West Indies v Australia - Player of the Series

[Black Thunder]

Well here's the options:

Shivnarine Chanderpaul - 6 inns, 257 runs at 42.83, HS: 104, 2 100's.
Adam Gilchrist - 5 inns, 282 runs at 70.50. HS: 101*. 1 100, 2 50's. 12 ct, 3 st.
Jason Gillespie - 168.4 overs, 17 wkts at 20.76. Best: 5/39. 1 5WI.
Matthew Hayden - 8 inns, 379 runs at 63.15. HS: 177, 2 100's.
Justin Langer - 8 inns, 483 runs at 69.00. HS: 146. 2 100's, 2 50's.
Brian Lara - 8 inns, 533 runs at 66.62, HS: 122. 2 100's, 3 50's. 6 ct.
Jermaine Lawson - 88.4 overs, 14 wkts at 26.42. Best: 7/78, 1 5WI.
Brett Lee - 144.3 overs, 17 wkts at 28.82. Best: 4/63, 0 5WI.
Darren Lehmann - 7 inns, 353 runs at 58.83. HS: 160. 1 100, 2 50's.
Stuart MacGill - 204.1 overs, 20 wkts at 33.95. Best: 5/75. 1 5WI.
Ricky Ponting - 5 inns, 523 runs at 130.75. HS: 206. 3 100's.
Ramnaresh Sarwan - 6 inns, 287 runs at 47.83. HS: 105, 1 100, 1 50.
Steve Waugh - 4 inns, 226 runs at 75.33, HS: 115, 1 100.

[Black Thunder]

Most people will go for Ponting because those numbers are simply extraordinary, but just to create something different I've gone Gillespie.

Just as I speak Ponting has been announced as the official player of the series.

I think given that the pitches where just the biggest roads, and even that 200 that Ponting scored, he didn't even have to work to hard for. He was served up a load of ****, and on absolute roads, it's no suprising he did well.

Gillespie had to toil hard and basically led our bowling. Lee only just averaged below 30 and no Aussie bowler managed to do that. Gillespie basically lent a lone hand more or less to the bowling, and for that reason I have given him my man of the series.

If you do it this way - who would have Australia missed more?? Gillespie or Ponting??

I think the answer would be Gillespie. Only Lee came away with decent results (while MacGill's were OK for a spinner), but in the batting, all 6 batsmen average over 50 so the loss of Ponting wouldn't have been overly hard to take. Although in saying that the only test he didn't play, the lost ;) go figure.

[DaveW]

Ricky Ponting, a century in each Test, you can't do much better than that. The batsmen in the team faced extra responsibility with the different balance of the side - one less specialist batsman. Ponting was the one who came through in flying colours.

[Black Thunder]

and for all the bagging he cops, MacGill topped the wickettaking for the series.

[clucas91]

Lara,

Scored all the runs when the rest of his side didn't.

[ScouseCat]

Originally posted by Black Thunder
Ricky Ponting - 5 inns, 523 runs at 130.75. HS: 206. 3 100's.

Ricky Ponting gets my vote easilly.

His batting in the 3 tests he played enabled us to get away with only playing 5 specialist batsman plus Adam Gilchrist. To score a century in each test is awesome, well deserved man of the series.

[scmods]

Originally posted by Black Thunder
Just as I speak Ponting has been announced as the official player of the series.

Maybe it's time we told you, you don't actually have to say it out loud while you're typing! :D

[Nige_Bix]

I went for Ponting but Gillespie's efforts in the 1st three tests on flat tracks were terrific

[^Eagle^]

steve waugh, considering the number of innings he played and his age, he was super

[Slax]

Originally posted by Black Thunder
and for all the bagging he cops, MacGill topped the wickettaking for the series.

He may of but at 33.75 it's not what I'd call a great performance. It obviously shows he got some stick. He is no Shane Warne.

I say move aside MacGill and lets try the youngsters.

[scmods]

Originally posted by Slax
He may of but at 33.75 it's not what I'd call a great performance. It obviously shows he got some stick. He is no Shane Warne.

I say move aside MacGill and lets try the youngsters.
MacGill's biggest problem is that Warne is so exceptional.

MacGill should be considered a great leg spinner, but being in the same era as Warne, who is probably a one-off in history, he doesn't look as good as he is.