Pietersen gets the nod

[vic_orthdox]

Acid test begins for Pieterson...

 

[steds]

Acid test begins for Pieterson...

Great idea! Acid on his tongue! That'll make him talk properly...or else we'll do it again

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

If the middle order of Pietersen,Flintoff,Bell and Jones fire, you may well be looking at one of the most destructive middle orders in world cricket of the last 20 years.

Oh come on. If four players batting from 4 to 7 all fire any bloody middle order is destructive. The point is that Pietersen is a great prospect but you have to do more than score really quickly to be successful in tests, and it's a pretty big trial by fire to take a guy who's clearly struggling to score through the off-side with ODI fields and put him in tests where McGrath can put it out there all day and bowl to a 7-2 field as much as he likes. Bell and Flintoff are fine, but having Thorpe in there offered stability to the order, assuming he was fit enough to play. Hell, maybe Pietersen will crack a ton on debut and be a huge revelation, but you could back Thorpe a lot more.

Just like you can't rely on the old guard forever, you can't assume that sticking anybody new in there in the place of a proven performer is a good move.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Almost on cue when he was on the news, mum shouted "Speak English!" and dad shouted "Get a hair cut!"

Now I am in the dilemma of who to support, while I obviously want England to do well this summer, how can I support a team with him in?

Given your past record of supporting Somerset and the Saffies and how well they've done I think it would be for the best if you cheered on the convicts.

 

[Top_Cat]

Bloody hell, this is simply amazing! Just about all of you are 5+ years younger than me yet with this selection gamble (it has to be said), you're reacting like a bunch of 60+-year-olds who are annoyed that Boycott has been dropped! Yes Thorpe has played well in the last two years but I doubt his back has been giving him as much trouble either. In Pieterson you have a young, fit, in-form but unproven batsman who is an absolute dynamo in the field vs Graham Thorpe, a modern great who has been in reasonable form but has made sporadic appearances for England and Surrey due to injury and other problems. So which one sounds more risky?

I bet all of you, were Thorpe to be picked and injured in the First Test or drop Gilchrist on 2 on his way to a ton would be saying "Should have picked Pieterson".

 

[marc71178]

The fact that Thorpe is fit too play in the c and g quater final and piterson is not shows that fitness is not the reason.

Sorry, but there's a difference between a 1 day game and a Test.

 

[Top_Cat]

Sorry, but there's a difference between a 1 day game and a Test.

Or indeed an entire 5-Test series! Particularly since this series will be played with few suibstantial breaks between games.

 

[aussie]

I bet all of you, were Thorpe to be picked and injured in the First Test or drop Gilchrist on 2 on his way to a ton would be saying "Should have picked Pieterson".

Well i rather that happen or you could put up the scenario of Thorpe Failing. Either way i would rather that than Thorpe not be selected at all.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Bloody hell, this is simply amazing! Just about all of you are 5+ years younger than me yet with this selection gamble (it has to be said), you're reacting like a bunch of 60+-year-olds who are annoyed that Boycott has been dropped! Yes Thorpe has played well in the last two years but I doubt his back has been giving him as much trouble either. In Pieterson you have a young, fit, in-form but unproven batsman who is an absolute dynamo in the field vs Graham Thorpe, a modern great who has been in reasonable form but has made sporadic appearances for England and Surrey due to injury and other problems. So which one sounds more risky?

I bet all of you, were Thorpe to be picked and injured in the First Test or drop Gilchrist on 2 on his way to a ton would be saying "Should have picked Pieterson".

At least it would be justified in that case. I mean, it was only a few months ago that you were arguing for the inclusion of Kasprowicz over Lee in New Zealand, right? I, among other people, were making the argument that Lee was in form, had the wood over the NZ top order, was the future of the Australian pace attack and deserved to be in the team, and that the McGrath/Gillespie/Kasprowicz attack looked one-paced and sameish. You said that Kasprowicz had done nothing wrong, and Australia should stick with the winning combination.

So, why the change? Why does Pietersen (the somewhat questionable player in some respects who has been in good ODI form and is electric in the field and young) deserve a shot over Thorpe (the proven performer who has done nothing wrong and is part of a winning combination in the middle order) but Lee didn't over Kasprowicz? Would I have been right then to compare you to the old Yorkshire stodger who was upset about Boycott being dropped?

It's not nothing to do with being old and opposed to change, it's got to do with the fact that Thorpe is an excellent batsman and, assuming he is fit and wants to play, he should be picked over a young guy who has done well in ODIs.

 

[Crazy Sam]

thorpe will be back should australia flog england in the first test.

 

[Top_Cat]

It's not nothing to do with being old and opposed to change, it's got to do with the fact that Thorpe is an excellent batsman and, assuming he is fit and wants to play, he should be picked over a young guy who has done well in ODIs

And as I said before, if Thorpe is fit, he shouldn't have been dropped. The thing is, I'd say it's pretty unlikely that he's fit enough to last a couple of Tests let alone a series so Pieterson is the next logical choice. I think I've made it pretty clear that if Thorpe was fit, he should be selected. If not, well I'll try harder next time.

Anyway, I maintain that picking Lee back then would have been a mistake. Even now, it's a tight one because he's been in top ODI/FC form before, been picked in a Test match, not taken wickets straight away and then gone missing for the rest of the Test/series or been really expensive. I'm of the opinion that he's actually bowling better now than on previous occasions and if picked, will be more likely to succeed but I still have my doubts about how he'll respond if played in a more patient fashion.

The thing is, it's only really Gillespie's and Kasper's woeful form which has brought him into calculations. If they were bowling well, I'd support both of them ahead of him, despite his excellent ODI form.

 

[roseboy64]

Good to see Pietersen selected but disappointed that Thorpe wasn't picked. I'd rather the both of them selected or Thorpe alone than Pietersen alone. It's better Thorpe fail first and bring in Pietersen than have Pietersen fail and then who knows what? With Thorpe failing you'd know he's past t and so wouldn't be too much of a problem.

 

[Pratters]

Some very interesting reactions on the thread. My take on it which I have written on Sportolysis

Whatever happens in the drama which ensues at Lord in less than a week’s time, one thing is certain – England have already made a statement which smacks of confidence, the positive and brave attitude it has shown in the past one and half years. There is no Butcher being out with injury, Thorpe – the backbone of the English batting line up in the latter part of the 90s has been omitted and the English test side has younger look than at any point in the past 15 years.

The selectors have shown faith in Pieterson for the beginning of such a crucial Ashes opening test that it totally surprised me. But it was a pleasant surprise. Whether Pieterson fails on succeeds now in the first test, the English team have made the first real statement of the Ashes. The one day games were just mouth candy. The English team have said – we are ready to make things happen rather than wait and merely hope that it happens. We are not going for the safe play. We are gritty, we are raring to go and we are willing to growl and make move. In other words, we just don’t hope to win the Ashes if Australia show some lack of form or if we show some miracle of brilliance. We are coming at you and will do all things to achieve the goal of winning the Ashes.

It may not help in winning the Ashes but it is the perfect attitude. Choose a youngster raring to go rather than a soldier with history of nothing from past Ashes spoils, playing a last battle, having already announced his retirement. I never understand the concept of announcing a retirement before a series or test match or a season or a tournament. It smacks of irresponsibility and shifts, if some times only partly, the attention from the actual battle at hand to a mere soldier. Don’t show a desire to quit before a major battle. There are other players raring to go with more rush in the blood.

In a similar irresponsible act by Steve Waugh before the series against India, the Australian selectors did not show the steel to blood Clarke immediately. It shifted attention of Australia in the series and remember how Clarke rose to the occasion in India when given the opportunity. Going back some time, Remember how Gilchrist rose to the ocassion when Healy was looking for a ‘last test’. Pieterson would try to make the most of the chance he has got. Pieterson is delighted at being selected. It’s a big thing for him. Thorpe is disappointed at not getting selected. He was expecting it. That for me undermines the correctness of the decision and shows how much which player was raring to go.

Should England go back to Thorpe if Pieterson fails in the middle of the Ashes. Or bring back Butcher when he comes out of injury? Not really. Have faith in the young, the new. Bring Key or blood Joyce.

The first blood has been drawn by England and the Ashes and the small battles of the Ashes have now begun in all earnest. What was happening the last 2 months was drama with no substance and no one, not even the media writing it taking it that seriously.

 

[Matteh]

I think that it is nice for once in the last decade for England to have to pick between 3 top class batsmen for the middle order (Pietersen, Thorpe and Bell)....
During the 90s England had so many nearly men that were well established in county cricket but not in international cricket...Thinking of Nick Knight(although he got labelled as a purely one dayer)..Darren Maddy..Robert Irani had a go...Steve James... and these are all in the late 90s when I began to realise how much i liked cricket.

So i think that being the situation of having to choose between having quality(at international level, the above players are/were all great in the domestic leagues) players is something that we(Englanders) should be grateful for after a drout.

 

[Monty]

yeah it is good that england do have good talent now

 

[Scallywag]

I think that it is nice for once in the last decade for England to have to pick between 3 top class batsmen for the middle order (Pietersen, Thorpe and Bell)....

Bell and pieterson both unproven and are not top class middle order batsmen. Well thats exactaly what Marc would say.

 

[Swervy]

Just like you can't rely on the old guard forever, you can't assume that sticking anybody new in there in the place of a proven performer is a good move.

so how does a player prove himself then? He has to play to prove himself doesnt he...a perfect opportunity to pick KP when Thorpe isnt at top fitness

 

[marc71178]

Bell and pieterson both unproven and are not top class middle order batsmen. Well thats exactaly what Marc would say.

Yes, I would.

I think Bell has at least done enough to show he can perform, that debut innings was a very good knock and showed a lot of composure, but he's now got to show it.

Pietersen I've always had my doubts about, but I hope to be proved wrong.

 

[Scallywag]

Yes, I would.

I think Bell has at least done enough to show he can perform, that debut innings was a very good knock and showed a lot of composure, but he's now got to show it.

Pietersen I've always had my doubts about, but I hope to be proved wrong.

Bell one innings of 70 against WI and that shows he can perform. hahahahahahahahaha

 

[C_C]

I think England just made a HUGE blunder.
Thorpe is their senior-most batsman and in my opinion, their best ( Vaughan,Strauss,Tresco are behind him)...averages 45+ against OZ and averages 62 over the last year and half or so...dropping him, just because he had a mediocre 2005 so far ( still yearly average is 40+), is madness.