The enigma that is Kevin Pietersen

[D/L]

The issue has already been dealt with numerous times, D/L.

For the third or whatever number you want to assign to it the answer is pretty simple: When asked if something deviod of context could be offensive to another party then the answer will almost always be yes. It would be impossible to say anything else and admitting such an obvious idea would be hanging oneself in the circumstance.

Whether or not the comments were meant in an offensive manner was not actually the question asked despite it being the salient one.

If you ask a pointless question you will always get a pointless answer.

“Avoided” seems more apposite than “dealt with”, M_S.

It’s OK. Many will understand any failure to put forward a credible alternative theory for the reason for Pietersen’s denial.

Perhaps you can explain why that is not credible D/L, just to illustrate your own denial seeing as you seem to take such a strong position on the term.

If I understand correctly, we are being asked to believe that the reason for Pietersen’s non-denial was that he was worried that, even though he thought that the text he sent contained nothing offensive, others would not agree. I wonder why he thought others may not agree if he thought the text really contained no offence.

Surely, the denial should have been made and Pietersen should have been prepared to argue why the texts weren’t offensive.

It all seems very fanciful, especially considering that at this time, nobody knew whether the texts would be published verbatim. It also seems as much a defence of a long-entrenched position as it is of Pietersen.

Clearly, the far more likely reason would be a concern that the texts may be examined, their offensiveness apparent to anyone who read them and any denial shown to have been false.

[Kim]

Im a bit lost with this conversation.

Surely the fact that he apologised for sending texts tells us all we need to know about why he didnt deny sending texts.

Im sure Ive missed the point.

[KipperJohn]

As an aside, I'd be interested to know what views anyone may have as to who constitutes a' senior' player and what status they have (other than as a captain in a particular format) within a team or a squad.

In the absence of Strauss and Pietersen, the longest serving England player is, I think, Bell. I may be quite wrong but I would doubt whether he considers himself to have any right to have a say in the due process - and neither should anyone else. Unless, of course, they have an official grievance under the procedures which one hopes are in place as in any place of employment.

As far as I can see this is firstly a contractual issue, secondly, a disciplinary matter.

Any employer worth their salt would have proper policies and procedures in place to deal with this.

The suggestion that Pietersen's contract and alleged behaviour should have been sorted out over dinner or a pint is laughable.

[ddb]

So now apparently he might be in the squad for India after all.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/india-v-eng ... 82093.html

[yorker_129-7]

Well with neither Cook nor KP involved in Sri Lanka there is no excuse not to try and work something out. Yes, Flower isn't there, but I would hope he would expect Cook and Morris to act on his behalf. If Cook can rehabilitate KP in time for the India tour that would be a pretty big feather in the young mans cap going to India, although I don't think England can afford to leave things hanging, everything must come out, be laid on the table and the slate wiped totally clean, otherwise we could well be back in this position a year or 18 months down the line.

[m@tt]

As an aside, I'd be interested to know what views anyone may have as to who constitutes a' senior' player and what status they have (other than as a captain in a particular format) within a team or a squad.

In the absence of Strauss and Pietersen, the longest serving England player is, I think, Bell. I may be quite wrong but I would doubt whether he considers himself to have any right to have a say in the due process - and neither should anyone else. Unless, of course, they have an official grievance under the procedures which one hopes are in place as in any place of employment.

With Strauss gone, Bell is the longest serving player by time, though not by caps - that goes to KP.

Senior players would be: Cook, Trott, Bell, Prior, Broad, Swann, Anderson and, if he returns, Pietersen. In the ODI side, Morgan would probably count as one too.

Good to hear England are getting closer to a resolution with Pietersen. Will be interesting what happens if a batsman gets an injury during the World T20.

[Making_Splinters]

Interesting interview in The Times today with Cook where he said he wants all of his World Class players in the squad for India.

He's got four days to make KP part of that.

[D/L]

Im a bit lost with this conversation.

Surely the fact that he apologised for sending texts tells us all we need to know about why he didnt deny sending texts.

Im sure Ive missed the point.

It’s the possible reasons for not denying the nature of the texts that are being discussed here, Kim. Whatever reason Pietersen had for not denying them goes to the heart of the issue.

The most likely explanation seems that Pietersen considered the description of them as put to him by the ECB as fairly close to his knowledge of them and realised (or was advised) that if the content became known, he would be seen to have made a false denial.

Other theories include one that non-denial was due to Pietersen’s fear that any offensiveness they were deemed to contain would have been misconstrued by the ECB and, presumably, by anyone else who saw them.

In the end, as we know, the euphemism “provocative” was used by the Pietersen camp to describe their nature.

[D/L]

Interesting interview in The Times today with Cook where he said he wants all of his World Class players in the squad for India.

He's got four days to make KP part of that.

Yes, there are signs that the ECB are working to find a way back for Pietersen. Today, following Swann the other day, Anderson said that he would accept any decision the ECB made on the matter.

However, we would hardly expect them to say anything else. Not only would it have been a very bad career move, it would have started another media frenzy.

The ECB stand at the crossroads. The integrity and the dignity of the game is in their hands. Do they stick to the principles they’ve stuck to so far or do they open the floodgates to player power and set a precedent for seriously poor behaviour receiving no more than token punishment?

[Gingerfinch]

A one game ban was sufficient punishment.

If KP can bring it to himself to apologise then lets get on with beating the Indians.

[D/L]

We’ll just have to agree to disagree on that, iatw. It doesn’t seem like much of a deterrent for seriously bad behaviour to me. There must be dozens of examples of players getting longer bans for transgressing less.

Any road up, we've no chance in India, especially with there being no UDRS.

[Making_Splinters]

Interesting interview in The Times today with Cook where he said he wants all of his World Class players in the squad for India.

He's got four days to make KP part of that.

Yes, there are signs that the ECB are working to find a way back for Pietersen. Today, following Swann the other day, Anderson said that he would accept any decision the ECB made on the matter.

However, we would hardly expect them to say anything else. Not only would it have been a very bad career move, it would have started another media frenzy.

The ECB stand at the crossroads. The integrity and the dignity of the game is in their hands. Do they stick to the principles they’ve stuck to so far or do they open the floodgates to player power and set a precedent for seriously poor behaviour receiving no more than token punishment?

I just see it as everyone finally deciding to stop acting like children, D/L.

There is no certainty that he will be back for the Test series in India but it looks like there is a future for KP in the side.

[Gingerfinch]

We’ll just have to agree to disagree on that, iatw. It doesn’t seem like much of a deterrent for seriously bad behaviour to me. There must be dozens of examples of players getting longer bans for transgressing less.

Any road up, we've no chance in India, especially with there being no UDRS.

No UDRS? I thought that was being made compulsory?

I think we do have a chance. India look to be re-building. Could be a good time to tour!

[hopeforthebest]

I'd love to be a fly on the wall when Pietersen meets the other players on his return. I hope Swann has his video camera handy for a youtube presentation.

[Making_Splinters]

I'd love to be a fly on the wall when Pietersen meets the other players on his return. I hope Swann has his video camera handy for a youtube presentation.

I think FTS already posted the picture in the Caption competition thread.