The enigma that is Kevin Pietersen

[Kim]

Seems to me KP wanted to retire from one format.

Which is really what Hussain, Vaughan and Strauss - our last three captains - did, however it was dressed up.

Same with Collingwood.

[shankycricket]

I wouldnt be at all suprised if its a publicity stunt and KP wanting attention and people begging him to play.

I expect a U-turn in the next few days.

It seems you are looking for attention on this forum, eh?

[SaintPowelly]

I wouldnt be at all suprised if its a publicity stunt and KP wanting attention and people begging him to play.

I expect a U-turn in the next few days.

It seems you are looking for attention on this forum, eh?

Any true county fan knows exactly how much of a **** KP is.

[Arthur Crabtree]

I wouldnt be at all suprised if its a publicity stunt and KP wanting attention and people begging him to play.

I expect a U-turn in the next few days.

It seems you are looking for attention on this forum, eh? :)

All that would do is create pressure on himself. it is more likely that the ECB would change their mind due to public pressure.

But I'd guess they won't.

[shankycricket]

I wouldnt be at all suprised if its a publicity stunt and KP wanting attention and people begging him to play.

I expect a U-turn in the next few days.

It seems you are looking for attention on this forum, eh?

Any true county fan knows exactly how much of a **** KP is.

I really couldnt care less given how much KP has served England. I really dont care what he has done for his county.

[shankycricket]

I wouldnt be at all suprised if its a publicity stunt and KP wanting attention and people begging him to play.

I expect a U-turn in the next few days.

It seems you are looking for attention on this forum, eh?

All that would do is create pressure on himself. it is more likely that the ECB would change their mind due to public pressure.

But I'd guess they won't.

[Making_Splinters]

Seems to me KP wanted to retire from one format.

Which is really what Hussain, Vaughan and Strauss - our last three captains - did, however it was dressed up.

Same with Collingwood.

And I can't really see any reason why he should not be allowed to aside from the ECB saying that you have to be available for both despite the fact that the two teams have separate squads, separate captains and that both the incumbent ODI captain and his predecessor didn't even play both of them for England, infact Strauss didn't even play both domestically.

I understand why they are taking this stance from a contractual point of view but that is mitigated as he will be downgraded, the real reason for the sticking point is more that the ECB are worried that more players will want to play just T20 cricket for example Swann who has made no secret of his contempt for ODI cricket.

The thing is I don't really see why the ECB should worry about players not wanting to play ODI cricket, if they don't want to we have plenty of other players who do want to play international cricket in one format for England.

[braveneutral]

I notice someone mentioned Surrey workload. It may be that they will allow him to opt out of the 40 over stuff which would greatly reduce his workload.

As for him playing only T20. I see both sides of the coin. He is obviously a talent and more than handy in T20, but could it set a dangerous precedent?

It would be odd to have a Number 1 Test and T20 team and an number whatever ODI side as no one wants to play that. I imagine that this is being used as a warning to players like Swann.

[braveneutral]

Mildred is speaking sense of Selvey's blog. It is a bit like the reawakening of the Kraken is her return to the cricket commentary world.

[Arthur Crabtree]

Maybe greater flexibility for the over 30s?

I used to post that no England player should play in more than two formats, to reduce burnout. But there are so few T20s they hardly matter.

There are many young England players hungry for the opportunity that this will bring. But with KP wanting to play T20, his absence will hang over that team. And be brought up to explain every setback.

[Arthur Crabtree]

A coded message from Chile, smuggled out the country in a breadfruit, bn. Still got it eh!

[shankycricket]

Unlike others, I feel that if he were to retire from ODIs, he has retired at just the right time IMO. If he did not intend to play the next WC, then it would have been pointless for him to play the ODIs this summer and taking up the spot of someone who could potentially open at the next WC.
However, I still dont see why he should not be allowed to play T20I. Yes, people talk about setting a precedent and as a warning to Swann, etc but then again, I would like to say, a player would not retire from ODIs if he cares about that format. If he doesnt, then he should not be playing ODIs anyway. So if we are worried that Swann, for example, will follow KP and quit ODIs and still play T20Is, then thats probably because he doesnt like to play ODIs, in which case he should not be playing them.
If a player actually wants to play ODIs, then he will not follow KP's example. If he does, then he doesnt care about ODIs. So he shouldnt be playing that format. Simple really. So I really dont understand these "precedent" comments.

[ddb]

Maybe greater flexibility for the over 30s?

I used to post that no England player should play in more than two formats, to reduce burnout. But there are so few T20s they hardly matter.

There are many young England players hungry for the opportunity that this will bring. But with KP wanting to play T20, his absence will hang over that team. And be brought up to explain every setback.

There will be more t20 internationals, less ODI's(although they're not dead or whatever I've seen banded about), most* boards IMO have realised they need to balance the formats out more or maybe just cashing in...

*ECB excluded it seems but then you want to win a WC.

[Making_Splinters]

I notice someone mentioned Surrey workload. It may be that they will allow him to opt out of the 40 over stuff which would greatly reduce his workload.

As for him playing only T20. I see both sides of the coin. He is obviously a talent and more than handy in T20, but could it set a dangerous precedent?

It would be odd to have a Number 1 Test and T20 team and an number whatever ODI side as no one wants to play that. I imagine that this is being used as a warning to players like Swann.

But why do we need to be warning players? It's utterly daft to force players to play a format they do not want to be playing and will just end up with us ultimately getting less out of them across all the formats.


I brought up the Surrey fixture list earlier, the Surrey ECB dynamic will be interesting to watch.

[dan08]

It's very frustrating as we spent years trying to get a successful opening combination, then we finally found it in Cook and KP. Then after just a few matches, KP retires and we go right back to the start again.