Pietersen gets the nod

[Craig]

take a bow selectors, you've just thrown away any chance you had of winning the ashes.

Are you being serious?

It has been said time-and-time again in this thread that he is suffering from back problems and therefore is a liability with bat or in the field. And if he gets injured while coming into this match with his injury he can't have a runner.

It has been amazing people (I'm not just taking a shot at you TEC) keep missing this. This is only the squad for the first Test not the whole series.

I agree that he a very good batsmen and if he is fit he should be included straight away - not if he is 70-80% fit if that means he can't really field properly or have problems batting and becomes a walking wicket. Come on.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

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

A player proves himself worthy of a place in first class (and perhaps ODI) cricket, which KP has pretty much done, and then waits for a place in the team to open up. This was always going to be Thorpe's last series... he's going to retire after it. KP could have been brought into the team then. As it is, I'd say England are significantly less likely to win with KP than with Thorpe, who was a master batsmen under pressure and dug England out of a hole on countless occasions.

 

[Jono]

IMO, as some have already stated, it simply comes down to whether he's fully fit or not. If he's not 100% fit, why would you take the risk? England can ill afford another injury filled series like the last Ashes.

 

[Swervy]

A player proves himself worthy of a place in first class (and perhaps ODI) cricket, which KP has pretty much done, and then waits for a place in the team to open up. This was always going to be Thorpe's last series... he's going to retire after it. KP could have been brought into the team then. As it is, I'd say England are significantly less likely to win with KP than with Thorpe, who was a master batsmen under pressure and dug England out of a hole on countless occasions.

fitness is the key though..and as Thorpe is not fit (and is out of touch domestically) a place HAS opened up for KP.

Englands problem has always been 'lets try and dig ourselves out of a hole'....the hole doesnt exist at the moment.This move is an indication of confidence in the batting line up

 

[Swervy]

Are you being serious?

It has been said time-and-time again in this thread that he is suffering from back problems and therefore is a liability with bat or in the field. And if he gets injured while coming into this match with his injury he can't have a runner.

It has been amazing people (I'm not just taking a shot at you TEC) keep missing this. This is only the squad for the first Test not the whole series.

I agree that he a very good batsmen and if he is fit he should be included straight away - not if he is 70-80% fit if that means he can't really field properly or have problems batting and becomes a walking wicket. Come on.

spot on

 

[simmy]

Brilliant decision if you ask me. KP has already had the better of the OZ bowlers...

As an English there seems to be an "air of calm", much like when Strauss batted in South Africa, when KP is at the crease. That game when he got 91* I seriously never doubted him. He also offers so much more in the field, is a fielding option and shows that England are fighting!

I'll be surprised if he doesnt do something spectacular in the first test! Plus Thorpe can barely walk... and playing him is a clearly defensive move.

Warne himself said that he would prefer Thorpe to be playing than KP.

He also averages over 50 in his FC career.

 

[Matteh]

I think that it's clear that Pietersen proved himself during the ODI and granted it's a different type of game but the opposition's bowlers are still the same...
Bell has proved himself capable of getting runs at test level - maybe not 100s but in the few chances he's had he's got 50s...

Over the next 10 years they could surpass the Hussain + Thorpe middle order combination..

 

[marc71178]

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

So scoring 70 isn't performing then?

Backing it up with other runs in his next 2 games, against admittedly weak bowlers.

 

[simmy]

Lots of people have said that Bell should have been the man for the chop. I go to Uni at Loughborough (where the ECB Academy) and have watched Bell train on a few occasions. The man is class. Looked so good and has done for Warks for years... I seriously think that he is England's secret weapon. I really like the look of this line-up... will make the Aussies sit up and think thats for sure.

Pieterson was one of the bats that really stood up and "got in the face" of the Aussies. He won't go down without a fight or a say in this series. I also think he's England's most naturally talented cricketer behind Flintoff. Thorpe on the otherhand doesnt seem to have any commitment to the side announcing his Oz move before the Summer started and hence his retirement. If Vaughan bats as he did in the last Ashes the rest of the middle order wont even be needed!

 

[King_Ponting]

If bell was dropped with the test record he had................................ well what would the world be coming to

 

[tooextracool]

I don't think people (ie us lot) have been told the full story here. I fully believe that Thorpe is the kind of man to say to the selectors not to pick him if he wasn't fit enough which there is a high chance he isn't.

Maybe not openly saying it to them but a quick word in the ear of the Chairman and the decision is made for them but Pieterson still receives the confidence boost (does he really need one? ) of being picked over the best batsmen England have had in the past decade.

cant see any reason why he would declare himself fit 2 days before the decision though.

 

[tooextracool]

I think he includes Bangles (whereas you obviously don't) where Strauss scored 82*, 152 and 98.

strange then that he said in ODIs vs australia

don't think Strauss has become a bad player with big flaws just yet. He just needs some form and I'm confident because he doesn't have to play his shots in Tests where he has been dragging on a couple of times trying to play the cut too close to his body to score at a rate ODI require..

maybe so, but when you have players who you're a bit iffy about, you cant really put even more unproven players in the side.

 

[tooextracool]

The reason I said what I said was because I didn't see this flaw in South Africa or on any of the previous series. Granted, McGrath et al are probably a fair bit better than any of the other attacks but still, I don't think it's as big a problem as people are making out.

you have to be able to swing the ball back into him though, and out of all the bowlers hes played so far, only 1(pollock) had the ability to that(nel only played the 1 game). the fact that even mashrafe mortaza managed to exploit that weakness in the test series doesnt bode well with me at all, but its obviously something that he would have realised by now and hopefully by the first test he might be able to iron it out.

 

[tooextracool]

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?

err the unproven player obviously. its like going into an india-pak series with a debate between dhoni and tendulkar, and then deciding on dhoni, because tendulkar has recurring back problems and hasnt been in the best form of late(and thats not even considering the fact that we dont have players like dravid, sehwag and laxman who are proven test match performers and have experience against pakistan). thorpe has declared himself fit, as far as im concerned,thorpe is the sort of player who even if he only plays 2 tests is more likely to score runs, carrying an injury or not, than any other player in the side. it seems that the selectors have forgotten about the main point, they seem far too interested about 'looking to the future'. this series is not about the future at all, its about this ashes series, and england need to pick their best team for this series only. thorpe is the man for now, pietersen is the man for the future.

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".

i most certainly wouldnt, and im equally sure that if thorpe had been picked and scored a century at Lord's, most of the people who suggested that pietersen was a good pick would be saying " thank god the selectors stuck with thorpe". i do hope for thorpe to return sometime during the series, even if its not for pietersen, and i hope that he comes in and scores big.

 

[tooextracool]

It has been said time-and-time again in this thread that he is suffering from back problems and therefore is a liability with bat or in the field. And if he gets injured while coming into this match with his injury he can't have a runner.

It has been amazing people (I'm not just taking a shot at you TEC) keep missing this. This is only the squad for the first Test not the whole series.

I agree that he a very good batsmen and if he is fit he should be included straight away - not if he is 70-80% fit if that means he can't really field properly or have problems batting and becomes a walking wicket. Come on.

thorpe declared himself fit only a couple of days ago. fact is if he performed the same way he did against SA where he was also struggling with his back, he'd still have made a good enough contribution to englands cause in the series.

 

[tooextracool]

Thorpe on the otherhand doesnt seem to have any commitment to the side announcing his Oz move before the Summer started and hence his retirement.

thats the worst thing i've ever heard. if anyone didnt have the commitment to play in his last test series in perhaps one of the most important series of his career, he'd have to be out of his mind.

 

[PY]

strange then that he said in ODIs vs australia

You win.

 

[aussie]

Their is been a lot of talk about Thorpe's fitness but he seemed pretty ok taday for surrey...

 

[kendall]

especially considering Piterson was not fit enough too play for hampshire

 

[Top_Cat]

cant see any reason why he would declare himself fit 2 days before the decision though.

Oh. Please. Who WOULDN'T do that if it was their last series against Australia?? If I had a broken leg, I could fake a decent walk to play. Players have ALWAYS pulled stunts like this. Jeff Thomson played his first Test with a broken foot for crying out loud! Anyway, I'm definitely of the opinion (unsubstantiated) that Thorpe's injury is far worse than people (including him) are letting on.

err the unproven player obviously. its like going into an india-pak series with a debate between dhoni and tendulkar, and then deciding on dhoni, because tendulkar has recurring back problems and hasnt been in the best form of late(and thats not even considering the fact that we dont have players like dravid, sehwag and laxman who are proven test match performers and have experience against pakistan).

Errr, the gulf in talent isn't quite as huge as that for one. For two, if Tendy had a back problem like Thorpe's which, if he wrenched it, would hurt him and the team, he wouldn't get picked would he? I mean it's not as if it hasn't happened before. How many matches did Tendy play against Australia in the last series? You make it sound like a ridiculous proposition when it has a very recent precendent (tennis elbow).

i most certainly wouldnt, and im equally sure that if thorpe had been picked and scored a century at Lord's, most of the people who suggested that pietersen was a good pick would be saying " thank god the selectors stuck with thorpe". i do hope for thorpe to return sometime during the series, even if its not for pietersen, and i hope that he comes in and scores big.

Look, I'm not just thinking of the injury and form in of itself. Think of the psychological boost for the Aussies if Thorpe was picked and subsequently injured during the Test. Think about what the Aussies would be saying if Thorpe was carried off the ground retired hurt. If I was them, I'd be thinking, "Why didn't the English pick a totally fit player? Do they have that little confidence in their reserves?"

No, picking Thorpe unfit sends the wrong message to the Aussies. Especially since it would give the Aussie bowlers something to target; you think they wouldn't give Thorpe EVERY opportunity to test the back out? I know I would! Even if Thorpe wasn't as injured as above, if he gets a bouncer and he feels a twinge, it could prey on his mind or gradually get worse. Now, for England's best batsman, that's a psychological boost which is too risky to hand over to the Aussies.

Anyway the risk with Pieterson is less than you think; he has form against the Aussies and attitude. Like I said, you'd pick a fully fit Thorpe but if not fit, Pieterson isn't the woeful replacement you guys think he is. ODI form DOES mean something; it's exactly how just about all of the current Aussie team either got into the team or regained their spot after being dropped. Matthew Hayden, Ricky Ponting, Damien Martyn, Michael Clarke, Adam Gilchrist, Michael Kasprowicz and Glenn McGrath are perfect examples.