Graham Thorpe vs Andy Flower

[PlayerComparisons]

.

 

[ataraxia]

Huh?

 

[TheJediBrah]

Closer than most people think IMO

 

[Lillian Thomson]

No one can seriously vote for Thorpe. He was the better keeper though.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

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.

 

[PlayerComparisons]

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.

Do you think Cook was better than Thorpe?

 

[Prince EWS]

Do you think Cook was better than Thorpe?

Yeah he was IMO. Opener tax, especially in England.

 

[PlayerComparisons]

Yeah he was IMO. Opener tax, especially in England.

yeah good point

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Do you think Cook was better than Thorpe?

Yes

 

[BazBall21]

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.

 

[anil1405]

Thorpe v Mark Waugh would be more competitive perhaps.

 

[trundler]

Thorpe v Mark Waugh would be more competitive perhaps.

Another poll for Mark Waugh to lose in.

 

[BazBall21]

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.

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

 

[_00_deathscar]

That England team wasn’t actually that bad - it was bizarre they were so ****.

Thorpe and Stewart were gun players but they kept trying to **** up Stewart.
Atherton was a solid enough opener for the era.
Had a decent bowling line up too if they could get them on the field at the same time.

 

[Jack1]

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

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.

 

[BazBall21]

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.

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.

 

[Jack1]

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.

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

 

[BazBall21]

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

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.
And yeah English conditions tax minimises when you aren’t batting top 3 but Thorpe was bloody good at 40-3 rescue acts.

 

[Jack1]

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.
And yeah English conditions tax minimises when you aren’t batting top 3 but Thorpe was bloody good at 40-3 rescue acts.

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 unforgivable