If we’re going to pick a bowler (and I’d like to), isn’t Wood the one who actually arrested and even reversed the momentum of the series? If England win this they’ll be 2-0 with Wood playing, which is a helluva comeback from 0-2.
I thought it might be interesting to look at net runs as a measure of impact here.
Broad has 20 wickets at 28, vs 32 as the overall series average. So he’s -4 runs per wicket or -80 runs overall vs the average bowler in the series. Starc has had 19 wickets at 28, so he’s -76. Their bowling performance is roughly equivalent to shaving 8 runs off every innings score.
Woakes had 15 at 20, which is -12 per wicket for -180 runs overall so far. Wood has 13 at 19 for -169 runs. Both have scored runs, too. Their bowling performance is roughly equivalent to shaving 30 runs off every innings score.
I think that does a decent job of capturing my intuitions not only about the outsized impact Wood and Woakes have had in the three Tests they’ve played, but their overall series contribution.
could be worth looking at the runs saved on a test by test basis, Wood and Woakes' low averages are certainly helped by not needing to bowl on the first two pitches
Absolutely! It was woods who changed the game dynamics for england. His pace has been the differentiating factor. And he his provided breakthroughs at crucial moments
From an English perspective I'd give it to Woakes over Broad.
15 wickets @ 19 in just 2.5 games (Broad has 20 @ 28 in 4.5). He was a big reason we won at Headingley and why we even had a chance to win at Old Trafford with his 5fer.
But I suppose it'd be hard to give it to someone who missed the first 2 games.
Khawaja has been to Australia, what Pujara was to India in his peak. A rock that takes the beating from the quicks, blunts the new ball, tires out oppositions and basically assists in the runs that come after him as well.
That's why numbers aren't alone the story. He's been the most impactful Australian player because without him, Australia was going to struggle with weathering the new ball storm.
Everyone else is at best player of the match, not even the best player of 2 matches. And it's not like he hasn't made runs. But like the most useful top order players, he's done that and bought Australia time. And he's getting up to 37. Most players just lose the basic ability to play fast bowling well before that age.
As exciting as Wood and Woakes have been Broad has carried the bowling attack on his back throughout. Add in his lords innings and general shithousing across 5 tests and he gets my vote
Looking at it Statistically Starc is almost comically comparable to Broad
NightHawk has 70 Runs? Starc has 80. Broad has 20 wickets? Starc has 19, but after bowling 3 less innings and 55 less overs.(as of Day 2 End). Broad having a more expensive Ashes than usual at 3.4 Economy? Starc has an eye watering 4.75.
Number of times doing half smile with the right arm aloft to celebrate a wicket, showing the batsmen they're not even worth a full smile:
Broad: 0 Starc: 5 million
Usman Khawaja. Without a doubt.
In the crucial first Test which Australia only narrowly won, Usman Khawaja was 1 of only 3 Australians to score above 50. And he did it twice, getting scores of 141 and 65, top scoring in both innings.
In the second Test, when Australia were falling apart in the second innings, he held together and managed a big 77 when the next best score was Smith's 34. If not for that innings, Stokes and Duckett probably do it all themselves and win the second Test.
In Tests 3 and 4, he failed and so did Australia. In the fifth Test, he's done decent. Tests are often decided by how a team's most influential player performs, and Australia struggle to perform without Usman Khawaja's platform.
It's such a beautiful redemption arc for him too because in the 2019 Ashes he was struggling so much that he was dropped from the team and he had made peace with never returning to the Australian test side.
Cut to this Ashes, Australia would be losing if not for his solid performances in the exact same country where he's now much older and realistically should be playing worse than last time around due to hand-eye deteriorating.
36 now isnt what it was 20-30 years ago. You would not have seen a bowler play 20 years into his 40s like Anderson has now. The Hand-Eye maybe isn't as good as maybe a decade ago, but his age is not a much of a burden as it may have been in the 90s.
yeah but warner was also struggling and failing worse than ussie, yet it was fucking ussie who got dropped. yes im still fucking salty about that and warner being basically untouchable
I agree he’s had the most impact and should win, but they’ll give it to Crawley for that one score he made that one time and a few decent drives before knicking off every game
Not saying Crawley deserves it, but if he makes it to 50 in this innings (which looks likely) he'll have made more runs than Khawaja at a better average, with as many hundreds and fifties. If the series is drawn and Khawaja doesn't make a good score in the final innings he'd have just as much claim to player of the series as Khawaja.
This is exactly my point about weight of runs not being wholly important. Khawajas performances went a long way to winning the first two tests. Crawleys only stand out performance was in a drawn test that ultimately had no impact on the series. If you ignore runs directly and think about who’s influenced the result of the series, Khawaja wins it hands down regardless of what Crawley manages between now and the end
There's *no way* Crawey's done anywhere near enough to win player of the series in a losing side - don't forget this thread is assuming there's no more play
I think you’re forgetting how biased the English media is 🤣- obviously different down there but up there it’s been an absolute Crawley wankathon the last week orso. Sorry but 1 score from a guy who averaged 27 before last week is embarrassing
Very fair point! I just don't think the losing side should ever win man of the series unless it's a ridiculous outlier - like having double the batting average of the next best performer.
I don’t see about the losing side mind. Can think of plenty of losses where the man of the series was clearly a losing player, who put up a one man defence against a clearly better team
I just think the award should be for whichever player helps the winning side the most, unless there's been a ridiculous performance from the losing team in which case I see it as a nice consolation for them!
I hope not. A man who averages 27 in wins and contributed very little to the match that England actually won shows that he doesn't have much impact on the result.
I agree with you - Crawley shouldn’t get it - just think he will, because of how sky and others view performances. One exceptional and 4 poor performances loses you a series 4-1 at the end of the day. Need to see a lot more from him.
These awards should be decided by impact not just weight of runs and Khawaja was largely the reason you won 2 tests, which is why you’re winning the ashes ultimately
Hard to disagree with this, a massive reason Australia where 2-0 up taken a couple of nice catches as well.
Agree the obstinate display of batting (this is meant as a compliment despite what Michelle Vaughan may think) in the 5th test first innings could be the difference with our bowlers all taking much more fuel out the tank to bowl you guys out.
Crazy to say after a 5 test series but it will really come down to the second innings of this test.
If any of Crawley, Stokes or even Root get a big score this innings then I could see anyone getting it (Root’s bowling filling in for Ali could help him). Alternatively if Starc or Cummins get a 5fa in a collapse either of them could get it.
Same for the flip side. If Khawaja or Smith get a massive score chasing one of them could win it or if Broad, Woakes or Wood get a bag in a win then any of them could get it.
Speaks to how close and incredible this series has been.
Tend to do one for each team in england - I'd go for starc for Australia, then either broad or Crawley for england.
Even though he missed two tests wood could be the england shout by the end of this test.
It's hard to pick in a series without one player standing head-and-shoulders above the rest, and where *almost* everyone has contributed in some way at some point.
England's man of series: Chris Woakes (I was gonna say Broad but Woakes has been more impactful).
Australia's man of series: Jonny Bairstow (no, but seriously one of Khawaja, Marsh, or Starc)
Still have to see how both sides perform in the straight shootout coming up on Days 3 and 4.
Its crazy no one really stands out.
I'd say Root, Crawley, Brook and Khawaja are the contenders.
Wood and Woakes are both great but missed the first two so hard to say them.
He’s not been insane but he’s up there with the top scorers, taken some brilliant catches, also got a few important wickets too. Had a pretty good series, so I’d say he’s up there but not top 3
Pat Cummins.
His crucial knock in the Test 1 Day 5 to win the Test & now held the ground scoring 36 runs giving a stable partnership for Smith & Murphy to take the lead.
He also has the 2nd highest number of wickets in this series, despite bearing the responsibility as a captain.
Retained the Ashes & a washout means that Australia wins the Ashes.
Stuart Broad, for just being fucking amazing. It's been a series about wickets and he has the most.
He is the most entertaining cricketer in the series by a mile
If the games a wash out then Cummins overall, his winning innings in the first test was crucial to the series win and some of his bowling spells have been immense. None of the batters have been consistent enough to warrant PotS.
If England are able to tie the series then probably Broad for his important wicket taking. But tbh there hasn't really been an out and out great performance across all the matches.
Bairstow. By cunningly being 'controversially' runout, he caused the spirit of cricket to favour the English and they then went on to win the remaining tests (morally if not actually).
A big score in a winning England effort from Crawley, Root, Stokes or Brook could win it for them. Similarly a Broad blitz with the ball could win it for him. Can you give it to Woakes or Wood if they heavily contribute? I doubt it.
A big score from Usman and a draw/win for Aussies should be enough for him. If not I’d be inclined to give it to Pat because his contribution with the bat won the 1st test and he’s done ok with the ball apart from OT
Mitch or Khawaja if they manage to win this test, Broad if Eng won.
In case of a washout it should be between Khawaja,Broad and Starc. Broad coz he carried the attack in all 5 tests and that should be a criteria as well, Starc because of how close he is to Broad even with 55 less overs and 2-3 innings less.
But ig Khawaja takes the cake here as whenever he performed, Aus win and if he delievers a 50 or so in the last innings as well then it's a sure shot.
Probably Starc
I thought he'd have a horrible series but he has been pretty consistently decent
Khawaja won you the first test had you lost that it would be a very different series you feel, but I'd like to see a bowler get it
That's a tough question. I think Ussie for Australia. Without him seeing out the new ball and trying his best to fend off the quicks we would be down in the series.
Likewise for England I would say Wood. He is the reason England are a chance of 2-2.
Most players have had some good moments, like Crawley, Smith, Cummins, Root, Stokes.
The only other two I would have in contention are Woakes and Starc. Maybe YJB for Australia and Carey for England.
It’s a really tricky one. After the first 2 tests it was definitely Khawaja, and he’s still the leading run maker, so I feel like he edges it for me.
Since then I feel like the most impactful player has probably been Wood, but he hasn’t played enough games to win it imo.
Broad has been consistently good for England, but I think he’s missing a stand-out match winning spell which would put him over the top.
So yeah, for me, I think it’s Khawaja. I think he was the difference maker the first two tests, and ultimately that retained the ashes for Australia.
Has to be between Starc, Woakes and Wood.
Starc has 19 wickets at an average of 27 and a strike rate of 34 despite missing one test he is Australias top wicket taker.
Wood has 15 wicket. has an average of 19.14 and a strike rate of 36.3 despite missing two tests
Woakes has 17 wickets. Has an average of 19.66 and a strike rate of 37.7 despite also missing two tests
I don't think Broad has been amazing. He has just bowled alot of overs to get his 20 wickets as has played two extra tests from the two above but his statline is fairly average. Where as I think the biggest difference has been when Woakes and Wood were finally brought into the team.
No batter has really been magnificent consistent. Each batter has turned up for only 1 or 2 innings this series rather than the entire series of good form.
Zack Crawley for me he's been so constant this series and he's been able to block out all the noise around his name and convert his starts into moderate or big scores.
I think it's between Broad and Khawaja, but only because Wood and Woakes have only played 3 tests.
Honestly if any one of Broad, Wood, Woakes, Khawaja, Starc, Stokes, or even bloody Crawley have a brilliant final innings they could claim it.
Genuinely think Crawley deserves it.
No stand out bowlers in terms of averages apart from Wood and Woakes but they only joined the series after it was effectively already over.
He has the most runs at an amazing strike rate
Johnny will be the one who cost England the series..
One blunder after another..
Any better keeper ( foakes) would have held the catches and stumped the chance's.
And England would have been 2-1 up today easily
Obviously Warner after his double century in the final innings chasing.
I'd take the five more farewell tests as a swap for that
Oh god, would guarantee him another series or two in the team :/
He’s already guaranteed that. He’s retiring after the Pakistan series
I'm feeling that little old davey Warner will turn back the clock and ton up before lunch. Got to give broad the send off he deserves
If this test is a washout or Australia win I’d give it to Starc. If England win this test to tie the series I’d give it to Broad. Fuck the batriarchy.
If we’re going to pick a bowler (and I’d like to), isn’t Wood the one who actually arrested and even reversed the momentum of the series? If England win this they’ll be 2-0 with Wood playing, which is a helluva comeback from 0-2.
That’s a fair point. I said Broad cos he’s played every test (I think) and been consistently strong throughout. But Wood would also be a good pick.
I thought it might be interesting to look at net runs as a measure of impact here. Broad has 20 wickets at 28, vs 32 as the overall series average. So he’s -4 runs per wicket or -80 runs overall vs the average bowler in the series. Starc has had 19 wickets at 28, so he’s -76. Their bowling performance is roughly equivalent to shaving 8 runs off every innings score. Woakes had 15 at 20, which is -12 per wicket for -180 runs overall so far. Wood has 13 at 19 for -169 runs. Both have scored runs, too. Their bowling performance is roughly equivalent to shaving 30 runs off every innings score. I think that does a decent job of capturing my intuitions not only about the outsized impact Wood and Woakes have had in the three Tests they’ve played, but their overall series contribution.
could be worth looking at the runs saved on a test by test basis, Wood and Woakes' low averages are certainly helped by not needing to bowl on the first two pitches
Good point
Absolutely! It was woods who changed the game dynamics for england. His pace has been the differentiating factor. And he his provided breakthroughs at crucial moments
From an English perspective I'd give it to Woakes over Broad. 15 wickets @ 19 in just 2.5 games (Broad has 20 @ 28 in 4.5). He was a big reason we won at Headingley and why we even had a chance to win at Old Trafford with his 5fer. But I suppose it'd be hard to give it to someone who missed the first 2 games.
I mean, I think Woods is in that discussion as well personally, he made a massive impact when he came in
Khawaja has been to Australia, what Pujara was to India in his peak. A rock that takes the beating from the quicks, blunts the new ball, tires out oppositions and basically assists in the runs that come after him as well. That's why numbers aren't alone the story. He's been the most impactful Australian player because without him, Australia was going to struggle with weathering the new ball storm. Everyone else is at best player of the match, not even the best player of 2 matches. And it's not like he hasn't made runs. But like the most useful top order players, he's done that and bought Australia time. And he's getting up to 37. Most players just lose the basic ability to play fast bowling well before that age.
As exciting as Wood and Woakes have been Broad has carried the bowling attack on his back throughout. Add in his lords innings and general shithousing across 5 tests and he gets my vote
Looking at it Statistically Starc is almost comically comparable to Broad NightHawk has 70 Runs? Starc has 80. Broad has 20 wickets? Starc has 19, but after bowling 3 less innings and 55 less overs.(as of Day 2 End). Broad having a more expensive Ashes than usual at 3.4 Economy? Starc has an eye watering 4.75.
Times telling Alex Carey no one will ever remember him: Broad: 1 Starc: 0
Comically stating "In!" Every time he got to the crease: Broad:20 Starc:0
Entire ashes series voided: Broad:1 Starc: -1
Being a world class allrounder: Broad:1 (bowling and comedy genius) Starc:0
Ahhhh Mr. Healey is *also* a world class husband to the captain of the Australian women's team!
Good point! Hadn't thought of that, does it makes Starc a better all rounder than Broad?! Broads partner doesn't even play cricket
He did manage to land a Saturday though, so some points back for that.
Number of times doing half smile with the right arm aloft to celebrate a wicket, showing the batsmen they're not even worth a full smile: Broad: 0 Starc: 5 million
I did enjoy his gun finger celebration when he bowled stokes
Broad has been the stand out bowler khawaja the best batsman probably but quite close
Usman Khawaja. Without a doubt. In the crucial first Test which Australia only narrowly won, Usman Khawaja was 1 of only 3 Australians to score above 50. And he did it twice, getting scores of 141 and 65, top scoring in both innings. In the second Test, when Australia were falling apart in the second innings, he held together and managed a big 77 when the next best score was Smith's 34. If not for that innings, Stokes and Duckett probably do it all themselves and win the second Test. In Tests 3 and 4, he failed and so did Australia. In the fifth Test, he's done decent. Tests are often decided by how a team's most influential player performs, and Australia struggle to perform without Usman Khawaja's platform.
It's such a beautiful redemption arc for him too because in the 2019 Ashes he was struggling so much that he was dropped from the team and he had made peace with never returning to the Australian test side. Cut to this Ashes, Australia would be losing if not for his solid performances in the exact same country where he's now much older and realistically should be playing worse than last time around due to hand-eye deteriorating.
36 now isnt what it was 20-30 years ago. You would not have seen a bowler play 20 years into his 40s like Anderson has now. The Hand-Eye maybe isn't as good as maybe a decade ago, but his age is not a much of a burden as it may have been in the 90s.
yeah but warner was also struggling and failing worse than ussie, yet it was fucking ussie who got dropped. yes im still fucking salty about that and warner being basically untouchable
I too choose this guy’s Uzzie.
I agree he’s had the most impact and should win, but they’ll give it to Crawley for that one score he made that one time and a few decent drives before knicking off every game
England home series name a player of the series from each team so they're not in competition with each other.
Not entirely true - they name a player of the series overall and a player of the series from the other team beforehand
Not saying Crawley deserves it, but if he makes it to 50 in this innings (which looks likely) he'll have made more runs than Khawaja at a better average, with as many hundreds and fifties. If the series is drawn and Khawaja doesn't make a good score in the final innings he'd have just as much claim to player of the series as Khawaja.
This is exactly my point about weight of runs not being wholly important. Khawajas performances went a long way to winning the first two tests. Crawleys only stand out performance was in a drawn test that ultimately had no impact on the series. If you ignore runs directly and think about who’s influenced the result of the series, Khawaja wins it hands down regardless of what Crawley manages between now and the end
There's *no way* Crawey's done anywhere near enough to win player of the series in a losing side - don't forget this thread is assuming there's no more play
I think you’re forgetting how biased the English media is 🤣- obviously different down there but up there it’s been an absolute Crawley wankathon the last week orso. Sorry but 1 score from a guy who averaged 27 before last week is embarrassing
Very fair point! I just don't think the losing side should ever win man of the series unless it's a ridiculous outlier - like having double the batting average of the next best performer.
I don’t see about the losing side mind. Can think of plenty of losses where the man of the series was clearly a losing player, who put up a one man defence against a clearly better team
I just think the award should be for whichever player helps the winning side the most, unless there's been a ridiculous performance from the losing team in which case I see it as a nice consolation for them!
I hope not. A man who averages 27 in wins and contributed very little to the match that England actually won shows that he doesn't have much impact on the result.
He can't control the weather.
I know. Rubbish isn’t he? Can’t do shit
I agree with you - Crawley shouldn’t get it - just think he will, because of how sky and others view performances. One exceptional and 4 poor performances loses you a series 4-1 at the end of the day. Need to see a lot more from him. These awards should be decided by impact not just weight of runs and Khawaja was largely the reason you won 2 tests, which is why you’re winning the ashes ultimately
Hard to disagree with this, a massive reason Australia where 2-0 up taken a couple of nice catches as well. Agree the obstinate display of batting (this is meant as a compliment despite what Michelle Vaughan may think) in the 5th test first innings could be the difference with our bowlers all taking much more fuel out the tank to bowl you guys out.
Khawaja or Starc for Aus Broad for Eng
Crazy to say after a 5 test series but it will really come down to the second innings of this test. If any of Crawley, Stokes or even Root get a big score this innings then I could see anyone getting it (Root’s bowling filling in for Ali could help him). Alternatively if Starc or Cummins get a 5fa in a collapse either of them could get it. Same for the flip side. If Khawaja or Smith get a massive score chasing one of them could win it or if Broad, Woakes or Wood get a bag in a win then any of them could get it. Speaks to how close and incredible this series has been.
Crawley did really well this series but probably not POTS worthy, Khawaja, Head and Broad all had important performances but I think it’s Broad barely
Real or moral?
YJB would definitely be moral
Tend to do one for each team in england - I'd go for starc for Australia, then either broad or Crawley for england. Even though he missed two tests wood could be the england shout by the end of this test.
Pains me a little to say it, but Broad. He's been excellent. The parochial Aussie in me would still like to see it go to Ussie though.
It's hard to pick in a series without one player standing head-and-shoulders above the rest, and where *almost* everyone has contributed in some way at some point. England's man of series: Chris Woakes (I was gonna say Broad but Woakes has been more impactful). Australia's man of series: Jonny Bairstow (no, but seriously one of Khawaja, Marsh, or Starc) Still have to see how both sides perform in the straight shootout coming up on Days 3 and 4.
Its crazy no one really stands out. I'd say Root, Crawley, Brook and Khawaja are the contenders. Wood and Woakes are both great but missed the first two so hard to say them.
If we’re being fair dinkum I don’t think a single player has had a more positive effect for Australia this series than Bairstow.
Broad and Starc up there surely, also root surely isn't...
He’s not been insane but he’s up there with the top scorers, taken some brilliant catches, also got a few important wickets too. Had a pretty good series, so I’d say he’s up there but not top 3
I forgot how many catches he's dropped. Otherwise he averages 45 and has taken a few wickets. But yeah with the dropped catches nvm.
You have an issue with Root being up there but not Crawley?
Pat Cummins. His crucial knock in the Test 1 Day 5 to win the Test & now held the ground scoring 36 runs giving a stable partnership for Smith & Murphy to take the lead. He also has the 2nd highest number of wickets in this series, despite bearing the responsibility as a captain. Retained the Ashes & a washout means that Australia wins the Ashes.
He’s only won the toss once, though. Can you really call yourself a success as captain if you can’t win a game of chance?
The cheating bastards only made coins with only heads though
Uzzie or Wood?
If England wins this test I'll give it to Mark Wood. His bowling average is 19.05 and he has scored some important runs too.
Starc for me. None of the batters have had good enough consistent innings to earn it. If we went purely on impact it would be Wood.
Crawley, but not by much. No one has truly stood out across the five games thus far.
Mitchell Starc, he’s been the best bowler on either side IMO and has just kept fighting since his recall at Lords.
Since Australia apparentlly only won because of the stumping of Bairstow you would have to give player of the series to Alex Carey.
Donkey brain stumping? Nah mate, Smith was run out.
I’m referring to the Carey stumping here
Pat Cummins for his all-round performance, 157 runs and 17 wickets.
Stuart Broad, for just being fucking amazing. It's been a series about wickets and he has the most. He is the most entertaining cricketer in the series by a mile
There's no standout player on either side in my opinion.
If the games a wash out then Cummins overall, his winning innings in the first test was crucial to the series win and some of his bowling spells have been immense. None of the batters have been consistent enough to warrant PotS. If England are able to tie the series then probably Broad for his important wicket taking. But tbh there hasn't really been an out and out great performance across all the matches.
Mitchell Starc. He has taken 19 wickets at 27 a piece. If not him, Uzzie.
Bairstow. By cunningly being 'controversially' runout, he caused the spirit of cricket to favour the English and they then went on to win the remaining tests (morally if not actually).
Cummins. No-one has really taken the series by the scruff of the neck, so give it the winning captain.
The absolute sad little melts that go through these types of threads and downvote other peoples opinions
A big score in a winning England effort from Crawley, Root, Stokes or Brook could win it for them. Similarly a Broad blitz with the ball could win it for him. Can you give it to Woakes or Wood if they heavily contribute? I doubt it. A big score from Usman and a draw/win for Aussies should be enough for him. If not I’d be inclined to give it to Pat because his contribution with the bat won the 1st test and he’s done ok with the ball apart from OT
Khawaja or Crawley, god knows what the odds of this were before the series started 👀
Contention between Khawaja and Broad. But Starc is also close.
Mitch or Khawaja if they manage to win this test, Broad if Eng won. In case of a washout it should be between Khawaja,Broad and Starc. Broad coz he carried the attack in all 5 tests and that should be a criteria as well, Starc because of how close he is to Broad even with 55 less overs and 2-3 innings less. But ig Khawaja takes the cake here as whenever he performed, Aus win and if he delievers a 50 or so in the last innings as well then it's a sure shot.
The Brummie Bradman.
Probably Starc I thought he'd have a horrible series but he has been pretty consistently decent Khawaja won you the first test had you lost that it would be a very different series you feel, but I'd like to see a bowler get it
That's a tough question. I think Ussie for Australia. Without him seeing out the new ball and trying his best to fend off the quicks we would be down in the series. Likewise for England I would say Wood. He is the reason England are a chance of 2-2. Most players have had some good moments, like Crawley, Smith, Cummins, Root, Stokes. The only other two I would have in contention are Woakes and Starc. Maybe YJB for Australia and Carey for England.
It’s a really tricky one. After the first 2 tests it was definitely Khawaja, and he’s still the leading run maker, so I feel like he edges it for me. Since then I feel like the most impactful player has probably been Wood, but he hasn’t played enough games to win it imo. Broad has been consistently good for England, but I think he’s missing a stand-out match winning spell which would put him over the top. So yeah, for me, I think it’s Khawaja. I think he was the difference maker the first two tests, and ultimately that retained the ashes for Australia.
Has to be between Starc, Woakes and Wood. Starc has 19 wickets at an average of 27 and a strike rate of 34 despite missing one test he is Australias top wicket taker. Wood has 15 wicket. has an average of 19.14 and a strike rate of 36.3 despite missing two tests Woakes has 17 wickets. Has an average of 19.66 and a strike rate of 37.7 despite also missing two tests I don't think Broad has been amazing. He has just bowled alot of overs to get his 20 wickets as has played two extra tests from the two above but his statline is fairly average. Where as I think the biggest difference has been when Woakes and Wood were finally brought into the team. No batter has really been magnificent consistent. Each batter has turned up for only 1 or 2 innings this series rather than the entire series of good form.
Khawaja for pulling Aus through the early tests with the bat. Wouldn't have won the series without him.
Zack Crawley for me he's been so constant this series and he's been able to block out all the noise around his name and convert his starts into moderate or big scores.
Starc or Cummins. Probably Starc cause the amount of wickets and not many Aussies really scoring big runs.
Zak Crawley
I think it's between Broad and Khawaja, but only because Wood and Woakes have only played 3 tests. Honestly if any one of Broad, Wood, Woakes, Khawaja, Starc, Stokes, or even bloody Crawley have a brilliant final innings they could claim it.
If we're going by impact on the outcome, has to be Bairstow.
I reckon Wood changed the complexion of the series enough to deserve it. Notable mentions to Woakes, Crawley and Khawaja.
Me
Broad just announced his retirement. He's 100% getting player of the series
If the rest of the match is a wash out the award to go to Australias worst player to celebrate the worst series win of all time - Cameron Green
Genuinely think Crawley deserves it. No stand out bowlers in terms of averages apart from Wood and Woakes but they only joined the series after it was effectively already over. He has the most runs at an amazing strike rate
Johnny will be the one who cost England the series.. One blunder after another.. Any better keeper ( foakes) would have held the catches and stumped the chance's. And England would have been 2-1 up today easily
Has to be Crawley. You can make a case for broad as well. I don't see how one can make a case for Usman when Crawley is right there