Cricket-Match-Special ... A forum for discussion

Arthur Crabtree wrote:...Don't want to get involved in another go around textgate...

Of course not - Pietersen's apologists would wish them away if they could.

In fact, they happened and they trump all other arguments.

Arthur Crabtree wrote:...But I'm not so sure this is all over. That will only happen if the ECB gives a justifiable reason why they acted as they did....

They don't need to. Most people will think that Pietersen got what was coming to him, if a little belatedly.

yuppie wrote:Yep, what would the ECB have done with Warne? Seriously makes you wonder

It may do some. Others may fail to see the relevance and realise that it's all rather hypothetical.

D/L wrote:

yuppie wrote:Yep, what would the ECB have done with Warne? Seriously makes you wonder

It may do some. Others may fail to see the relevance and realise that it's all rather hypothetical.

Of course. It is interesting however that despite how many times the ECB and press like to go on about the singular importance of the dressing room, this doesn't seem to be a relevent factor in one of the most successful teams of all time, strange that.

Wouldn't have been an issue as he's have failed the beep test anyway.

(Not that I'm against players being fit.)

Arthur Crabtree wrote:Wouldn't have been an issue as he's have failed the beep test anyway.

(Not that I'm against players being fit.)

Not if there was a pizza slice at the end of each section

It's all about individualising incentives.

Arthur Crabtree wrote:...All the people involved in this seem to have made peace with each other. The players anyway.

This is now after event and Pietersen is no longer of daily concern to them and whatever problems he caused have gone away, so what they say may be taken with a pinch of salt.

Perhaps, in the inevitable autobiographies, more stories (factually accurate or not) may emerge, negotiations (on the lines of I say this about you in my book, you may say that about me) permitting, of course.

good article here.
http://www.alloutcricket.com/cricket/bl ... ick-reject

On the second day, as the final picks of the trialists were being made, the leg-spinner had to be the first choice. A kid so talented, surely he would be fast-tracked to a county? Names were called out, and Inzy, as I’d come to know him, had not made the cut. I overheard Pietersen saying that he had vouched for him vehemently, but the other coaches had vetoed it on account of his lack of fitness. He just could not understand how such an obvious talent, such a stand-out diamond in the rough, begging to be polished, could be ignored in this country. He’s still no closer to understanding English cricket today.
Read more at http://www.alloutcricket.com/cricket/bl ... iWeGwiE.99

Can't believe counties take fitness into account at youth cricket. Surely fitness could be improved, but batting skill or bowling skill cannot be massively improved.

bhaveshgor wrote:good article here.
http://www.alloutcricket.com/cricket/bl ... ick-reject

On the second day, as the final picks of the trialists were being made, the leg-spinner had to be the first choice. A kid so talented, surely he would be fast-tracked to a county? Names were called out, and Inzy, as I’d come to know him, had not made the cut. I overheard Pietersen saying that he had vouched for him vehemently, but the other coaches had vetoed it on account of his lack of fitness. He just could not understand how such an obvious talent, such a stand-out diamond in the rough, begging to be polished, could be ignored in this country. He’s still no closer to understanding English cricket today.
Read more at http://www.alloutcricket.com/cricket/bl ... iWeGwiE.99

Can't believe counties take fitness into account at youth cricket. Surely fitness could be improved, but batting skill or bowling skill cannot be massively improved.

Good post bhaveshgor. And not unusual. Thanks for the link.

Giles Clarke on a BBC interview puts pressure onto the new England regime, stating

I can't stand losing anything, not even tiddlywinks

He reiterated that the reason Pietersen was sacked was as the previous statement by Paul Downton, who watched the whole of the Sydney Test, and felt KP had become disconnected from the side, adding

I think there was a widespread feeling that the team had lost connection with the supporters

So, not just Kevin then. But he did give reason for optimism

There have been quite significant changes in the team, a younger group and fresh faces and that often leads to a change in the atmosphere

So well done Harry Gurney!

He approved of

a sea change in all the personnel involved in managing the team and that has injected a completely fresh and dynamic approach

without managing to connect that with the previous managing director of the England side, Andy Flower, and any relief promoted by his absence.

Hearteningly, he found time to defend his own new appointment, Paul Downton:

Paul Downton is an experienced Test player a man of great judgment, an outstanding individual who has already impressed everybody since he took over the job.
"He's received the most repulsive amount of abuse over social media and the like for no good reason. We are lucky to have a man of his calibre in that role. He has carried out his activities quietly, thoughtfully. He has spoken to a great number of people and he has impressed everybody

Suggesting that not only the England team has become disconnected from its supporters. This disconnection between players and supporters, it appears is too complex for him to go into details.

Cook also attracted the approval of Clarke.

he and his family are very much the sort of people we want the England captain and his family to be

Showing the kind of depth of thinking that goes into England's appointments, and suggesting a part played by Jessica in KP's downfall. What next? God-fearing?

And finally?

Alastair is an Ashes-winning captain and we don't have too many of those

Yes, but we have far fewer captains with an Ashes whitewash under their belt. Carry on Cooky!

It seems that there may still be restrictions on what people may say about the reasons for Pietersen's sacking.

Also, the track record of the ECB when it comes to clarity of statements, like most corporate bodies, is not all that good. There's no reason why it should change. Best to take much of it with a pinch of salt but be thankful that they finally did the right thing with Pietersen.

It seems that there may still be restrictions on what people may say about the reasons for Pietersen's sacking.

I would imagine so. I would find it hard to believe that the current England setup want that issue being banded about any further this summer, at the very least.

I think there is much gold dust in this interview, its staggeringly insulting to me as an England cricket fan. I could go into details on each statement, but I will spare you all of that. Suffice to say, just on the first line, that Downton sacked KP because he wasn't all there.... at the end of the series they lost 5-0, I wonder if KP wasn't the only one really up for the match, even if this is true..... we known from other comments that the dressing room was falling apart and arguments had gone on.

As for the latest point, the reason I came to this thread....

The picking of Ian Bell in the T20 SL game, is for me anyway, more proof of the contempt that the ECB and their management have generally for the domestic game. On so many levels that decision to pick him for that format, and made worse when D/L pointed out he hadn't play a single T20 match in three years, is further evidence that the ECB seem to operate in a world of their own. Bell is one of them, therefore he can do anything, even if evidence proves otherwise.

Its just so "them and us" with the ECB at the moment, and they don't seem to understand that by "them" they are talking about the people who pay their wages. Anyone who doesn't understand the blueprint of the masterplan is, by rights, not really a fan and doesn't know anything anyway.

The ECB is a business. Cricket is their product. We are consumers.