| 
Posts and words
Loading ...Must admit I’m quite surprised. Still fortune supposedly favours the brave!!
Graham Thorpe misses out to Kevin Pietersen
By Will 5 years ago, mid-July Add your comment below
“Selection of Kevin Pietersen gives us a better chance [of beating Australia,” says David Graveney. That’ll be the end of a marvellous career of one of my favourite batsmen, Graham Thorpe.
England’s squad for 1st npower Ashes Test
1. Michael Vaughan (Yorkshire) (captain)
2. Ian Bell (Warwickshire)
3. Andrew Flintoff (Lancashire)
4. Ashley Giles (Warwickshire)
5. Stephen Harmison (Durham)
6. Matthew Hoggard (Yorkshire)
7. Geraint Jones (Kent)
8. Simon Jones (Glamorgan)
9. Kevin Pietersen (Hampshire)
10. Andrew Strauss (Middlesex)
11. Chris Tremlett (Hampshire)
12. Marcus Trescothick (Somerset)
Tags: david-graveney, graham-thorpe, kevin-pietersen, kevin-pieterson, selections, the-ashes |
32 Responses to “Graham Thorpe misses out to Kevin Pietersen”
July 14th, 2005 at 11.40 am
July 14th, 2005 at 11.53 am
Nightmare decision for Graveney to make – so, so difficult. It’s almost as though it didn’t matter WHO he chose – it’s a bold decision, as it would have been had Pietersen been ommitted. I’m happy, I think it shows intent.
July 14th, 2005 at 11.56 am
It seems to be a look to the future, which is a good move. However, I’m not sure who Australia would prefer to face. Pietersen possibly offers more opportunities to Australia’s bowlers, however he could also take the match for England with one good session. It’ll be interesting to hear some comments from the Aussie players.
July 14th, 2005 at 12.00 pm
A positive move for England. It would have been disappointing after the long build up, to see the selectors take a backward (read convervative) step. Pietersen could add great value to their innings if they can get off to a good start.
July 14th, 2005 at 12.02 pm
Warne has already commented on how he would rather be bowling to Thorpe. Understandable when he has dismissed him 9 times in tests, as well has having a 1st hand look at KP with Hampshire
July 14th, 2005 at 12.13 pm
I’m reasonably happy with the decision. The interesting part will be if, as expected, England line up like this:
Tescothick, Strauss, Vaughan, Bell, Pietersen, Flintoff, Jones, Giles, Hoggard, Harmison, Jones
The lower middle order is potentially extremely volatile. It’s not the way I would have gone about it, but I can see the logic – with batsmen who like to hit out, you’ve got a better chance of knocking a bowler out of the attack. As Australia only play four front-line bowlers, this seems a reasonable tactic.
(Except, of course, that Shane Warne will only have two left-handers to bowl at, and both of those are openers.)
July 14th, 2005 at 12.19 pm
Graveney says it was his most difficult decision as a selector, and no one will disagree.
Also he seems to be pleading for a green-top so can he play Tremlett instead of Giles…
If so… when did England last play two debutants in the 1st Test of an Ashes series?
July 14th, 2005 at 12.27 pm
Playing five seamers is surely excessive. If the pitch is green, then four decent seam bowlers should easily be enough. If it isn’t, then you’ll want a spinner.
A shred of hope regarding Giles: Daniel Vettori did well against almost all of the Aussie batsmen recently. The exception being Gilchrist, who murdered him. Much as he took to Giles at the Oval. As long as that doesn’t happen too often, I think Giles will do well.
July 14th, 2005 at 12.44 pm
Green top ? At Lords ? Also Will, I think the line you quoted sums up the reasoning perfectly : this is a bid for ‘winning’ as opposed to no loosing.
I personally feel its a wrong move, atleast for the first test.
Also, not sure if Thorpe’s career is over yet. Look out for the big red panick button if Eng loose first couple of test badly (or even if they loose first one by big margin and KP contributes nothing)
July 14th, 2005 at 5.10 pm
oh, so many views. so many possibilities, so many possibilities. This is going to be one hell of cracker- and what a disappointment it shall be if Kp messes this chance up. To be fair, if they think he has it to be in there, they should give him an extended run. Would be senseless otherwise.
July 14th, 2005 at 6.34 pm
I think this is a huge mistake. And somehow I feel this is not going to be the end for Graham Thorpe – he is going to be sent out another SOS like in 2003.
On another note it would be absolutely foolish to with 5 seamers – Giles must play – even if it is just to hold one end up. The Aussies are not very comfortable playing left-armers (except Gilchrist). They struggled against Vettori last year, I remember them struggling against Venkatpathy Raju a few years ago and even Bangladeshs MOhammad Rafique and Kenyas old-leftarmer (forgot his name now) troubled them in the WOrld Cup
July 14th, 2005 at 6.58 pm
are tresco, strauss and vaughan beyond being dropped. I mean if tresco gets found out, should he be dropped, thorpe get back in and then vaughan move up to open. i don’t think tresco is bad, i enjoy his batting the most because of the power he has but against aussies he has probs.
July 14th, 2005 at 7.49 pm
I’m very happy with this development. You can read whatever you want into that statement. It does reveal my pleasant state of mind! 
July 14th, 2005 at 7.50 pm
He’s had problems against Australia, Ram. As Graveney said at the announcement today “let’s try and be positive.” Tresco looks like he’s playing a lot straighter this season – and he does average nearly 60 at home…
July 14th, 2005 at 8.36 pm
sorry will but he had problems in both australia 2003 and in england in 2001.
July 14th, 2005 at 8.39 pm
Yes, hence my saying he’s had problems.
July 14th, 2005 at 10.54 pm
A good bold move by England, he has the ability to turn a game in a matter of a short time, much like Gilly, although for Englands sake I hope his entry into the 5 dayers is a bit more solid than Aussie star Andy Symonds, who I fear will never play test cricket again, after a couple of attempts in Sri Lanka last year.
All the best for Kevin, dare I say it a good mate of Warneys.
July 14th, 2005 at 11.14 pm
Do you live and breath Shane Warne?
July 15th, 2005 at 12.23 am
What can I say, they are good mates aren’t they… lets hope the good rubs off and not the bad… and yes there are more things in life than just Shane Warne, although right at the moment I can’t think of any, but I’m sure they will come…
congratulations will on a great blog
July 15th, 2005 at 3.47 am
The new England
The selection of Pieterson over Thorpe
…
July 15th, 2005 at 5.54 am
England must open with Vaughan & Bell (both very technically sound) as strauss & trescothick look very shaky against Lee & Mc Grath….and perhaps even push trescothick to the no.5 spot so that he can handle Warne.
July 15th, 2005 at 8.18 am
Bell isn’t an opener.
I can see the argument for a left/right combination and a southpaw at No 5, but on the whole I think the England management are right to try to keep as settled a batting order as possible.
July 15th, 2005 at 10.49 am
For England to stand a real chance, they have to bat well, they have to score mountains of runs if they want to put pressure on Australia…they can just take a cue from the last two Natwest ODIs which england lost and the Aus-India series last year. If england don’t score enough runs,they are going to suffer.
July 15th, 2005 at 11.22 am
that’s just stating the obvious mate. Australia will need to score runs as well though. after all, that is the point of cricket.
July 15th, 2005 at 11.53 am
Everybody is talking about Pietersen and his explosive one-day innings but he also averages over 52 in the first-class game, which happens to be better than Ian Bell, with more runs,centuries and even more catches. In fact a better allround batsman
July 15th, 2005 at 11.55 am
I’ll state the obvious – “you have to get 20 wickets to win a Test Match”. (You can quote me on that ) Harmison and Flintoff are just as much the key as any batsman.
July 15th, 2005 at 2.27 pm
That’s exactly right. Well close enough anyway…(because you can obviously win a game without getting 20 wickets, it’s just very hard)
I think what Pierre was trying to get accross was that England are going to need to score plenty of runs (and i thought that was obvious) but i don’t think either of us were disputing the importance of the bowlers
July 15th, 2005 at 4.08 pm
And presumably KP’s a better fielder than Thorpey… dare I suggest that England have the better fielding side?
July 16th, 2005 at 3.51 am
I think the key to how well England do is how their top three fare. Whether KP is a better bet than Thorpe to either build on an early advantage or to grab back any advantage lost is open to speculation, but I feel that neither KP nor Flintoff can bail them out consistently if the England top 3 do not at least battle the new ball to a draw over the course of the series.
If they can do that, and allow Flintoff and KP to bat late in the day against a tiring attack…
July 24th, 2005 at 7.16 pm
I believe Thorpe and Pietersen should have been in the England side. Bell shouldn’t have been picked over Thorpe. Bring back Thorpe, Get Bell OUT!!!!!
July 12th, 2006 at 9.48 pm
Amazing to think that it’s now just 12 months since KP made his debut. The impact he has had on English cricket has been remarkable.
June 2nd, 2009 at 7.04 pm
KP has been a perfect replacement!
Thorpe could have acheived so much more but for injury.
A great servant to English Cricket all the same.
Comments
« D-day (or “A-Day!”) tomorrow for Pietersen | Main | Justin Langer on the BBC »
