Further to yesterday’s debate about the identity of England’s best player, here’s one possible way of rating them
We made the point yesterday that people shouldn’t blindly accept that Joe Root is England’s best player because he only regularly contributes in one facet of the game. We then a touch disingenuously suggested that all of England’s many all-rounders had a better claim to such a title, simply by dint of contributing in multiple disciplines.
There then followed an interesting-but-lengthy to and fro about the definition of an all-rounder and their value to a team.
Bradders suggested that players could be assessed by their ability to make match-winning contributions. We therefore give you the hundreds and five-fors rating, a wilfully simplistic system whereby hundreds and five-fors are given equal weight and everything else a player might do is utterly disregarded.
These are the figures for the last 12 months, presented within an old-school HTML table which will probably lose its formatting in the majority of internet browsers.
Player | Hundreds | Five-fors | Total |
Joe Root | 3 | 0 | 3 |
Alastair Cook | 2 | 0 | 2 |
Moeen Ali | 3 | 2 | 5 |
Ben Stokes | 1 | 1 | 2 |
Keaton Jennings | 1 | 0 | 1 |
Chris Woakes | 0 | 2 | 2 |
As you may or may not be able to see, Moeen Ali is England’s best player and he is almost twice as good as Joe Root.
Bert writes... Regular readers of this website will be aware that I have a standing…
Players and commentators talk a lot about playing each ball on its merits, but actually…
It's almost time to start looking ahead to the Ashes again, but before we get…
The 2023 Ashes has sogged and then at the last moment unexpectedly fizzled to its…
It's a weird feature of cricket that you can go out in style but then…
It's quite possible you didn't. He only scored nine of them in 82 balls after…