vic_orthdox
Global Moderator
Acid test begins for Pieterson...
Great idea! Acid on his tongue! That'll make him talk properly...or else we'll do it againvic_orthdox said:Acid test begins for Pieterson...
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.Swervy said: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.
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.Langeveldt said: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?
Sorry, but there's a difference between a 1 day game and a Test.kendall said: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.
Or indeed an entire 5-Test series! Particularly since this series will be played with few suibstantial breaks between games.Sorry, but there's a difference between a 1 day game and a Test.
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.Top_Cat said: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.Top_Cat said: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".
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.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
Bell and pieterson both unproven and are not top class middle order batsmen. Well thats exactaly what Marc would say.Matteh said: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)....
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 fitnessFaaipDeOiad said: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.
Yes, I would.Scallywag said:Bell and pieterson both unproven and are not top class middle order batsmen. Well thats exactaly what Marc would say.
Bell one innings of 70 against WI and that shows he can perform. hahahahahahahahahamarc71178 said: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.