Not really sure what you're looking for, Hawker04. If you're looking at someone's savegame, presumably you're doing it for one of two reasons: to get advice, or to give advice.
In either case, you need to analyse what you see. Things to think about:
How are the cities planned out?
Did the player make a good tactical decision by blocking off a large portion of land for later expansion?
What kind of units, and how many, are defending the major cities?
Is a city with the potential for a GP farm being wasted as a mediocre production city?
Is the research rate appripriate given the gpt bing earned?
Is tech progression soaring, or lagging? Why?
These are just a few of the many possibilites.
Sometimes you can see major good points easily, such as specialized cities, and a modern military. The same can be said for major blunders, like a undersized, ancient military, with a poorly defended capital.
If you're analysing the game to learn from it, you have to look at what is presented and ask yourself why the player did what he/she did. "Why was that a good choice?"
If you're offering advice, you need to look for common errors, and suggest to the player ways to fix and improve them. "In the future, you should try to avoid..."
Does that answer your question?