PlayerComparisons
International Captain
.
Do you think Cook was better than Thorpe?IMO, Flower was probably better than all England batsmen between Boycott and Root.
Gower -Flower (it rhymes), Gooch-Flower, KP-Flower, or Cook-Flower would all be closer.
Yeah he was IMO. Opener tax, especially in England.Do you think Cook was better than Thorpe?
yeah good pointYeah he was IMO. Opener tax, especially in England.
YesDo you think Cook was better than Thorpe?
Another poll for Mark Waugh to lose in.Thorpe v Mark Waugh would be more competitive perhaps.
Just to emphasise the point, in the 90s Thorpe played 80% of his Tests against Aus/SA/Pak/WI, Flower played 33% against the same opposition under the same time frame and never toured Australia (played only one Test against them), whereas Thorpe kept having to play the best team in the world for a lambs to the slaughter level opponent and did very well. He actually did well against top attacks in general.Flower. Thorpe did have to play top sides a lot more though. Gooch, Gower and KP would have pushed Flower closer. Infact, Cook would have done too despite Thorpe being better than him.
Flower also played for Zimbabwe and kept wicket. Much harder job. Thorpe had a big average at 5 and Flower batted mostly 5 which makes it difficult. I don’t like Thorpe because of what he did for Tudor so I voted for Flower.Just to emphasise the point, in the 90s Thorpe played 80% of his Tests against Aus/SA/Pak/WI, Flower played 33% against the same opposition under the same time frame and never toured Australia (played only one Test against them), whereas Thorpe kept having to play the best team in the world for a lambs to the slaughter level opponent and did very well. He actually did well against top attacks in general.
Don’t get me wrong, I still voted Flower and believe the difference in average is enough to compensate the disparity in schedules. But it’s closer than some think
Yeah but if we’re looking at all the context, you could also argue England is a tougher place to bat than Zimbabwe. Thorpe’s average at 5 was similar to Michael Clarke.Flower also played for Zimbabwe and kept wicket. Much harder job. Thorpe had a big average at 5 and Flower batted mostly 5 which makes it difficult. I don’t like Thorpe because of what he did for Tudor so I voted for Flower.
Suppose though neither are openers (in fact 4/5) and you ought to be strong (arguably strongest, even taking England into account) in the home conditions regardless of where it isYeah but if we’re looking at all the context, you could also argue England is a tougher place to bat than Zimbabwe. Thorpe’s average at 5 was similar to Michael Clarke.
I agree Flower had it tough playing for Zimbabwe, and the gloves are a burden. But playing for a poor England side in the 90s that were constantly playing the top sides was also a tall order. I don’t think this forum truly recognises how much more favourable Flower’s opponents distribution was relative to Thorpe but it probably doesn’t compensate the gap in averages.Suppose though neither are openers (in fact 4/5) and you ought to be strong (arguably strongest, even taking England into account) in the home conditions regardless of where it is
You are right. Being English I would have voted for Thorpe if he didn’t rob Tudor of a historic nightwatchman ton. I see Flower and Thorpe as 50-50 apart from that by their stats. There’s even an argument for Thorpe by his stats at 5 but the Tudor thing was unforgivableI agree Flower had it tough playing for Zimbabwe, and the gloves are a burden. But playing for a poor England side in the 90s that were constantly playing the top sides was also a tall order. I don’t think this forum truly recognises how much more favourable Flower’s opponents distribution was relative to Thorpe but it probably doesn’t compensate the gap in averages.
And yeah English conditions tax minimises when you aren’t batting top 3 but Thorpe was bloody good at 40-3 rescue acts.