Sarwan: 3/10
Marlon Samuels: 6/10
Kieron Pollard: 5/10
Dwayne Bravo: 7/10
Devon Smith: 5/10
Denesh Ramdin: 4/10
Darren Sammy: 7/10
Tino Best: 4/10
Kemar Roach: 6/10
Sunil Narine: 6/10
Ravi Rampaul: 3/10


Overall Score: 6/10, Hopeful​

Review
A resurgent West Indies, that's what we've been hearing for well over a decade now yet they have never materialised, apart from a brief moment of glory in the Champion's Trophy 2004. This was supposed to be another tournament where they would do well and in some cases, they did. Their beating of Pakistan was impressive and a number of key components looked to be ready. Gayle got a start, Roach and the rest of the bowlers looked good, if not exactly the world beaters some thought they were. Then came India, THE in form team of the tournament and West Indies were outclassed in almost every department.

My first paragraph may seem harsh, considering the Windies were eliminated on D/L rather than being genuinely beaten by a South African team which was just being put under pressure by a decent middle order stand and we all know what happens to South Africa under pressure, don't we? Having said that, my misgivings with regards to Gayle and Pollard came true in this tournament. Both are terrific strikers of the ball yet they are both more apt at scoring a quick 20 then sticking around and proving their worth as match winners. The Gayle fans, of which there are many, won't like that but it's a simple enough fact. The last time he played an innings of note was last July, since then it has been nothing but media hype and mad fandom that have allowed him to viewed as such a destructive force.

Players that genuinely pleased me and deserve far more credit were the likes of Charles, Roach, Best and both the Bravo brothers. None of these players looked like world beaters but each one showed confidence and intent. They wanted to prove how good they were and how good they can make the West Indies, at least in limited overs cricket. Sammy once again proved his worth and quietened the rather ridiculous critics. This hasn't been quite the resurgence one may have hoped for but it's obvious that with a little help and stability, this team could do good things.
 
Last edited:
Australia Team Ratings
Shane Watson: 3/10
David Warner: 1/10
Philip Hughes: 3/10
Glenn Maxwell: 5/10
George Bailey: 6/10
Adam Voges: 6/10
Mitchell Marsh: 3/10
Mathew Wade: 5/10
James Faulkner: 5/10
Mitchell Johnson: 4/10
Clint McKay: 6/10
Xavier Doherty: 4/10
Mitchell Starc: 2/10


Overall Score: 7/10, Dog Fighters

Review
Australia are always in with a shout, or that's what fans and other teams thought as they grew up watching the most dominant team in the sport through the mid-90s to the latter part of the last decade. This was a team of skilled technicians and burly bullies. A team that could look spectacular as they won but knew how to win ugly too. The most complete sporting team of the late 90s and the early millennium? Possibly. However, watching the current outfit play is to know that giants have fallen.

That's not the say the team has been as pathetic as the Pakistani outfit which we've seen in this tournament. The dog still has some fight left and the recently concluded match against Sri Lanka proved that. Having said that, looking through the team sheet you could may be point out 3 or 4 truly world class operators, namely Michael Clarke, Shane Watson, Mitchell Johnson and Mitchell Starc. Sadly Clarke was injured even before the tournament started and Starc fell by the wayside after the first game. Watson, a once crucial opener has been woefully out of form, even his bowling has lacked any strength or guile. Johnson on the other hand, now the leader of the attack showed some pace and discipline but he too lacked the extra edge needed to win.

Australia had New Zealand both suffered due to rain, who knows how things may have panned out if that match had been played to completion? This is still not the Aussie too strike fear but its a dog that hasn't lost all of its bite. They fight hard with limited resources and have done well to remain competitive throughout the Champion's Trophy.The Baggy Green isn't dead yet.
 
Last edited:
I wouldn't rate Australia higher than West Indies. West Indies clearly did better in the tournament. They were very unlucky to lose the semifinal spot on better net run rate to South Africa. Australia didn't deserve the semis spot, West Indies somewhat did.
 
I wouldn't rate Australia higher than West Indies. West Indies clearly did better in the tournament. They were very unlucky to lose the semifinal spot on better net run rate to South Africa. Australia didn't deserve the semis spot, West Indies somewhat did.

Nope. Australia were sadly washed out against NZ and actually looked decent there. They fought tooth and nail against Sri Lanka, even when it stopped meaning that they would qualify for the semis.

The Windies struggled badly against an out of sorts Pakistan and limped across the finish line and were schooled by India. Then they went on to lose against a South Africa which hasn't looked strong in the whole tournament.
 
How can you give Australia 7 out 10 when none of the indivdual players got over 6 out of 10? That makes no sense at all. :facepalm
 
How can you give Australia 7 out 10 when none of the indivdual players got over 6 out of 10? That makes no sense at all. :facepalm

Gestalt my dear boy, Gestalt - "the whole is greater than the sum of its parts". Base components of the Mona Lisa ain't worth a lot, canvas and paint.......................
 
Got to say you are too generous to allocate 3 to Sarwan. He has been absolute failure this season.
 
I tend to agree with cricket_icon although would have given them a 5/10. It was hard to read much into the side apart from the first game. We know batting is an issue but the finding of Voges and consistency of Bailey plus Clarke should add more starch to that middle order in the future. They do need to be more aggressive at the top of the order, Maxwell, Finch or Maddinson as opener and told to blast it.

Starc was disappointing on the bowling front, he was our star player going into this tournament but the warm ups then that English game really brought him down a peg. Faulkner was okay, McKay good as always and Doherty solid in his one game.

Going ahead I'd be looking at
Maddinson/Maxwell/Finch
Watson
Clarke
Bailey
Voges
Ferguson/Faulkner
Wade
Johnson
Starc
Doherty
McKay

Ferguson should be brought back in and finally allowed to try to become the new Bevan/Hussey. Faulkner would be backup batsmen, he offers more than Mitch Marsh atm.
 
Could not agree more with your rating of Pakistan. However Farhat is still rated to high, as well as Amin. Rest are very good indeed.

Great job on the articles.
 
I tend to agree with cricket_icon although would have given them a 5/10. It was hard to read much into the side apart from the first game. We know batting is an issue but the finding of Voges and consistency of Bailey plus Clarke should add more starch to that middle order in the future. They do need to be more aggressive at the top of the order, Maxwell, Finch or Maddinson as opener and told to blast it.

Starc was disappointing on the bowling front, he was our star player going into this tournament but the warm ups then that English game really brought him down a peg. Faulkner was okay, McKay good as always and Doherty solid in his one game.

Going ahead I'd be looking at
Maddinson/Maxwell/Finch
Watson
Clarke
Bailey
Voges
Ferguson/Faulkner
Wade
Johnson
Starc
Doherty
McKay

Ferguson should be brought back in and finally allowed to try to become the new Bevan/Hussey. Faulkner would be backup batsmen, he offers more than Mitch Marsh atm.


Good team pick. I think the Aussies have a tonne of potential, especially their fast bowling department but they need a solid batting line up which (and this is very rare for an Australian side) is severely lacking. Apart from Clarke and Watson I can't even pick another truly world class batsman. That is shocking.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top