Andy Flower thread

[doremi]

Since no one else was making one -

Peter May
KP
Ken Barrington
Denis Compton
Len Hutton
Dexter
Graham Thorpe
Boycott
Gower
Gooch
Cowdrey
Trescothick

I think Flower was better than Thorpe and Trescothick, and I really liked to watch Thorpe play. Can't compare KP yet, but KP'll possibly be better. The others are before my time, although from what I've read, heard and watched (a few highlights), Barrington, Compton, Hutton and Boycott are better than Flower. May, Dexter and Cowdrey, I know too little to comment on.

[JKLever]

I think Flower was better than Thorpe

and as i've already said on the other thread, Flower played 3 of his 63 tests against the best attacks of his day.

Thorpe played over 40% of his 100 tests against them.

[doremi]

And the Zimbabwean batting line-up consited of him and, even when they were decent-ish, fluke performances by his team-mates.

[Lara Lara Laughs]

All of them are better than Flower. Flower averages 48 if you exclude Bangladesh. That's 48 without having played the best and with a massive amount of not outs and with very poor records in England, SA and SL.

If KP hadn't played the Aussies and had done well against some of the other Test sides, the notion that he was better than any of the batsman above would be laughed at.

[HH_pink]

Sorry if I missed something from earlier, but why is Andy Flower being discussed along with all these English batsmen?

[JKLever]

Go look at the Zimbabwe election thread Pink.

[JKLever]

All of them are better than Flower. Flower averages 48 if you exclude Bangladesh. That's 48 without having played the best and with a massive amount of not outs and with very poor records in England, SA and SL.

If KP hadn't played the Aussies and had done well against some of the other Test sides, the notion that he was better than any of the batsman above would be laughed at.

Agreed.

And none of this should take away the fact Flower was a damn fine player who held Zims batting together for years...

[Merlin]

Sorry if I missed something from earlier, but why is Andy Flower being discussed along with all these English batsmen?

The One highlighted (amidst pontification on the Zimbabwean polls) that Andy Flower was better than any English post war batsman.

The amusing thing is, he went on to defend his hair brained comment!!
LLL and JKL amongst others have put his fire out with some relevant facts/stats .... well, I think they have!
TO may well be back tomorrow for some more of his Pythonesque remarks!

[holcs]

Brilliant this thread just fantastic.

You've got JK and LLL, giving Flower the boot somewhat over his average, and removing the Bangles from his stats.

Oh thats just fantastic!!!!!!

[Makaveli]

Not sure about the original claim, but Flower was a damn fine bat.

[Basil]

This thread is a waste of time

That's all. Move along - nothing to see.

[tac]

Flower was probably as good as many on that list and better than a couple . . . damn fine batsman was Andy . . .

[Basil]

Flower was probably as good as many on that list and better than a couple . . . damn fine batsman was Andy . . .

Name names

[Henry]

I'd have Flower on a par with Thorpe.

[Basil]

I'd have Flower on a par with Thorpe.

Bollocks!

[Henry]

Why? You think Flower was better? Or thorpe? I don't see it as very clear cut, tbh.

[Basil]

Why? You think Flower was better? Or thorpe? I don't see it as very clear cut, tbh.

Thorpe by a country mile

[JKLever]

The stats don't lie do they?

They're comparing a guy who has faced the best bowling attacks in 4% of his test career (Flower) to a guy in Thorpe who faced it for almost half his career!!!

[Henry]

Nah, not by a country mile.Thorpe was pretty inconsistent from 1993 to 1999. He'd play the odd gem of a cameo, but he only scored about 3 hundreds in 6 years. Then Fletcher came on board, and his best mate Nasser was made captain, and he started to bat with wonderful consistency.

Flower was pretty consistent right the way through his career, and didn't have great coaches and great facilities to work with when his game was a bit off. For most of the time, he was also the only batsman in his team to average over 30, let alone 50. But as has been mentioned, he hardly ever faced the Aussies, and struggled in swinging and seaming conditions.

So all things considered, about even I reckon.

[Basil]

Andy Flower was a good player who did yeoman service for his country. But not world class.

[tac]

The stats don't lie do they?

They're comparing a guy who has faced the best bowling attacks in 4% of his test career (Flower) to a guy in Thorpe who faced it for almost half his career!!!

That's why all current Aussie bats are worse than the English line up as well, eh?

[Henry]

Andy Flower was a good player who did yeoman service for his country. But not world class.

I'd say that he was world class, but wasn't a great.

[Basil]

Nah, not by a country mile.Thorpe was pretty inconsistent from 1993 to 1999. He'd play the odd gem of a cameo, but he only scored about 3 hundreds in 6 years. Then Fletcher came on board, and his best mate Nasser was made captain, and he started to bat with wonderful consistency.

Flower was pretty consistent right the way through his career, and didn't have great coaches and great facilities to work with when his game was a bit off. For most of the time, he was also the only batsman in his team to average over 30, let alone 50. But as has been mentioned, he hardly ever faced the Aussies, and struggled in swinging and seaming conditions.

So all things considered, about even I reckon.

I've said all I've got to say on this subject - if you want to try to massage the stats to suit your ill-founded views - then good luck!

[JKLever]

The stats don't lie do they?

They're comparing a guy who has faced the best bowling attacks in 4% of his test career (Flower) to a guy in Thorpe who faced it for almost half his career!!!

That's why all current Aussie bats are worse than the English line up as well, eh?

4% sonny jim! 4% !

Australia once & WI twice out of 63 tests!

Flower is a top bloke and a damn fine bat but i've always thought his average was somewhat padded.

[Paul Keating]

Thorpe is over-rated.

The majority of his runs came in dead rubbers.

Take the 1997 Ashes for example. Yes he scored a matching contributing century in the Edgbaston test with Hussain. But where was he for the next three tests when the series was decided?

He then proceeds to score well in the dead rubber matches and hence average fifty.

That is consistent with a lot of his career.

Over-rated IMO

[Sponsored content]